Posted on 02/11/2005 10:55:36 AM PST by Jim Robinson
The shot heard around the Internet has been fired on FreeRepublic.com The owner Jim Robinson and his moderators have launched a sniper style purge against members that disagree with the President’s ‘guest worker’ amnesty or support more control of illegal immigration. Free Republic is an amazing tool for those looking for a good debate and news from around the country.
The problem for the administration of the site is that their creation is allowing the participants to learn that the Bush immigration record and plans are shockingly out of line with the views of most conservatives. The management’s answer to this conflict between the majority of conservatives and the influence of the White House on their Web site has become electronic executions and censorship.
Members and readers of Free Republic would be surprised to know that many members of their community have fallen silent on the discussions about illegal immigration lately because free speech is an illusion on FR.com. They are silent because they have been banned from the Web site without warning, cause, or explanation in most cases. For weeks the moderators have been suspending and banning new members that chimed in quickly on the immigration debates.
Now this trend has broadened as the first groups of long-term users were suspended or banned this past week. Although Robinson and his staff removed many members of the Free Republic community in the first few days of the purge, those that religiously support President Bush’s immigration plan, open borders and approve of public benefits for illegal aliens remain on the forum. Those that were banned were the members that wanted more done to control illegal immigration and a strict observance to the President’s Oath of Office.
2 issues:
Actually, no. Not with the prevalent attitude in Canaduh. They have hatespeech laws. They are considerably to the left of us.
Canaduh is a beautiful country sullied by idiots.
We need to really tighten up the northern border as well. Lots of thirdworlders come in through Vancouver, etc. and overwhelm the medical system.
By 2025, we could absorb the entire working age population of Mexico, and the worker to retiree ratio required to pay Social Security benefits to the baby boomers would not be reached.
The problem is in this side of the border.
Mr. Gheen:
I didn't expect to get a note from you, but thanks for providing.
In your post to me you noted that "I tried to make it clear in my article that most Freepers do not approve of guest worker and do not approve of Mr. Robinson or his moderators taking people off the site without cause or explanation especially when the majority here agrees with those posters. This is information that Freepers would like to know because it's rare that you see someone actually zotted."
I disagree with your points. I think that most FReepers realize that a larger number of posters are taken off than those we see removed on the more public "ZOT!" threads. FR is a huge site and as such, attracts large numbers of posters. The barriers to entry are virtually nonexistent; you sign up and you can start posting immediately.
What makes FR attractive from the point of view of ease of entry also makes FR a tempting target for those who simply want to act in a disruptive manner, or those who wish to use FR as a venue to publicize extremist views that border on the seditious.
I seriously doubt that the moderators have the time, resources, or inclination to launch an in-depth inquiry into the motivations of each poster. There are simply far too many posters. Are errors made in zotting otherwise responsible posters? I'd be surprised if errors weren't made. That's simply the risk you take when you sign up. Signing up is free, and you can post here as much as you want and never contribute a dime to the support of the site. To a certain extent you get what you pay for.
The only alternatives I see for Jim Rob and crew is to either assess a charge for each account or to set up a waiting list and/or vetting process like they do at Lucianne. I dislike both alternatives.
If you make posting contingent on the payment of a fee, it begs the question of what do you do when someone who has paid acts in a disruptive manner? Do you provide refunds? Do you make the fee so high that no one dares say anything that might be considered offensive? In my view it would just be substituting one set of problems for another.
The other alternative of an invitation-only FR is even worse. A quick review of the posts at Lucianne will show you why this is a bad idea. The syrupy sweet way that the posters deal with the mods and Ms. Goldberg is enough to make you want to gag. Dissent? Forget about it. And do you honestly think that an open and notorious Democrat such as myself would get an invitation in the first place?
With all it's warts, FR is still a great place to exchange ideas. Rhetorical chairs get thrown, feelings get hurt, and people who may not have been deserving of banishment get the zot. Those are just the risks you take when you choose to sign up.
The identifying feature was his post! What drivel!
Re: Downward wage pressure from illegal immigration.
Price and demand are two other factors in that equation. Besides the basics*, what do people really need and/or want to buy, and how much are they willing to pay for it? Do lower prices (due to lower production/labor costs) create artificial demand? Is it sustainable, or will exceeding a correlative constraint (e.g., number of college students willing to go to med school) break some fundamental structural support beam?
*Basics = a fungible descriptor - some might include beer and cable? :)
A little off subject, but how long until the shenanigans with "MD4Bush" and the FReepmails turns around and bites them on the backside?
And is there any connection between that and the alipac.orc garbage yesterday?
Or is it too early to say at this point?
HTB: Thanks.
I'm so busy right now, I've probably missed several other things as well. I just haven't had the time to spend at FR. I'm lucky if I get time to read 1/4 of my pings.
Have a great weekend.
Louis, you have a link to these "pertinent" documents? I haven't read the Cato Institute and the WSJ in quite a while and would be interested in what their latest spew is.
Heck, I've been here and missed some things.
Good to see you.
I have limited patiences for fools.
valentine day weekend bttt
No I want to solve the problem.
This has nothing to do with "saving" social security. The money going to provide the billions in free health care, costly education, prisons, food stamps, housing assistance for workers and non-workers coming in from Mexico who can earn maybe $6 an hour at most (which they cannot live on) could go a long way toward propping up Social Security. Social Security is actually not in trouble today or for some years --- it's actually set to collapse at the time the Mexican retirees will be demanding it.
"I have limited patiences for fools"
Which, of course, is anyone who doesn't share your opinions. Uh, bye, bye
bttt
Thanks!
In case I miss it: Happy Valentine's Day.
If anything collapses Social Security it will be any kind of totalization program with Mexico.
The pertinent document --- not exactly a document --- but this is what's behind it all:
I look askance at Fox's foreign minister, Jorge Castaneda, and his brazen statements. At a meeting of Latino journalists in Phoenix, Castaneda made it clear that he would brook no compromise.
Looking American journalists squarely in the eye, Castaneda said, "It's the whole enchilada or nothing; we can't slice it one piece at a time."
What is it that is included in Castaneda's list of demands? Basically, he wants a complete surrender of U.S. sovereignty over immigration policy.
America must legalize all Mexican illegal aliens, loosen its already lax border enforcement, establish a guest worker program in the midst of an economic downturn, and exempt Mexican immigrants from U.S. visa quotas.
Not only that, but also the demand that Mexicans living in the U.S. receive health care provided by the American taxpayer and in-state college tuition.
Speaking in Tijuana, Castaneda became even more bold; he aptly described such demands with this statement: "We must obtain the greatest number of rights for the greatest number of Mexicans in the shortest time possible."
Mind you, Castaneda is referring to rights for Mexicans in the U.S. – NOT in Mexico!
Perhaps we'd understand Castaneda better when we reflect upon some of his statements when he was identified as a Marxist. He wrote in his book "The Economics of Dependency," "Democracy is in absolute contradiction with capitalism."
Castaneda is quoted as saying, "Vicente Fox is exactly where he wants to be on open borders, setting the agenda in Washington and Canada."
And he added, "These are not negotiating proposals; these are big ideas – a vision – some will fly, some will not. I learned from him that he will bring a new emphasis to overseeing Mexico's 50 consulates in the U.S. and will try to insure better treatment of Mexicans living in the U.S." – the same Mexicans who send billions of dollars home every year.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/2/14/223039.shtml
"Maybe he should clearly state the rules such as list all the known journalist who's articles are censored by this site."
________________________
"He's done so many times. Perhaps, he should mail you a card each time he sets a new rule."
________________________
Please tell me where this is posted.
What’s your brother’s FR name?
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.