Posted on 05/12/2009 12:07:37 PM PDT by jveritas
There are some really annoying liberal trolls on Free Republic who have survived for months and years without being banned. Why is Free Republic allowing them to stay? We have enough liberalism and left wing lunacy on 90% of the media and we do not need this crap on this forum.
It is not difficult to spot these trolls. A quick review of their posting history will prove without any shadow of doubt that they are liberal trolls. Some of them try to mask it but they cannot fool the vast majority of us.
There are plenty of left wing forums which will welcome them that if they are not already registered and active members there.
It is time to get rid of them.
Hit the abuse bottom on them and hit it often.
bttp
This is not a blog! :)
I know. ;) The graphic was just so perfect for what jveritas was saying.
I hear you. :)
There might be some merit to a conservative quiz on each homepage showing what things a Freeper supports and is most passionate about. But many Freepers wouldn't want to fill one out for reasons that have nothing to do with their ‘conservative credentials’. And people lie.
I would also like to see some way to segregate ‘no horseplay’ threads for those who wish serious debate or organization. However, unless you limit the membership such as on the caucus threads in the religious forum it would be hard to control. Once again, people lie.
Concerning my analogy of perpetual political war, it is as firm as ever. Weak leaders and traitors have always been a part of political and military war. The Union should have defeated the South in less than 12 months. Unfortunately, the North's generals were weak, incompetent and indecisive. The South's were not. We have a bunch of McClellans in charge of the GOP right now. Until we get a few generals like Grant (who won by refusing to yield the field of battle) it will require bold action by junior officers and individuals to hold the lines.
And I always try to read every post by a given individual before replying to them on a thread - I did read yours before I posted to you.
The price trebled, the wait doubled....
Thanks, Rush.
When I light one, though, I still smoke it all...
As for the effects of ethanol on perception, one school would have it that it enhances the ability to see the favorable aspects, while another would say it blinds one to the unfavorable. Of course the issue is rendered moot when the object of study becomes twins...
If I were studying the two mentioned ladies, I must concur that Michelle's assets are substantial and seem to follow her, but I, too would agree were such an issue and given those choices, guarding my good fortune, and with sufficient single malt, that Chelsea would be more suitable to my tastes.
The attitudes and behaviors associated with Christ are love, humility, compassion, patience, kindness, selflessness, being a good servant-leader. Wagglebee has exhibited none of these on this forum. In fact, as soon as he gets a post that may challenge him the first thing he does is ping his list. If Wagglebee is the one you have chosen to follow at his beck and call, look a little higher source for guidance.
Just so we are clear, I DID NOT ping any complete lists, I merely pinged a few FReepers who I know would be interested.
For starters you have NEVER answered the simple question I posed in post #311, Out of curiosity what is it you find "haughty" about morality? While I do not know for certain exactly why you refuse, my assumption is that your sole intent is to hurl invectives at those who do not subscribe to your brand of moral relativism.
So, I thought I would clarify things and explain to you precisely what I believe and why.
I believe that the Ten Commandments and the "Sermon on the Mount" as found in the Gospel of Matthew chapters 5, 6 and 7 tells us exactly how to live our lives. Further, I believe that our Lord's discourse on the sheep and the goats found in the last portion of chapter 25 of Matthew clarifies how we are to treat one another. And while I believe that the acceptance of Christ is necessary for Salvation, I also believe that these Teachings are absolute and valid for Christians and non-Christians alike.
I believe that, through the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, our Founding Fathers gave us a near-perfect form of government and plan for its function. I believe that these were based firmly on Judeo-Christian principles and that abandonment of these principles is the greatest danger our Republic will ever face.
I believe that Ronald Reagan's 1975 CPAC speech, Let Them Go Their Way, provides the clearest blueprint for conservatism and I also believe that the GOP has abandoned nearly all conservative principles. I believe that it is possibly to reform the GOP into the party that Reagan envisioned and formed, but that this is unlikely.
Yes, as everyone knows, I have been in charge of the Moral Absolutes ping list for several years. I believe that just as nature has immutable laws, there are also immutable moral laws. There ARE right and wrongs and they are precise and inflexible as gravity, but for too long the moral relativists have tried to redefine and minimize these and THIS more than anything else is the source of most of society's problems.
I also have been doing the Homosexual Agenda ping list for several years. I believe that homosexuality is unnatural, immoral, sinful and unhealthy. That being said, if two people want to be left alone to live this way, that is their choice, my chief opposition is their insistence that society accept and validate their lifestyle and the force indoctrination of others. This ping list IS NOT as you have previously suggested an "anal" ping lit.
I have been running the Terri Dailies ping list for several months and have been involved with almost since its inception. Nearly all of the threads I post and participate in are pro-life in nature. I believe that life is an absolute right from God and find it quite disturbing that this is even a subject of debate on a conservative forum, yet it is.
Just so we are clear, I have no problem with people who disagree with me. I have been a part of a great many Catholic vs. Protestant theological debates on here and I have pinged a few FReepers who I have had these arguments with. However, I believe they will all agree that I DO NOT carry grudges toward them and I have joined them in support on far more threads than I have opposed them on.
So, if, as you claim, you want to challenge me, then challenge me. Calling me a hypocrite IS NOT a challenge, it is an insult which exposes your own ignorance.
Agreed!
If someone wants to organize and plan, all they need do is do so.
The rest is an often invigorating exchange of ideas and information.
If you take everything out of the soup that someone doesn't like, you eventually end up with a pot of water.
While I, too tire of the trolls on occasion, especially the ones who seem to post anti-conservative defeatist messages--not ideas, not demands of the GOP, just the "all is lost, woe is me" variety--I have chosen to ignore them.
In the words of John Paul Jones, "I have not yet begun to fight!".
Naw. Perhaps it's not so much a challenge or an insult as a standard ad-hominum tactic that some progressive types use to avoid having to debate on substantive points. It's just a crude way of misdirecting attention, of "changing the subject." At the same time, this writer is evidently holding himself out as "a better Christian" than you are wagglebee; for he faults you for your lack of Christlike behavior, and gives you a detailed list of what that requires. Then he puts up a strawman argument, suggesting that you are looking to attract "a following." What on earth is going on here? Where is the caritas?
You pinged me wagglebee, but I know I'm not on your "official" ping list. You pinged me because you thought I might be interested in this discussion. And you were right: I am.
Excellent post, wagglebee.
Don’t think you need to apologise to BTB or anyone else for anything. Moral lines need to be drawn in the sand, and now is the time to draw them.
Well said, bb.
Thank you both for your kind responses.
Trust me, that thought never crossed my mind!
Good verbiage. Not the raucous concatenation of alliterating adjectives we get from BlackElk, but above average for the compound-complex sentence structure.
And now, back to my previous state of inertia.
The obvious question is "Why?".
Even the troops have the USO.
If you want a "War Room", why not ask the mods and Jim to set up a forum within the forum, much like Religion or the Smokey Backroom?
I think we have room for Activism and for entertainment.
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
I wasn’t asking to be graded!
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.