Yes. I'm angry because he's a bigot and frustrated because he's relentlessly insulting and won't engage in a rational discussion about it.
Again, where?
Looks like he responded to your very general question.
Are you referring to calling an end to government discrimination "affirmative action" and saying he doesn't support AA?
He's now deleted his post. But I don't recall anyone discussing AA here. AA seems irrelevant to this particular discussion.
You have not responded to him.
Are you referring to his accusation that I support affirmative action?
No idea what you're talking about.
The word "racism" is there in the same sentence in the FAQ about what's unwelcome in the FSP. That covers the Stormfront crowd. Is that the only form of bigotry that the FSP cares about, and if so, why add "bigotry"?
First, no, it does not "take care" of them. You can be racist and not be a bigot. Bigotry is more than just, consciously or unconsciously, having beliefs in an accordance with some discriminatory ism. Bigotry is more of an ignorant stubbornness that your opinion must be right--nothing else is possible. It is a close-mindedness. Typically, negatively judgmentalism directed at other people. We ask people not to
promote that kind of behavior.
I thought Keith's answer about what bigotry is was pretty good: it could mean a number of things, and it depends on who's doing the deciding. 'Course, I didn't get the impression that the latter part of the answer was entirely sincere. But there appears to be more behind this "dispute" than either you or Keith are stating.
Do I think people that actively hate homosexuals are bigots? Yes. But I cannot speak for everyone.
He's already expressed that he would support having the Loving decision rolled back because it was an expansion of government (and raised his taxes)
And did he go on to say that interracial marriages should be illegal?
Yes. He wants all marriages to be illegal.
Where did he say this? (pointing to your own blog doesn't count.)
I have theories about what his problem is, but I won't say it here because I don't feel it adds to the conversation. But I presume you mean a problem with regard to his involvement in the FSP.
I meant the former.