On this particular issue I wanted to make a few long winded points that might (?) provide context. I see this mentioned a lot, but I don't really understand what people expected this sites administrators to do about it. Quite a lot of this thread is about people wanting to be more free to express their opinion, so should the moderators have massively intervened to silence or shut down the wave of attacks on Perry? I never got the impression that this sites owner, Jim Robinson, had any particular hostility to Perry. Perhaps he may have disagreed with some of Perry's positions, but I seem to remember him saying that Perry was a reasonable conservative option. I don't recall any of this sites moderators/administrators/assistants targeting pro-Perry people for abuse or zots. Sure, maybe many preferred other candidates, but I never got the impression that Free Republic in any way sanctioned any attacks on Perry supporters.
It's not like other candidates were spared, and many of us (including myself at times) were probably more over the top than necessary when arguing for their own candidate and against others. I thought Cain, for example, was a total fake and was bluffing his way through - and I am pretty glad we are allowed to express that sort of blunt opinion that no doubt rubbed many people the wrong way. I mean, was I "attacking" Cain for arguing he was not a candidate we should take seriously? I think history has now proven I was right, but saying such things certainly infuriated a lot of people at the time.
When Perry entered the race he immediately led the polls and looked very likely to be THE non-Romney. He has a great resume and had an ability to raise enough money to compete with Mitt. On paper he appeared to be the strongest candidate to square off against Romney unless......someone else entered the race. And who were many, many, many conservatives on this forum (and others) waiting for to enter the race? Sarah Palin. Like it or not, for a very large number of people, Perry became an instant, albeit temporary, enemy (as the man who appeared to be the single most legitimate conservative threat) to a Sarah Palin candidacy that so many people expected. Many of these folks immediately did what people who support a candidate do, they tear down the competition to clear the way. This, in my opinion, is what really sparked all the attacks on Perry - and I don't see how political forum moderators/admins could have done anything about it. They'd have had to take draconian actions to stop it - and if they'd done that it would have appeared they were actually siding with Perry instead of just trying to moderate debate.
I supported Perry. I moved away from him when I lost faith in his ability to communicate effectively enough during this particular election cycle (I will happily consider him again in 2016/2020). I was attacked for supporting Perry too - but I just don't see how it is fair to blame Free Republic's owner or the forum moderators for it. If you read some of the other conservative forums similar stuff happened (not counting the ones that outright supported Perry). We had a situation this election cycle where THE big name conservative/Tea Party candidate, Sarah Palin, that so many people absolutely believed was going to run (and were prepared to support) simply waited and waited and waited and ultimately declined to get in the race. For months lots of people here and activists all over the place were readying themselves for her candidacy, not even considering backing anyone else, and effectively working to clear the field for her. By the time she made it official that she wasn't running (and many people STILL don't believe it and think she can STILL somehow be the nominee), the attacks on Perry had already done their damage and the primary was more of a mess than it should have been.
Those are just my observations. On another note. I know much of the site was fairly pro Palin, but I was fairly blunt all summer that I believed she had no real intention to run. That was quite a contrarian view that infuriated a lot of people, yet I was able to speak my peace no matter who it outraged, attack right back at anyone who came after me, and otherwise make all my points without being censored, threatened or banned. My experience with moderators/admins has been quite good (even though perhaps many of them disagree with me on many policies).
The attacks were personal, not philosphical or based on fact, and the moderators allowed it against almost anybody who supported Perry. Perry supporters repeatedly hit the abuse button but got no help from the mods. I won't pay good money to be called an idiot, stupid, ignorant, a redneck Texan, pond scum, told to go get a brain, etc, and that isn't the worst of the name calling that went on. It was really over the top and that is why so many of us left and took our checkbooks with us. We weren't an overly sensitive group of thin skinned people, we only wanted to be treated with some basic respect.