Political discussion in a vibrant, healthy democracy will include anger at politicians,

[cheapdate]

45. No, Will's expression of anger doesn't warrant an apology

because it will interfere with "the electoral success of the Democratic Party. I didn't say or imply anything like that and you've completely misread me if that's what you took away.

What I was saying was that Will's strong (some might say misplaced and over the top) expression of anger was guaranteed to stir up many of the reactions it did precisely because this is a Democratic political forum.

Somehow you seem to have reversed my position to suggest that I'm arguing against,...well...vigorous argument. I'm not sure how you turned that trick, but that's the perfect, mirror opposite of how I feel. Will can say whatever he wants to. The idea that he owes anyone on DU an apology for what he said is absurd. I neither said or implied anything of the sort. I have no idea which "third paragraph" of mine you read to mean that I would propose that "DU rules demanded an apology for every opinion post that did not include a clear supporting argument".

I don't know what you mean by I "disliked Will's post". He's been here a long time and he's entitled to his opinion. Other people are entitled to argue against him. That's the deal. Where you're getting this idea that I'm opposed to blunt expressions, argument, and counter-argument is a mystery to me.