Posted on 06/06/2002 9:57:11 PM PDT by Big Guy and Rusty 99
Dear Mr. Robinson,
I have been a loyal member of the Free Republic since before the 2000 election. I have been a Conservative since the early days of Clinton. When I found this site, I thought "Thank God, people who think like me." I have continued to think this until the more recent days. Now, it seems that there are threads left and right bashing our President.
Why? There are things the President has done which I don't agree with but my loyality still lies with him. I am not sure if these "Bush-Bashers" fail to see the reality that with politics comes comprimise or it is something worse. I feel there is a cancer in the Free Republic. Some are eating their own.
I feel that some of these people are members of the dreaded democratic underground disguised as disgruntled conservatives. They are only here to stir up trouble. What's worse, they are doing just that. I am not sure what I think you should do.
As a conservative, I believe in our moral code but I also realize the reality of politics. I back our President but if he were doing something unsavory (like lying under oath,) I could not support him. This is unlike the left's clintonista dogma. What President Bush is doing is not betraying the conservative cause. He is using politics to confound the left. Those who do not understand this are either leftists themself or unable to separate themselves from their zealousness.
This is your show. You choose who gets to be a member and who does not. Those who break your rules are banished from the kingdom. I am not discouraging free speech, but this is free speech in your forum. These Bush-Bashers are brining us down. When this infighting happened in 1992, Bill Clinton got elected. let's not let that happen again.
Yours,
Big Guy and Rusty 99
You are aware that Nero Ceasar fits the description of the Anti-Christ as well as numourous others through out history that have been called so -- ranging from Adolf Hitler to John Lennon.
But only Nero Ceasar desolated and utterly destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem, forced Christians to acknowledge him as Lord or die, was the fifth of seven rulers, ruled from a city set on seven hills, and instituted a tattoo on the head or hand that permitted you to buy and sell goods within the Empire.
The thing to remember when reading and interpreting scripture is that it was written for us, not to us.
It's easy to get caught up in the "Last Days" craze, (I did in my youth) but given time, study and understanding of the scripture and the past, you will see it for what it is -- the false prophecy that Christ warned over and over to be careful of, as well as revenue to the writer(s) and proponents of it.
Daniel was the Prophet, John was the Revealer, AD70 was the fullfillment. All that is left is Christ return to gather his faithful, which will be as a thief in the night.
Yeah! They always eventually hang themselves; and it's fun watching them do it.
The vote was umpteen to one for your idea. FReepers voted.
What number or thereabouts does umpteen represent? Only three posters responded to this idea. One was nothing but an attack. Another was disingenuous and obfuscating. You are the third person to respond, wherein you too obfuscated and made broad sweeping statements and wouldn't identify specifics that you disagreed with and explained why you disagreed with them. Despite my politely asking you three times.
Most curious of all is why you don't like it that all Freepers would be able to post to all threads. Here's quick recap of that part of our discussion.
If you have a constructive criticism of the idea please identify what specific parts(s) you don't like and explain why you dislike it.507
All of it. 523
Really, all of it? Why don't you like that every lurker and poster could read every forum?
536 posted on 6/7/02 5:42 AM Eastern by Zon
Like I said earlier, I know when to quit. Try it. It doesn't hurt for long. Not only is this the FRee Republic, it is a democracy. You're idea has no legs and I will not be an accomplice to the beating of a dead horse.
I know a lot of people wish he were more conservative, but I think he realizes that he's got a big ship to steer, and you can't turn that big of a ship on a dime. It's been swung the wrong direction for quite some time, and a lot of people whose consent he needs (voters for congressional candidates) have gotten used to that direction and are only now awakening to its flaws. He's turning the ship by degrees, and I think in the end he will bring a lot of fence-sitters around to a much more conservative viewpoint, at which time real reform can take place.
This is just my personal observation/hope. I do think that he may have more leeway than he perceives to make a few very bold, conservative moves right now, like clamping down on immigration until we get a workable monitoring system in place, and putting teeth in the locating and deporting of immigration violators. I think the public would ride roughshod over Congress if they stood in the way of this.
Sometimes I do resent the epithet "bushbot" because I think it's often used just as reflexively and unthinkingly as some of the Bush cheering it derides; I also dislike it because I haven't thought of a comparably pithy and memorable rejoinder yet. "bush-whacker?" "Pat-o-phile?"
Ah, I know where some of the Bush-bashing is coming from, but I honestly think that our president knows what he's doing and is only now moving out the first few pawns in the chess game.
By definition, that's not bashing.
If you can't adequately defend his actions, or the perceived disconnect between his words and his actions, then you bash the critics with claims that they must be liberals, or DU interlopers.
You should direct your efforts to a defense of the president's actions, rather than generic ad hominem attacks on other FR posters.
So far, what I've heard you say is that the reason President Bush is taking these criticized actions is because he is cleverly co-opting liberal issues to take votes away from them. You haven't explained how the results of these actions are different from the results of a liberal president doing them.
A distinction without a difference?
Full disclosure: I voted for (now) President Bush in 2000, but unless he puts the brakes on these big government issues, I am willing to "throw my vote away" in 2004 on principle. That's why we call it "principle."
Unfortunately, many are NOT members of the dreaded d.u., but are longtime FReepers who are still mad that their favorite candidate, whether Republican or Libertarian, isn't president.
I'm very discouraged at the ugliness on the Forum these days. I almost believe there are some who would rather see a RAT in the WH so they could point out how much better their man would have handled things.
Folks, the enemy of this country is the DEMOCRATS. It's one thing to have differences with President Bush, but for crying out loud, get over the fact that your man didn't win. I did, and in fact, am glad that he DIDN'T win. He's proved to be whining disappointment.
But that is the story of most families in America; they have their strengths and durability, their flaws and outrageousness. Therefore I keep my misgivings in perspective.
I don't go out of my way to bash G.W. Bush, but I filter out the things he does and supports that serve the oil extraction industry, and other corporate powers to which he is beholding to from that which is legitimately done for the general good.
If my internal musings on Bush wasn’t reflected to a degree in Free Republic to some degree, the dialog on him and his family likely would be a stilted and dishonest one.
As long as people remain civil, and expound on honest criticisms and misgivings, they can serve as a safety valve when it is needed, or help temper Bush’s presidency, making it actually stronger as flaws are removed.
I wouldn’t fret too much as criticism of Bush. It has it’s place, and silencing something like that doesn’t end it, and if the dam built to contain it doesn’t allow some pressure relief by having a spillway to ease some pressure if it builds, such a dam will be unable to keep from giving way.
Yeah. Your conservative bashing and Eleanor Cliftist attempt to silence criticism shows that the GOP would rather whine about what the liberals are doing than actually push forward conservative ideals. The RINOs, Bush Sr. types (and increasingly, Bush Jr.) prefer to "just get along" and high five with dems to celebrate their phyrric victories over the American people, than fight the good fights (Reaganism, WINNING the war against miltant Islam, cleaning out the Clinton leftovers at Justice/FBI, school vouchers, IRS overhaul, sunset ATF, non-dependence on Saudi oil, etc.).
More likely that you have an empty hole in your head where most have a brain.
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.