A Few of my Other Warnings...

A couple months before my most recent warning, there were a few other messages I got warned for that were a real stretch...

Democrats refuse to pass budgets. The Senate willfully obstructs and then Obama claims this is proof he needs to act unilaterally.

This warning was over I don't even know what. Maybe from what we know now, it was a stereotypical generalization. But really, this is pushing it. What else can be modded on the board, if this can be modded?

Some will say it's the Republicans who are obstructionist. Well, how many times was that said on the politics board and was anyone moderated for it? On the subject, Democrats obstruct too. Just as many Democrats as Republicans voted against Obama's budget...all of them. The House passes things while the Senate holds things up. Anyone following politics knows Obama has said he will act unilaterally, as I noted at the time when I brought this moderation up on Hellhole. This is more of a statement than an argument. Now I had some messages on my history so that explains the warning, but why would a message like this be touched at all?

By the way, another reason for a blog. Many people at the time were asking me just what I said and could not believe it was this simple. It was, but for me to post it directly on the site would be "quoting a violation." So here it is now.

Second warning about a month later, right before that last one cleared from history:

To any observer this should be another easy 9-0 ruling against Obama.

On the Hobby Lobby case. Not a popular opinion on the board but not a crazy one either. I think it's around 8 cases where the Supreme Court has ruled unanimously against Obama's arguments, such as when it came to religious liberty in the Hosanna Tabor case. I think the case I commented on would be as straightforward enough as those cases.

 Some comments have noted that my history was bad, justifying my latest warning. Full disclosure yes, as I said in the posts that these were building upon a past moderation. I'd disagree that it was a violation, but when it came to moderation it made sense to be more strict. However, these past warnings occurred with a history that wasn't close to what it is now. I also found it strange that during that time, I would comment throughout the month but it was only toward the end of warning 1 on my history when warning 2 popped up. Murphy's law or a timed response. Either way the warnings were totes bogus.