[chemainus]

I find this amusing as I am guilty of being a bit inflammatory and taking opposite sides of a discussion , even if I only have a few seconds to spend on it, for the sake of provoking rebuttal on contentious points. If anyone ever set themselves up to be "banned" and "warned" it is I. Yet, this has never happened. I suspect it never will happen. I do not like censorship. However in a situation like we have here, blatant and continuous insemination of leftist propaganda merely clogs up genuine discussion. I was reminded this morning that Marx's "dialectic" is nothing more that a high-sounding word for DoubleSpeak, i.e. lying out of both sides of your mouth. We don't have time for this. As long as our "censorship" remains at the level I have seen, I consider it to be simply the role and duty of a moderator. If you have complaints about THIS moderator, join a group like ProMed ( which is a great worldwide group looking at new and re-emerging diseases) and you will see just how strict a moderator can be and still be just what they are supposed to be, a moderator. I proudly support FreeRepublic and at times disagree with just about everyone here on purpose ; not to hear what I have to say, but to hear what YOU have to say in rebuttal.YOUR arguments make me a stronger , clearer thinker , even amidst the flames (-: FR is alive and well, rock-bottomed and copper sheathed !

[Oldeconomybuyer]

...I do not like censorship. However in a situation like we have here, blatant and continuous insemination of leftist propaganda merely clogs up genuine discussion...

I'm generally with you, but "censorship" implies that the poster has some sort of protected "right" to use FR. This is a private forum and its owners/moderators can toss anyone they choose in the same way a small business can refuse to serve a customer. Supply and demand will come into play if folks think there is excessive "censorship", and I see more FR users not less.