Yesterday, I was banned from the Face book forum, Conservative Hammers for questioning the media’s representation of the change in committee member’s of the House Budget and Financial Committees. - Also for defending John Boehner and Mitt Romney.
This does not matter since participation in a forum is only as valuable as the degree to which one has the freedom of speech to express one’s views. When Keith Brock, after reprimanding me for addressing him by his full name rather than as “Sir” or Mr. Brock”- telling me that I had not been granted permission to address him by the name that he goes by on Face book, published an announcement that he did not like to take such an action but as he announced “she is not a conservative’ and so he is justified in silencing my voice on the forum that he governs.
It is ironic because the “true conservatives” that allegedly populate Keith Brock's face book forum, Conservative Hammers, are part of the media chorus which unilaterally reports that the four congressmen were removed from the committees because they are conservatives- and so now Mr. Brock, after announcing to his loyal followers that I am not a conservative, at least in accordance with Keith Brooks personal definition of conservatives, uses said definition as a reason to remove me from his forum. Can this be the very definition of duplicity?
Touché to Keith Brock- By my definition, Keith Brock is no conservative because my definition of conservatism includes that which is being conserved - the American political philosophy which is the basis of our great constitution and which includes the freedom of speech, which Keith Brock has demonstrated himself to be intolerant there of, wanting to surround himself only with those who are in strict agreement with his own views. Keith's intolerant close minded attitude has sadly become the attitude that defines the (organized) far right., the same far right that is labeled by the media and themselves as the "true conservative" - more to say on that in my next blog post.
Also ironic is that Keith Brock reprehended me for calling him by his name- Keith Brock- and then he turns around and calls me one who is not a conservative- which I consider to be slander- but calling me by my name- no one needs my permission to do so- announcing to the world that I am not a conservative- I take offense to that.
This does not matter since participation in a forum is only as valuable as the degree to which one has the freedom of speech to express one’s views. When Keith Brock, after reprimanding me for addressing him by his full name rather than as “Sir” or Mr. Brock”- telling me that I had not been granted permission to address him by the name that he goes by on Face book, published an announcement that he did not like to take such an action but as he announced “she is not a conservative’ and so he is justified in silencing my voice on the forum that he governs.
It is ironic because the “true conservatives” that allegedly populate Keith Brock's face book forum, Conservative Hammers, are part of the media chorus which unilaterally reports that the four congressmen were removed from the committees because they are conservatives- and so now Mr. Brock, after announcing to his loyal followers that I am not a conservative, at least in accordance with Keith Brooks personal definition of conservatives, uses said definition as a reason to remove me from his forum. Can this be the very definition of duplicity?
Touché to Keith Brock- By my definition, Keith Brock is no conservative because my definition of conservatism includes that which is being conserved - the American political philosophy which is the basis of our great constitution and which includes the freedom of speech, which Keith Brock has demonstrated himself to be intolerant there of, wanting to surround himself only with those who are in strict agreement with his own views. Keith's intolerant close minded attitude has sadly become the attitude that defines the (organized) far right., the same far right that is labeled by the media and themselves as the "true conservative" - more to say on that in my next blog post.
Also ironic is that Keith Brock reprehended me for calling him by his name- Keith Brock- and then he turns around and calls me one who is not a conservative- which I consider to be slander- but calling me by my name- no one needs my permission to do so- announcing to the world that I am not a conservative- I take offense to that.
Comments
Post a Comment