Yes, I have seen how the character of the Republican candidates here is protected.
But I tend not to like the assuming of motive and the easy way people throw out liar and cheat and the like about candidates on both sides of the aisle.
We do agree on that. Facts don't bother me at all, but much of what passes for facts is often little more than creative innuendo.
I disagree. It is non-ideal, imperfect, but not wrong to punish wrongdoing, even if you do not punish ALL wrongdoing. What is wrong is not punishing the OTHER wrongdoing, not the punishing of the wrongdoing that IS punished. We don't let everybody get away with things because some get away with things.
Well, after the infamous "treasonous liberal" thread, I said that if the founder and the moderators did not step in and put civility back into this forum, it would get much worse. And to be sure, it is. Many on the extreme right are calling for the banning of anyone not meeting their definition of conservative. Several of us are regularly threatened with zotting by other posters and reminded of the fact that this is a conservative forum...and this from those who wouldn't know conservatism if it smacked them right in the face.
My rant is about over unless someone simply wants me to repeat myself, but suffice is to say that until those in charge bring back some degree of civility and reason to this forum, and recognize that conservatives come in many styles and sizes and that our true opponents are the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton, it's only going to get worse...and smaller.
Your questions were reasonable. Take care.
I will say that anybody who has supported what are thought to be liberal candidates here should be very cautious now NOT to post anything that is false. Two people now have been banned, both shortly after posting things that most of of knew were obviously false things. And it didn’t matter that they both asked to have their statements expunged.
I haven’t seen anybody banned yet simply for being a Rudy supporter, but it might be accurate to say that there are some who are looking for a good reason to act, so don’t give it to them.
I’m in no way agreeing with it, just an observation.
If it means I don’t have to read lies about Fred Thompson, or Mitt Romney, or Duncan Hunter, on a conservative forum, if it means I don’t have to waste my time DEBUNKING obvious lies (like Fred Thompson is a mormon? or Fred Thompson donated money last year to Hillary? — no sane person could believe those things, could they), I won’t be too upset with the policy.
And if that policy was extended to lies about Rudy, I would also be happy. It’s easy enough to debunk Rudy with the facts, we don’t need any lies.