Freepers are gettin' noticed.

Brace yourselves, Freeper Friends....I have a feeling the Hollywood communists will try to label the FreeRepublic Forum as a "hate" organization.....and Hillary will typically brand this site as a "vast right wing" group....that needs to be shut down....since Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are too powerful.....look for the socialist left to go elsewhere....just a thought....

Too late. Already been done. Stinking mackeral in the garbage can of truth. We moved on.

Tell them Bob Barr is a freeper see what they say! LOL

media can do what they want...we aint giving up

since Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are too powerful.....look for the socialist left to go elsewhere....just a thought....

Molon Labe.

FReep This
How the right-wing is making itself heard

Joyce Slaton, Special to SF Gate Thursday, January 30, 2003

Something strange happened during the 2000 Gore-Bush election fiasco you may have missed.

CNN, which was running 24-hour special election coverage, hosted a program with conservative columnist Bob Novak shortly after the disputed election results were returned. Novak was adamant that Al Gore should quit trying to steal the election and concede. To bolster his point, he brought up the results of CNN.com's public-opinion poll "Should Al Gore concede?" Poll results showed that a full 89 percent of the thousands of people who had visited CNN.com and voted had agreed -- Gore should give up the ghost.

But had the American people really spoken? Or was this poll FReeped?

Though many may not know about them, FReepers are members of a small but growing and vocal right-wing movement who are making a name for themselves.

First, some background: FReeping takes its name from its birthplace, Free Republic, a heavily trafficked right-wing Web site founded by a Fresno Republican in 1996, and its conservative forums get thousands and thousands of posts a day from people sharing news and opinions of interest to right-leaning citizens.

Some of those who hang out on Free Republic call themselves "FReepers." These people are dedicated to actively spreading conservative viewpoints, showing President Bush support and getting on the nerves of liberals the FReepers don't like. The FReepers often accomplish their aims with tactics familiar to their left-leaning counterparts -- peaceful demonstrations with signs and speakers, as well as phone calls, letters and e-mails to support conservative figures they like and scolding calls, letters and e-mails to liberals they don't like.

But then, well, there are those other tactics some FReepers have been known to use.

First of all, the mass poll voting: A FReeper will post a link to a poll on Free Republic and urge other FReepers to FReep it. Search under "FReep poll" at the Web site and you'll find many "FReep this poll!" marching orders each day. In monitoring Free Republic myself, I have been amazed at how fast the FReepers seem to find polls, which are sometimes posted to Free Republic just minutes after they appear online. "Whenever a poll is posted on Free Republic.com, everybody goes and votes the right way, and there's nothing wrong with that," says Marinelle Thompson, FReeper and founder of gun rights group Second Ammendment Sisters. "We just do it for a laugh. It doesn't really mean anything."

She's right -- there's nothing at all wrong with encouraging a group to vote in a poll. It's done all the time in political groups of every stripe. What most people, even some FReepers themselves, object to is the intentional swaying of polls by people who vote repeatedly. In fact, SF Gate has had a few of its own polls FReeped. As SF Gate News Director (and poll writer) Vlae Kershner put it, "People are finding a way of getting around our system that only allows one vote, and they're voting hundreds of times. It's not thousands of people voting one way; it's one or two people voting hundreds of times."

Anyway, Kershner says, SF Gate's polls are for entertainment value only. After all, the poll population is self-selected. The people who vote in online polls are those who care enough about an issue to vote -- by its very nature, a skewed population. But not everyone who looks at poll results knows the difference.

"Online polls are silly -- everybody knows that," says liberal political analyst William Rivers Pitt, whose book War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You To Know made him something of a FReeper target for a time. "But it can have a real effect if it's brought out as news that actually means something. The best example is the Gore thing."

David Allen, founder and moderator of major liberal forum Democratic Underground, a popular site many think of as Free Republic's most direct ideologically opposite rival, agrees.

"A lot of blame here needs to be placed on the media itself," says Allen. "These polls are put up there on Web sites and sold as if they are news, as if they are an accurate reflection of the opinions of American people, and they're not. They're completely skewed to whomever finds it first -- and, to be honest, that's never us liberals. It's always them. As long as the news media continues to report the results of an Internet poll as if it's news, the FReeping of polls will continue to be a problem."

Ridiculous, says Kristinn Taylor, a Washington, D.C., FReeper who holds protests several times a month in the nation's capital. "Everyone knows Internet polls are unreliable. I don't bother voting in Internet polls myself -- I think it's the least consequential thing we do. But I can understand why people do it. When we hear or see things we don't like, we make ourselves heard. Our voices are not heard in the media, so we had to find other ways."

The majority of the "other ways" Taylor refers to fall into the category of traditional political activism. It's those that don't that cause concern. A small number of FReepers believe so strongly in the ultimate good of their goals that they don't mind advocating or even participating in activities that are scary, violent and illegal.

A couple of examples: In 1999, after FReepers heard that Julie Hiatt Steele, the woman charged with obstruction of justice by Kenneth Starr during President Clinton's impeachment trial, was taking credit-card donations to help pay her legal bills, they flooded her Web site with fake donations. Steele's webmaster later told the LA Weekly that hundreds of "donations" listing fake credit-card numbers ended up costing Steele around $4,000, since she had to pay her e-commerce service company 25 to 35 cents to process each one. By the way, using a fake credit-card number, a form of wire fraud, is illegal.

Then there is the Chuy's incident. In June 2001, President Bush's underage daughter, Barbara, was served alcohol at Chuy's, a restaurant in Austin. The restaurant's bar manager, Mia Lawrence, saw what was happening and called 911 (and, the FReepers say, also phoned local newspapers at the same time, though others claim this allegation is false). The FReepers viewed Lawrence's actions as purposely harmful to the Bush family's image, and at least one of them retaliated by posting Lawrence's home address, date of birth, driver's license number and physical description, plus information about her baby, to Free Republic -- and urged other FReepers to make use of that information.

To Free Republic's credit, the site pulled the information almost immediately and banned the poster for life. But the fact that it was done at all shocked both liberals and FReepers themselves.

"That was just awful," says Kristinn Taylor. "And I argue strenuously against people doing that kind of stuff. Your private life is your private life, and this type of behavior and harassing phone calls, things like that, totally violate the standards of Free Republic."

"At first, we were upset that this woman was going to trash Bush through his daughters, but after her information was posted, we all felt sorry for her," says Marinelle Thompson. "We were going to FReep her restaurant, show up with signs, but after that, we didn't feel it was right, so we called it off."

Still, it's incidents like this that show a certain scary side of the FReepers. Though Taylor and Thompson both emphatically affirmed that they do not support posting of private information to Free Republic, making harassing phone calls or engaging in other illegal activities, the fact that such activities have occurred is alarming.

"Chuy's was a truly nasty incident," says David Allen. "And it's not typical of that group, but it does speak to a level of tolerance for violent speech on the right that I don't think is appropriate. I've gotten threatening phone calls from FReepers actually threatening me harm, and that's shocking."

"There's definitely a sort of hardcore wackjob segment of FReepers," agrees William Rivers Pitt. "Most of them are decent human beings, but there's a violent underbelly. Speech is tolerated there that wouldn't be elsewhere."

And under any other presidential administration, the FReepers might be such a radical fringe that they wouldn't matter much. But the FReepers do seem to have tapped into a certain cultural zeitgeist, an angry streak running through conservatives pushed to their limits during the Clinton years.

"The FReepers represent a narrow fringe within the Republican realm," says Pitt. "And all the people who believe what [FReepers] believe are now running the government. I don't know if that makes them powerful, but they sure have the home-field advantage right now."

There is nothing whatsoever wrong with holding passionate political views and expressing them. I admire the FReepers for their political passion at a time when many Americans are just tuning out. I admire a group of people who work to make themselves heard, who actively spread their opinions through e-mails and phone calls, demonstrations and poll votes. I admire people with the courage of their convictions.

But, still -- I tried to contact at least a dozen FReepers and right-wing organizations with FReepers in them (including Free Republic.com owner Jim Robinson), and very few of them were willing to talk to me. Why is that? Were they concerned I would misrepresent their views because they feel the media has a liberal bias? Or were they worried I would ask about embarrassing incidents like Steele's and Chuy's?

Perhaps I'll never know. In any case, I have no doubt most FReepers are honest, law-abiding people. It's just the lunatic fringe I worry about.

".... I tried to contact at least a dozen FReepers and right-wing organizations with FReepers in them (including Free Republic.com owner Jim Robinson), and very few of them were willing to talk to me......"

Why waste one's time talking to a liar?

You know what he is and what he does.

now...i wonder what they would have to say about the DU'ers

ill bet they make them freakin heros huh?

Quote:

"Speech is tolerated there that wouldn't be elsewhere"

That pretty much says it all.

"David Allen, founder and moderator of major liberal forum Democratic Underground, a popular site many think of as Free Republic's most direct ideologically opposite rival, agrees. "

Emphasis mine. On the whole not an entirely bad article.

"There's definitely a sort of hardcore wackjob segment of FReepers," agrees William Rivers Pitt. "Most of them are decent human beings, but there's a violent underbelly. Speech is tolerated there that wouldn't be elsewhere.""

Hey, Billy boy--check out the antics of the LIBERAL and leftwing groups. The "hardcore wackjob segment" on Free Republic is minsicule compared to them. They have been doing all the things that are presented as "negative" about Free Republic FAR longer. Geez--what a maroon (as is the author of the piece).

I think it would be great if FR could fund a legal arm to combat the ACLU. America has won many great battles in the field, but we lose every day in the courtroom when we let ninnies like these purloin our hard-fought freedoms.

But communist though they are, they know how to play the system, and they have an army of lawyers. Send a lawyer to fight one.

UP TO 376 RESPONES AND GUESS WHO REALLY WROTE IT?
william rivers pitt scott ritters buddy

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/832321/posts?page=376#376

A small number of FReepers believe so strongly in the ultimate good of their goals that they don't mind advocating or even participating in activities that are scary, violent and illegal.

!!!! LIKE WHAT?

Check out the reply (It's a hoot!):

"Thank you very much!!! That confirms something I have suspected in recent weeks.

It could, also, explain our recent influx of rabid, prolific, faschist type posters, here. They appear to be Freepers.

From the first link I picked up yet another link to site that we anti-Authoritarians need to visit, watch, support, and participate in. It is: democraticunderground.com"

I'm not at all surprized that it comes from one of the useful idiots at the Dimocratic Underground.

I wonder if Fraulein Slayton is aware of the absolute wackos of the IndyMedia in her own back yard? Reckon she could mention the shock that "it happened at all" concerning the killer a couple of months ago?

"That pretty much says it all. "

Made me cock my head to the side and say "Huh??"

I presume they mean how we will allow a person to slander someone. But as the article points out, when people post addresses of people, FR is very good about removing it and banning that person. Too bad they wont do a hit on DUh.com. They want venomous hate...there it is

"People are finding a way of getting around our system that only allows one vote, and they're voting hundreds of times. It's not thousands of people voting one way; it's one or two people voting hundreds of times."

OK...who in here has the whole day to sit and wipe out cookies over and and over and over again so you can vote hundreds of times. LOL!!

SFC has a message board up that is blasting Freepers here!

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/went/msglist?forum=techlocal&msgPerPage=25&postnum=