Quote (fender @ Feb 12 2018 06:56pm)
l2r, cletus.
another wimpy inapplicable response.
You tried to paint something as a deflection when the topic was directly talked about and you were the one cowering from debating it on merit.
Quote
So you are generally in favor of authoritarians interpreting rules of order to silence dissent.
You're not an anarchist.
Recognizing that someone directly explained why a specific case of someone interrupting a hearing was inappropriate is not being generally in favor of authoritarians doing anything.
Quote
the whole "reading out campaign donations are 'personal comments' and therefore have to be silenced" narrative is a bs excuse to protect your corrupt politicians, you fake libertarian hack. no, the real reason for this going off topic is a desperate deflection attempt...
Sad. Getting triggered and repeating your unintelligent claims of fake libertarian is not an argument, its just pathetic. Your poor character is showing.
Having some basic rules for a hearing about a bill is not a 'BS excuse to protect corrupt politicians'. Its a common sense rule of order.
Its simply not an open forum to talk about and castigate whoever you want. It would be a mess if business was handled like that.
You uncritically buying into left wing propaganda and simply claiming its true regardless of facts presented to you is not a sound and intellectually justifiable position or rebuttal.
No one is deflecting except you.
You and plague tried to make this about speech and rights and silencing being inappropriate.
Shocker someone contested the claims and discussed the issue tied to whether silencing her is a appropriate or not.
discussing the topic and you carrying on like a baby when you dont like what you hear is not a deflection.
This post was edited by cambovenzi on Feb 12 2018 06:14pm