BillD,

We were discussing the line you would draw between free speech and stupid, hateful obscenities: I chose the example of the sometimes objectionable ( ie, if it was done to a side one supported one would object) treatment of the minority viewpoint here. I DID NOT state that YOU were talking about conservatives.

YOUR statement was "Clever things with double-entendré remarks are one thing: stupid, hateful obscenities are another." Thus, my comment. How is that a straw-man arguement? If you chose not to voice your objection to treatment you claim to object to, what should I think, given your statement?