re: #159 Dark_Falcon
How about ‘confab’ or ‘discussion group’? All I’m saying is that in my mind it is not fair to ascribe the belief of one person in a group to others who have given no indication that they share it, and in at least one case actively disagree with it.
Its an opinion section under the control of the NRO editorial staff. If they found the content objectionable, they wouldn’t have published it. The fact they also published other opinions doesn’t change the fact they did choose to publish the other content.