Posted on 01/14/2010 9:56:55 AM PST by AJKauf
Perhaps there needs to be a minimum number of replies before a Freeper can post threads.
What say you?
Nope. I prefer the "citizen contributor" of FR past. The newbies tend to be trolls, blog pimps or aspiring journalists.
Quite frankly, Erick, the problem is not among us Palin supporters, but with the lib trolls and operatives working for other potential candidates who continue to use "Moby" and astroturfing tactics as well as Alinsky's Rules against the governor, and as of lately, her supporters.
I, along with my FRiends SolidWood, euram, Al B., jla, SoCalPol, and Sarah Barracuda, among others, have been regular contributors to the Palin threads ever since McCain introduced her on August 29, 2008 as his VP pick. Since then, we have seen it all on this forum and elsewhere, which has been more than enough to justify our suspicions any time we see someone come in from left field and drop a hit post against Palin.
I help SolidWood run the Palin Ping list and have a pretty good idea as to who her supporters are on this forum and those who are not. And lately, I've seen an uptick in the number of posts from individuals who I have never even seen before on the Palin threads, purporting to support her BUT are "concerned" about some perceived failing about her.
I've also seen a big increase in the number of attacks coming from the Libertarian and Ron Paul wing of FR, as well as from some individuals who apparently have a big problem with Palin based on the fact that she's a woman. As a result, we supporters have been labeled as "cultists," "kool aid drinkers," and "Palinistas," among other epithets, which makes us even more suspicious when we see what we believe to be baseless criticisms with an obvious agenda behind them.
So, Erick, forgive me for saying so, but you need to place your concern where it belongs, specifically on lib trolls and RINO operatives, and not on us.
There sure is a lot of that.
Remember when you could refresh the page and there might have been one new article? But it was an article not some bloggers opinion.
What they don't get is, I sit here and think "Who are these people and why do they believe that I care what they think? And they simply post their opinion and walk away from any discussion. I believe the term I'm searching for is "self-important". :-)
I was just reading about how Coakley in Mass. has let child rapists skate and thought about how much BS is out there about Sarah in comparison.
They try to tear down the most qualified woman politician in the country while letting horible women like Coakley and Pelosi dance on the graves of vitims.
WTH has happened to America’s Mesengers? Is anyone out there willing to tell the truth or are we supposed to just focus on the next faux Palin controversy?
They are generating hits to their blog. I assume they make some money doing that.
Also, some of them don’t even post their opinion. They lure you to their blog with a catch title, which simply has a link to some MSM article or another blog. Others list an MSM source, but the link goes to a blog.
Maybe. I don’t know any to ask. And I NEVER click on their blogs. lol
I got into it with a blogger about a link within a link. The link on HIS page took me to another link. Ridiculous.
They should be worried. Very worried. She's coming, and she's going to end them and their petty puke games.
LMFWAO
;-/
If the two of you want, I can post that article from Red State as a new thread and I’ll take the heat for posting it. I will ping the two of you and the ping list of course.
Let me know yea or nay and I’ll post it within the hour.
Big surprise, Sarah ups her exposure, dares not to go into hiding and voila, her attackers come out in full force. Gee, I wonder if Sarah is the one the establishment most fears now? People have had enough of the establishment, it’s been brewning for decades. Sarah wins, they lose.
Palin 2012.
Let me condense what is happening.
A few conservatives have doubts about this convention. They have expressed them. Sarah is attending. They assume (wrongly I think) she is in this little bubble where she is unaware of any critisism surrounding this convention and needs her “friends” to guide her from making a huge mistake. They assume this because she is still attending despite their “respected” opinions and because she hasn’t felt the need to let them into her reasoning.
I don’t know. Seems a bit pretentious to me.
The talk of her “cultists” is misdirection at best. They aren’t guiding her moves and they aren’t shielding her from opposing views. I have the feeling she’s quite aware of various conservative commentaries out there and reads them weekly.
I’m not sure how I feel about this convention. I’m keeping an eye on it and time will demonstrate if concerns were warranted. But she is an adult. One who is beholden to no one. She holds no office. Appointed or elective. It’s not for these people to take it upon themselves to act as her unpaid advisors and wage a little mini campaign against her to change her mind. If they dislike the organizers of the event, make that case and cite your reasons why and then let people make their own decision to attend or not attend. Including Palin. If she is wrong, oh well. She learns from it. If she is right, well then, it would be nice if those who critisized the move admitted they were wrong. the way they failed to admit they were wrong about the impcations of her resignation from office. If I recall correctly some of these same people announced her over after that move.
I would suggest they drop the complaint about profit though. I wasn’t aware there was consensus in the movement that profit was bad. Infact, come to think of it some of these people have been whining about how the movement had to organize and raise funds to be taken seriously. Well then...
Profit isn’t evil and it’s not counter to the movement’s purpose. It’s the determination of how that money is spent that will decide if it was wisely givem.
Unsolicited advice does not impress me at all; nonsensical criticism impresses me less.
And Riehl’s is here:
Riehl, Erick and Clouthier all turned on Sarah Palin over her decision not to go to CPAC. Their arguments slamming her for that were weak, so they started slamming the Tea Party event.
So we have a “conservative blogger establishment” joining with the anti-Palin left against Gov. Palin and the Tea Party movement.
Unfreakingbelievable.
- JP
And Riehl’s is here:
Riehl, Erick and Clouthier all turned on Sarah Palin over her decision not to go to CPAC. Their arguments slamming her for that were weak, so they started slamming the Tea Party event.
So we have a “conservative blogger establishment” joining with the anti-Palin left against Gov. Palin and the Tea Party movement.
Unfreakingbelievable.
- JP
I just checked. Several articles from Pajamas Media have been posted in News over the years. The only reason this one was moved to Bloggers is because it criticizes Palin.
Posting articles and never commenting does not make a person a troll. In fact, if this person had posted articles that you always agreed with, you would not be complaining.
He’s just trying to divert/steal FReepers for his own benefit. Hit the abuse button, I did.
Well said!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.