Hi Stan,
This isn’t really a pitting per se (though I can’t control other posters), but since I’m directing this at you rather than your arguments, this is the appropriate forum.
First, you’ve been here since ’05, so you should know that when referring to a news story, including a link is not only SOP, it’s common courtesy. From your thread, Can anyone here morally justify Obama’s proposed tax on charitable contributions?:
The exasperation inherent in “sigh” is absurdly misplaced, as is the low-end sneer that it’s such a common news item that a link is unnecessary. Again, providing links and a brief summation in an OP is standard practice, so posters don’t have to go through the task of searching out what your referring to or reading the entire article to engage in conversation. An admittedly trivial task (in most cases), but it’s such a part of Board culture that directing umbrage at being asked for a link comes across quite poorly.
Lastly, the insinuation that a poster is ignorant because he wasn’t aware of a news item is, at the very least, in poor taste. This is exacerbated by the relative dearth of coverage of the story. Not that it wasn’t available, but there was just one article on it in the NY Times (from February 26). Your own cite to an obscure periodical (obscure to those not in the non-profit sector), also from late February, only underscores this point. It is far from a common story, so your suggestion that the poster was ill-informed is tantamount to an ad hominem.
Moving on, you’ve claimed the mantle of “a primary critic of the new regime.” That’s great. We need conservatives on the board. The very existence of GD relies on opposing viewpoints, whether from ornery Canadians who have a passion for American Politics (hi Sam!) or people just playing devil’s advocate. But what we don’t need is low-end drivel. There’re plenty of boards —both right and left—that spout oversimplified and sloganized talking points in the guise of reason. The Dope, though, stands among the few in that by and large, the drool is a relative drop in a bucket of thought out, reasoned responses. Droll humor or snarks aren’t completely missing (e.g., Obamunist/Shrub), but through it all there is a level of articulation that propels debate; not just shouting.
But as so-called champion of the right, you’ve provided us with:
(Note; some of these are excised quotes with snipping for brevity)
The thing is, scattered about the above atrocities are smatterings of thought. No, not in what I quoted (I want to be clear to anyone reading this that I just quoted the insipid bits) but sprinkled about them like confectioners’ sugar on a very large steaming pile of shit. For the past few days, your ridiculous-to-reasoned ratio is horribly askew. As I said, we need conservative voices here, both to temper the echo and to give those of us who read the Boards for the near-academic quality of discourse a variety of viewpoints to ponder. Given the relative paucity of actively posting conservatives, stepping up to be one of the “primary critics of the new regime” is within your grasp, but you’ll have to let go of some of the hyperbole.
I’m aware that Pit threads oft turn on the OP, so if anyone out there thinks I’m in error, have at it. Not that you needed me to tell you that 
Rhythm