Now, back to the censorship meeting. You know who I really hate? Pennsylvanians. Anything coming from PA gets the kabosh. Deal?

This guy, American, isn’t even upset because you (allegedly) wouldn’t let him share what HE thinks.

If you read that first post, apparently his whole purpose for coming here in the first place, was to “educate” us on what WE (those of us who occasionally have Democratic leanings anyway) really Think/Believe.

Too funny.

Oh, and even though he’s bid us farewell twice now, I’m sure he’ll be back soon. :-)

Comrades! We don’t have time for this nonsense! Our weekly secret politburo meeting starts in a few minutes. This is an important meeting. We need to decide which comments to censor next. I don’t want to be working on this all night. Lets get started!

Bravo sir!

So, with that, I bid you fare well.

I’m guessing you’re new to comments sections, but people often talk to others who didn’t address them first. Not only that, mw is an author here and knows how the back end of the site works.

So, just some free advice, if you really want to engage people in debate in comments sections, you better bone up on how all of this works. Otherwise it’ll be frustrating indeed.

Nick, just for future reference, I consider myself a Democrat with some independent leanings, but a Democrate nonetheless. mw, meanwhile, is centrist by design. He always votes for the party that’s out of power in hopes that it’ll be balanced. An intriguing strategy to say the least, but one he hasn’t been able to convince me is worth pursuing…yet. :-)

Of course they’re not right in the head. They’re moderates. They’re all mushy and centrist in the head.

And this is the internet. If one guy being a little brusque can get you this worked up you probably won’t enjoy internet debate much.

I, for example, just managed to agree with Justin and MW, but still managed to give them a hard time about being moderate. This was cruel, mean, and nasty. But I did it anyway. Justin and MW will give me a hard time for being a leftist type sometime in the future and we’ll all be even.

Justin, how could the “get over it” remark be warranted BEFORE I had ever even spoken to MW?

What did he want me to get over? That my post had vanished like a fart in the wind?

I’m out here …

Of course we can move on. Just please refrain from stereotyping anybody here as leftist liberal, communists censors the next time. It’s decidedly uncivil and it absolutely warranted the very mild condemnation of “get over it.”

Well, MW, if you don’t mind being censored for a perfectly legit comment then more power to you and your communist buddies.

If, however, you believe we should be able to post regardless of our political beliefs, in a civil manner, then you should have stopped spouting after you made your point.

To more to the point here, if there are that many messages falling through the cracks then shouldn’t this be addressed?

Anyway, the first comment, above that WAS posted was only for the moderators as it appeared they were deleting my post. Since Justin has assured me this isn’t the case….shall we move on? And, perhaps, be civil?

Thanks

Once again, you’ve never posted a comment at the site before you posted the first time the other day. That’s why all of your comments were held in moderation.

Mike, I will correct you on one thing. If a comment appears to be a spammy, strident political message that somebody would simply throw into ANY comment thread just to get their message spread far and wide…it gets deleted.

This is done for two reasons.

First, I hate it when people just post stuff out of context just so they can be heard. This is OUR house, not theirs, and as such they should respect the fact that they can’t just say ANYTHING they want regardless of the topic.

Second, and most importantly, it’s done to maintain the integrity of the site as a place for civil discourse and I do it for messages from the left, right and everything in between. If I let everything through that people posted, things would devolve quickly and other commenters would get off track responding to somebody who really has no interest in talking.

In short, if somebody is a troll…they shouldn’t expect their comment to post.

———–

As to your “things fall through the cracks” comment, I posted the comment, waited a day, then reposted just to give you the benefit of the doubt. Still, the comment was not posted, thus the above response that was meant for the moderators of this site.

One has to wonder why the first two post fall into the depths of space but the one intended for you and your mods, magically finds its way.

————
Even then, assuming that what you say is true, one has to wonder why you would respond with “conspiracy” as your main point.

Perhaps you should reset your spam filter as to not automatically delete comments that you don’t necessarily agree with.

Just a thought. Have a great day.

Things fall through the cracks. I have a day job. I don’t get paid to do this. Please don’t jump to the conclusion that it’s a conspiracy because ONE comment didn’t post.

Jeezus…sometimes…

There was nothing wrong with the post, no vulgar language, not out of line, ect…ect…
but it was never posted or allowed to be posted by the so called moderators of this site.

Pure and simple, the post was about Democrats, what they believed in and how that conflicted with their other beliefs.

By not allowing the post to be “posted” its more than obvious this sites moderators are leftist liberal censors.

Afraid to let the truth be told, they instead took the low ground and followed the communist censorship path.

Er, maybe you should check out what Texas does with its public-domain oil revenues. (Hint: Google “Permanent University Fund” and “Permanent School Fund” plus “Texas.”) Nor are Texas and Alaska remotely the only states that benefit greatly from public-domain resources, just as the federal government does. They’re simply the most notable examples of states applying said revenue directly to expenditures and passing excess revenues through in some form to the citizens.

Don’t anyone hold their breath waiting for Palin to explain how the Alaskan oil program accords with conservative veneration of private property. There is no explanation. It’s simply at odds with conservative philosophy.

State ownership of public-domain lands does not conflict at all with private property rights, nor does it conflict with the “veneration” of same save in the more extreme capitalist philosophies that do not want a state at all (e.g., anarcho-capitalism). Especially don’t tell it to the monarchists….

And in the West, the government itself was the primary owner of almost all land, generally by direct purchase. Ask Thomas Jefferson about the Louisiana Purchase, or Seward about his Folly….

That the state itself may own property is inherently assumed in the existence of states. That it may actually return some portion of the revenues generated by state property to the citizens of same rather than simply absorbing it all is likewise hardly antithetical to fiscal conservativism, but rather the reverse.

When you get to arguing the nature of socialism, don’t forget to distinguish between the state holding on to what it legitimately* had to begin with by primary ownership, as compared to the state expropriating resources from established private owners.

[* -- "legitimate" of course being question-begging when states acquire their property through conquest, but still...]

SP has a far better understanding of what is or isn’t socialism than your precious harvard uneducated moron-president, Barry O. Government Motors is Socialism, not ExxonMobil; AIG is socialism, not BP; the Federal Reserve is socialism, not ConocoPhillips.

I love Sarah Palin, not just because she’s smarter than every democrat, independent and most republicans, but because she has the ability to draw all the knuckle-dragging libs to sites like this one, where they willingly expose their stupidity to the world. I LOVE the internet.

I’m obsessed about many things in life. It does not translate into respect for the obsessed subject. Sometimes quite the opposite.

“Here, then, is the real problem of our negligence. We fail in our duty to study Reagan’s Word not so much because it is difficult to understand, not so much because it is dull and boring, but because it is work. Our problem is not a lack of intelligence or a lack of passion. Our problem is that we are lazy.”