Radley Balko doesn't want you to see this (Huffington Post, immigration, libertarian)
This site has perhaps the most open commenting policy on the internet. I don't need to delete or moderate comments because I make good, honest arguments and if someone disagrees I can defend my ideas.
I left a comment  at Balko's personal blog on the post "Immigration Limbo" . The comment was held in moderation and he's confirmed that he won't approve it so it will appear on his site.
In response to me asking  when my comment will appear, Balco said this :
When you can make your point with being an asshole.
As you can see at , there's nothing rude about the comment: no ad hominems, just facts. From the objective standpoint there's nothing wrong with the comment. However, from Balko's standpoint there's a lot wrong with it: the comment might wise up some of his readers. When people leave comments here that attempt to contradict my posts, I show how they're wrong. Balko can't do that: he knows I'm right. He just doesn't want his readers to find out about it.
For a clear example, Balko is retransmitting the misleading claim made by Elise Foley discussed in the P.S. of my comment. Because Balko won't approve the comment, his readers will be kept in the dark about how her post is misleading. If Balko had approved the comment, his readers might have learned something. And, he can't have that.
See deleted comments for dozens of others who can't present a counter-argument to what I write but who simply delete posts or ban me.
 The comment I left:
Joshua opines: "Don’t trust anybody who profits from crime."
Indeed. That's why I say don't trust those who are really making big $ off illegal immig.: those crooked biz'es who want to profit from it in one way or another. And, don't trust those "libertarians" who want to help those crooks, such as by supporting what will always be in reality a huge subsidy. Those crooks get to profit from massive illegal activity and push all the costs - direct and indirect - off on the rest of us.
P.S. Mere presence in the U.S. can be criminal for some (such as those who were expelled but came back). IAs have also been prosecuted for coming here illegally months after they came here: they didn't have a visa so - since they weren't picked up by a water spout - it was assumed they x'ed the border against our laws.
P.P.S. Come by my site for all the things "libertarians" won't tell you about this issue.
Pardon the shorthand ("biz" instead of "business", etc.) The "P.S." is explained in .
 theagitator . com/2012/01/27/immigration-limbo
That post consists mostly of an excerpt from "No Conviction, No Freedom: Immigration Authorities Locked 13,000 In Limbo" (link) which Balko introduces as "Great bit of reporting by my HuffPost colleague Elise Foley". In the post Foley misleads, stating "Despite what the term “illegal immigration” implies, simply being in the country without status is a civil, not a criminal, offense." See the P.S. in 
 I tweeted "@radleybalko: when will you approve my comment on your "Immigration Limbo" post? #immigration #tcot #OWS #GOP #ocra #sgp #tpp #p2 #tlot" (twitter . com/24aheaddotcom/status/163740264031195136)
 twitter . com/radleybalko/status/163778201833832448
8/26/14 UPDATE: My current handle is @24AheadDotCom_ . The links above aren't valid anymore.