Actually, I was rather busy yesterday and didn't find time to respond to your drivel.
I do not mean to lend prominence to Wagglebee, there are others who have behaved the same way on this thread.
I'm curious, what is the proper response to this:
This is not a conservative question, we don't have to deny that there is insufficient habitable and desirable land for the doubling of American population every fifty years in order to maintain our conservative credentials. I don't know where this notion that growing population is good comes from among conservatives. Is it because misguided conservatives do not want to admit a predicate that allows for abortion?
You have been all over this thread pushing the Malthusian overpopulation lie, a lie that has been used to kill more than ONE BILLION innocent people in the past century.
To your previous posts, NOBODY is suggesting that the entire population of the earth SHOULD be put in Texas, merely they have pointed out that this COULD be done.
Hence apart from a single unpleasant exposure, I have no way of knowing whether your description of Wagglebee is deserved as one who outs "liberals, libertarians who violate core conservative views, or others." As a self-confessed conservative with a "pesky libertarian streak" I suppose I would fall into the category "of others" which you catalog.
Conservatism and libertarianism are largely incompatible. Pushing the overpopulation lie is not a mere "pesky streak."
I have no objection to debating the merits of my position at any time, in fact I do it all the time but I do object to being "outed" by a drive-by vigilante who throws his bombs and moves on.
None who know me would suggest that I "throw my bombs and move on." I go after trolls until they're gone.
If you look at my about page and I infer from your remarks that you already have done so, you will find a decade-old description of: "those Posters who evade unpalatable reality by resort to name-calling, ad hominem attacks, zotting, and just plain old-fashioned hardheadedness" who are to be compared unfavorably to Nathan Bedford Forrest who was possessed of "unflinching fortitude to behold, accept, and deal with reality no matter how unpleasant the prospect."
Really? A founder of the Ku Klux Klan had "unflinching fortitude"? How did this penchant for "dealing with reality no matter how unpleasant the prospect" reveal itself when he LIED to Congress about his KKK membership?
Troll police are intellectually arrogant because they assume that their fellow conservatives are too stupid to think for themselves and must be protected from dangerous error by censorship.
Of course, the libertarian fall-back position that it's "censorship" to not allow them to push their garbage.
Paradoxically, their inquisition mentality means that at root they do not believe in conservative values, they do not think that conservatism can morally or intellectually prevail against other ideologies so they protect the ideology just as Torquemada protected the faith. They patrol up and down the bandwidth of Free Republic shutting down debate with personal invective, believing all the while that they are strengthening the very philosophy they are wounding.
No, if I want to see leftist positions espoused I can simply turn on the television, I come to Free Republic to avoid it.
***************************
Amen to that, and well said, all.
the libertarian fall-back position that it's "censorship" to not allow them to push their garbage.
if I want to see leftist positions espoused I can simply turn on the television, I come to Free Republic to avoid it.
There is no safe haven for you, not even in Free Republic, because you take your dogmatic, intolerant, censorious soul wherever you go.
