Backing up that statement is not a problem, at all. The problem is who will judge it as having merit? Because I’m sorry to say, it will cause you embarrassment. There have, indeed been implied threats to liberals here that have been either a.) tolerated b.)overlooked, or best case scenario, c.) not understood as being such.

I think it was a lapse of what is usually fairly sound judgment on your part. But it’s there in the archives, for anyone to see.

My thoughts can be found in the last three paragraphs of comment #98.

If you want to take this discussion offline, you have my email. If you’re simply set on banning me, and not letting this comment through, that’s fine with me. But I’ve lived up to my part of that challenge, and backed up my words.

=D> =D> =D>

I have never acted like I have a special “right” to comment here in anyway different than anyone else has a “right” to comment here.

Unless you count every time he has hit the “Submit Comment” button.

Implied threats towards liberals? I am unaware of any, and I won’t let you make that accusation without backing it up. So, the next comment of yours that gets approved will 1) retract the accusation or 2) back it up.

No other comment will be approved. In other words, do 1) or 2) or be banned permanently.

I suspect you’ll do 3) whine and fail to do either. Your choice, though.

I take you also don’t appreciate it when the cast here begins to wax poetic about their gun collections and make implied threats towards liberals, Because I don’t remember you ever telling anyone to cool it with the talk of guns, although I have seen you tell people to cool it, on both sides of the aisle, when the talk gets violent, and as I said I was making an absurd figure of speech, in no way was I speaking of a guillotine in real terms. You know that, I know that and the rest of the crew here knows it, so what it is, is a little fun with someone who expresses contrary opinions. Fine, this is your site and you can do what you want, I have never acted like I have a special “right” to comment here in anyway different than anyone else has a “right” to comment here. Nothing less and nothing more than that.

Now, if you’re suggesting that any talk, even metaphorical, of a device used for capital punishment, in 18th Century France, in some way puts you in a compromising position as a Deputy DA, then I’ve already apologized for that. And admit I wasn’t sensitive to that aspect and I should’ve been.

But you know, I should be able to decide that for myself regardless of my job.

Exactly, and Peter is demonstrating willful obtusity in his cries of “censorship!”

Up to now, I had considered that Peter, although blindly faithful to his partisan ideology with a religious fervor surpassing anything I’ve ever seen in a snake handling fundamentalist, might be a semi rational person, his “Stick it to the Man!®” “Troof to Powder©!” endorsement of the scrollover has caused me to recategorize him and stick him in a sack with the Andrews and Marios.

I don’t need people pointing at my blog and talking about how people talk about violence on it.

But you know, I should be able to decide that for myself regardless of my job.

Alright, enough about me. Don’t you have some new Obama quote to lampoon or something?

I bring it up when you whine about being moderated, and falsely imply that you were moderated for your leftist opinions instead of your violent reference.

If that seems like every time you make a comment, then you must be whining about being moderated in every comment you make.

Were you to apologize and show some understanding of why it’s discourteous to leave violent language on the web site of someone with a public position like mine, I could take you out of moderation. But you show no understanding of how discourteous you were, and so, I don’t trust you not to do it again.

It’s your own doing.