Free Republic

Hi redrock,

TLE republished this article today; when I was looking for the date of the original I found this thread and you at the top of it. Hope life is treating you well.

Regards,
MA

I am a Texan. Therefore, I can criticize that fool, Ron Paul, anytime I wish.

So far this "criticism" of yours doesn't seem to be anything more than name calling. Care to present a substantive refutation of one or more of his views, or is that all you've got?

Thanks.

RIP Sean.

Ron Paul has never produced one piece of effective legislation that did anything to control illegal immigration. In fact Paul has never gotten any of his legislation through the process. Ever. He has NO support or endorsement from his congressional colleagues. His claim of small government is just that, nothing but a claim.

How do you reckon that other congressmen not supporting his bills equates to him not being in favor of smaller government?

Paul has co-sponsored 1876 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers) NOTE: 1876 bills, written by other congress members. All ‘constitutional’ ? You decide.

I'd like to, but the link you provided was to info on Duncan Hunter, not Ron Paul. Is there a summary of these bills somewhere that I can peruse?

(It is nice to see you too. Hope you've been well.)

Paul votes more like a democrat than a republican.

If true, that is a sadder reflection on the republicans than it is on Dr. Paul, since he restricts his "yes" votes to legislation which he believes is authorized by the Constitution.

“The resolution recognized “the Islamic faith as one of the great religions of the world,” rejected “hatred, bigotry and violence directed against Muslims, both in the United States and worldwide”

Are you suggesting that a good republican should be in favor of hatred, bigotry and violence?

When Dean was rejected, and it was obvious that the reason was not "the scream" despite what this forum and right-wing radio believed, I wondered if the Dean loss was engineered by the DNC by building the Dick Morris roach spray strategy into the process or whether the DNC was simply ignoring the will of the electorate like the RNC does.

In Washington State, the "R"s allocate half of their delegates based upon the results of the primary election. The "D"s don't use the primary results at all.

Huckabee adds nothing to the ticket, except for big-government nanny-statism & open borders, and he has ethics problems.

The best that might be said of him is that he doesn't seem to be in bed with the CFR/Trilateral guys.

How wonderful it is to see some old time FReepers (as well as new folks) sticking up for the good Doctor. Please add me to your list, OP.

Regards

Ron Paul is the "R" party's only hope of avoiding a Hitlery presidency in '08. She can't wait to make use of all those juicy new powers your boy Bush has handed to himself and future Presidents. And who do you think you're kidding that she is "anti-war", anyway?

It will be a shame if you squander your historic opportunity to support an actual patriot.

Here's hoping you find a way to fulfill your dream.
Best regards,
MA

BTW, MA, do you still listen by your radio with baited breath every Thanksgiving, hoping that your local doper FM radio station plays "Alice's Restaurant" by Arlo Guthrie.

Uh, gee Dane, why should I care if they play it on the radio when I've got it on vinyl and can listen to it whenever I like. And I believe the word you were looking for was "bated". You may go fishing with your breath but I certainly don't.

This is an article from a website, written by a well-known writer who is a Conservative, or at least writes for a leading Conservative website.

Yeah, and it is just an absolutely *amazing* coincidence that this blog entry, written last August and not even on the main page of his blog any more, was posted here the very morning that the LF thread where it was mentioned was resurrected.

LF: A Response to Richard Poe

Dear Mr. Poe,

In regarding your latest blog entry Attack of the Nazi Trolls: A Lesson For Message Board Moderators, you have left your readers with a false perception of what Liberty Forum is intended to be, and how it actually operates today.

In a private email which I granted you permission to post onto your website, I said:

Quote:

---

This forum is a libertarian forum, and is devoted to the libertarian concept of unabashed free speech. With that principle in mind, most posters aren't libertarian as many fringe types have taken advantage of this policy (which includes a no-banning policy) to run amok...hence the preponderance of anti-Jewish posts on this forum.

---

This quote leaves much to be desired. It also leaves the impression that all the non-libertarians on this board are "Nazi trolls". That most certainly isn't the case. Although Liberty Forum was set up with the intention of being a discussion forum for libertarians, the libertarian principle of free speech takes precedence. With this in mind yes, most of our posters aren't libertarian....but that doesn't automatically mean that they're "Nazi Trolls".

Our membership includes posters with political views that span the entire spectrum: from left-leaning libertarians, Paleo-Conservatives, Neo-Conservatives, Islamic Theocrats, Socialists, etc.

John Deere, the owner and Administrator of Liberty Forum, welcomes this and believes it's a good thing since he feels that in a free market situation such as this the best ideas win out....and John Deere is of the strong opinion that libertarian ideas are best placed to win in a free market and free exchange such as Liberty Forum.

To continue, you posited this in your blog:

Quote:

---

Inevitably, Nazi trolls find your forum and begin probing your defenses. If you allow them to post messages, they immediately spread the word to other Nazi trolls and soon your message board is infested.

At that point, all the normal people stop posting. It's a bit like when a fight breaks out in a bar and everyone stops talking and turns to watch the fight, transfixed. Suddenly, your message board becomes an arena for Nazi trolls and people arguing with Nazi trolls.

---

Where you make your error is where you state: "At that point, all the normal people stop posting."

As stated above, not all the non-libertarians are "Nazi Trolls". Secondly, your suggestion that they aren't "normal" is quite subjective. But the main point is that while a few did leave Liberty Forum, the vast majority of those committed to libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism decided to stay since they value the concept of free speech, a concept inherent in libertarianism.

Many of us might not like much of the speech we see here every day, but we're committed to the principles laid down by John Deere in his Charter, and have grown attached to what we've built here. There's much animosity here, but there's also quite a bit of loyalty to both John Deere and to Liberty Forum in general, more than any other board I've been part of. And this crosses ideological, religious, ethnic, and cultural lines.

One last note:

The impression left with you is that the trolls here are "Nazi" in flavour. Yes, we do have some of that stripe, but we've also experienced trolls of other stripes as well including the notorious Zionist trolls that infect discussion fora much like their Nazi bete noires.

Max Soldo aka "thoughtcriminal"

Please don't use this thread to curse and slime Free Republic.

Yeah, this thread is only meant for you and your buddies to curse and slime Liberty Forum. How dare we speak up for ourselves!

Dang!

bump

TF: Social Security is NOT welfare.

Sandy: Oh please. It's money coming from people who work going to people who don't. It's a simple tranfer of dollars from those with ability to those with needs. It's welfare, plain and simple.

Exactly. But, that's how Socialist Security was "sold" to the public when it was instated. They were living through a depression and couldn't resist the idea of a "safety net".

They think they're just "getting their money back" that they paid in over the years, not realizing that each generation of retirees needs more and more working people to finance each stipend, since the gov't is stealing the money for other uses rather than "keeping it in trust" as it originally promised it would do.

A few people end up dying before they "use up" all the money that was taken from them, but most of them end up taking out a lot more than was taken from them to put in. And since the 70s or so, one doesn't even have to have contributed anything in order to suck off the SS teat.

They put their trust FedGov and sucked all of us who came after into its pyramid scam.

The only difference is that both modern day Libertarians and Socilaists will look at a pollution power sucking pot farm and say "cool dude", while looking at a factory that produces wealth and products that benefit prople, the socialist will say "evil capitalist pig slave farm", while the Libertarian will say, "Oh come on that ain't so bad, but the pot farm is way cooler."

Hey, you're actually getting closer.
:-b

Would you mind documenting this "pollution" that pot farms allegedly produce though? What kind of "pollution"?

What part of "I'm not interested" didn't you comprehend?

Don't be dragging me into your endless bickering. I'm not interested.

Anyone is free to civilly disobey any law which offends their conscience, and indeed are obligated to do so. The Nuremberg trials well established this precedence that conscience should be followed above any mere human law.

What an insightful comment. I would have been even more impressed if it hadn't been buried in petty insults.

There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.