Why Does Richard Murphy Delete Harmless Comments?

Call me anally retentive, but I’ve got a blockage when it comes to bloggers censoring comments for no reasonable motive. Top political insider bloggers like Iain Dale do it all the time, and of course it is completely characteristic of most narrow ideologues that they need to create an environment where there are only two ways of seeing the world; the right way, which is their own, and the wrong way, which is the vile Other.

While many political bloggers simply delete comments that frighten them or the horses, ConHome has developed an especially sneaky approach. So, when one of their pet commenters has posted a particularly obnoxious or vituperative comment they put up a notice in its place, stating that the comment has been deleted, thus giving the impression of an open transparent process.

But what a fraud! As anyone not 'in with the in-crowd' will find, an intelligent, well-argued and polite comment that seriously challenges the group-think will simply be deleted covertly, without anyone the wiser.

And so, sad to find that Richard Murphy at TaxResearch blog is no better than ConHome. Or can anyone please tell me where the comment below, which he deleted, breaches his comments policy?

"Richard Murphy wrote: “And there’s much to oppose. If he did it properly he could bring the government down, and that would be a good thing.”

Don’t be too sure of that. Once the LibDems signed in blood the pact with the Tories they are in the fight to the death.

Besides which, where’s the alternative, when Labour have proven to be bankrupt?"

Harmless enough, you'd think. Why expunge it?