But I did not expect anyone had any doubt as to who I meant when I typed TROLL

His screen name was mentioned in the post just prior to the one where I defined what a TROLL is.

But for those still in doubt, yes it was the shinning star MikeB that I was referring too.

MM has the duty/pleasure of having who she wants here, I am OK with that.

When I can not stand the company in the roon, I can leave.

My problem with trolls, they take us away from the topic of discussion.

This has ran its course, and MikeB is still here. Let it lay. Kicking a dead
horse serves no good purpose.

While you may disagree with certain contributers, it’s best to leave the enforcement decisions to MM.

Most of what I’ve seen from MikeB and others like him are simply policy disagreements as well as mischaracterization of viewpoints.

If we started booting everyone who has a different political view and who mischaracterizes a conservative’s statement….we’d never have any liberals posting here ( and lose a few conservatives as well ).

Mike B constantly insults both Michelle – who, besides being a lovely woman, is also a bigger man than he’ll ever be

So you talk about him insulting Michelle, as if that’s a decent reason to remove him (it’s not. . .Michelle can take the insults, I’ve seen her ability to handle them well repeatedly), then you turn around and insult HIM in the same sentence.

There is no need to get rid of him. If you don’t want to read responses to him, there’s this nice scroll bar on the right. You can scroll right on by. Nothing is stopping ‘discussion on winning the elections’ here.

If you like that kinda thing, and you seem to be in the minority, now, I suggest you go and debate at the Daily Kos.

It’s hard to read that particular bit any other way than exactly how I called it before. I display a different point of view, you tell me I should go away.

You can claim it’s out of some chivalrous defense of Michelle’s honor or something, but I really don’t think she needs the defense. And your own words lead me to believe that’s not why you really want him gone anyway.

Well, to repeat some apparently missed points, Mike B constantly insults both Michelle – who, besides being a lovely woman, is also a bigger man than he’ll ever be – which is more than wrong, it’s discourteous; insults conservatives as a group which is rude to say the least in a place clearly recognized as being designed to be conservative-friendly (another backhanded slap at Michelle); and eats away at precious time better spent discussing matters on an intelligent level and not wasting it battling with a really bad imitation of Dan Rather.

No, if he gets thrown off then we aren’t following Democrat policy (let’s not call it “Democratic” – there’s nothing democratic about it), he’s simply being thrown off because he is following democrat policy, and that should be good enough reason for anyone, insults or no.

and as much as I disagree with 99% of what MikeB has to say, just to ban him ffor having contrary opionion sounds an aawful lot like democratic policy to me. Besides he’s not hurting anyone, and almost all the time his posts get smacked down anyway…and who doesn’t enjoy winning the arguement:)

$800,000 in a book deal from a Murdoch company…. How eeeenteresting…..

The hits just keep onnnnnnnnn coming.

This piece of swiss cheeze is getting breezy, so pardon me if I quickly plug it up, one hole at a time:

Ah yes, let’s ban a dissenting voice.

You forgot to add the words intellectually dishonest (he never debates squarely)and continually insulting to our host. When someone is a bad guest, you don’t keep him around for diversity, you kick him out and find diversity among those less inclinded to be out to cause trouble and insult the host.

Because an echo chamber is oh-so productive. Without dissenting voices, we are no more than a masturbatory echo chamber, engaged in self-aggrandizement posting of commentary we know everyone else already agrees with.

There is plenty of dessent within our own ranks, in case you hadn’t noticed. Once again, no reason to keep the creep. Simple. If you find that debating the nuances with those with whom you generally already agree isn’t exciting anough and need real warfare, there are plenty of liberal blogs to keep you from intellectually playing with yourself, as you otherwise put it.

Sorry, but as someone who has argued extensively with MikeB myself, ousting those who disagree with us, even those who insult us, is an awful notion . . .a microcosm of what the Democrats hope to accomplish with the “Fairness Doctrine”.

Except that good discussion on winning the elections could be had here instead of doing what we as conservatives always do – waste valueable time and oxygen running the liberal spin treadmill while they outflank us. If you like that kinda thing, and you seem to be in the minority, now, I suggest you go and debate at the Daily Kos. They’ll give you plenty of diversity and Michelle will have to put up with one less perpetually insulting voice in the form of Mike B.

If anything, he’s the best reason to have this sort of commentary in the first place. His presence here, and those like him, represent people who we might be able to actually bring around, however slim that chance may be.

With a zillion independants around you want to waste your time trying to convert him, and make the case that he should stay, insulting michelle and conservatives as a group to do it?

Have a party and invite anyone who dislikes you, and tell us if you have a good, productive time. There is much to discuss and much to do, and Mike B wastes our time while insulting the host. Simple.

Because an echo chamber is oh-so productive. Without dissenting voices, we are no more than a masturbatory echo chamber, engaged in self-aggrandizement posting of commentary we know everyone else already agrees with.

Sorry, but as someone who has argued extensively with MikeB myself, ousting those who disagree with us, even those who insult us, is an awful notion . . .a microcosm of what the Democrats hope to accomplish with the “Fairness Doctrine”.

If anything, he’s the best reason to have this sort of commentary in the first place. His presence here, and those like him, represent people who we might be able to actually bring around, however slim that chance may be.

He led the charge, but it isn’t just Edwards, it’s all the Democratic candidates. When Bill O’Reilly sent his producers out to ask the Democratic presidential canbidates why they refused to debate on Fox News, did they even make their case to the world then? No, Edwards and Hillary Clinton wouldn’t even stand their ground to a low-level Fox News producer without anywhere near the debate expertise they’d find in an actual Fox News debate. They walked hurriedly away (Clinton) or pretended to be somehow immediately occupied (Edwards). They’ll only make their case to their core audience, where they can get applause for so gross a political act.

Say it again, Katie, say it again. Only louder this time. Much louder, and to everyone you can think of. This is no small issue, it sits at the very apex of what the Founding Fathers intended when they, for example, created the Electoral College. And inspire anyone you can think of to say it also.

And you won’t be alone. Tonight on Fox Dennis Miller brought up the issue angrily as a sidebar before he was sidetracked by o’Reilly. It’s the invisible story, just as real and just as solid as any other story, until people get angry loudly about it, and then it will become not only visible, but significant, perhaps as significant as anything imaginable depending on how the dice roll.

ajmontana said:
mikeb

Thank you, AJMontana. If that’s the case people should stop being coy and say Mike B and say it plainly and directly and insist that he, Mike B, be thrown off the board. Allowing him to stay after repeatedly insulting the host isn’t good manners, it’s being a sap, and that isn’t polite to everyone else in the room – people come here because they like the host, therefore when someone insults the host that person shouyld be asked to leave out of respect for the feelings of the majority. It’s nothing new in the book of good manners, but you’d think it was the way things sometimes operate on the internet.

Remember, loudly, Katie, loudly!

If this is what the Democrats think they need to do to appear tough for voters, they are delusional. I can’t see them being tough enough for Al Qaeda. Actually, I can’t see them tough enough for anything.