Just noticed: Bricker, on why he doesn’t disown the nuttiness of fellow conservative Starving Artist:
Bricker’s entire complaint is based on a lie - if he doesn’t “own” Starving Artist and thus cannot “disown” him, he has no basis to demand that the people he calls “liberals” disown other “liberals.” I take this an an admission of his knowing deceit on the matter and figure the issue (at least as far as Bricker is concerned - I suppose we could debate how/if one’s political peers should be policed as a general concept) is closed on that basis.