PaulM...

A little prejudicially penned, hon. You know what they say about flies, vinegar, and honey...

In any case, for me, I *had* read some of the initial thread. And, as I am *not* a hacker, I leave it to those that have better technical know-how than I to make the call, *BUT*, more importantly, I leave it to those who are in charge of this site to ***make their own decisions*** as to how this site should be run.

The reason I support Joe is that he is one of these people, *and* I do not believe in "freedom of speech" on the internet (or in any other privately owned forum/business/venue, for that matter).

If I owned a business, someone came in to give a political speech, and I didn't want it in my place, I'd kick them out. As a privately owned establishment, your 1st amendment rights do not, and *should* not apply. I would be pretty pissed off if the person becried foul on the basis of their 1st amendment rights, and won their court case. Any clues what the future holds in a country where the government tells you how to run your business?

Here in the States, our 1st amendment rights start and stop where your speech about the goverment is concerned, and even where that is concerned, there are limits (you can't threaten the Presidents life and walk). We should all keep in mind (here in this country, anyway) of what happens when the government steps in to control private industry.

The word "Taliban" comes to mind.

So, before you use words like "Sycophant", you might want to ask *why* those of us who support Joes decision have done so. Maybe there is a reason beyond brown nosing.