Posted on 05/26/2007 1:49:34 PM PDT by Eurotwit
A few weeks ago – in between Hillary Clinton’s official entry into the presidential race and the first Republican primary debate of the cycle – the fiery online conservative forum Free Republic marked a decade in operation as one of the premier online forums for right-wing political discussion.
It also experienced one of the biggest internal battles to rock the site since the 2000 election of George W. Bush -- a tumultuous campaign year that nearly tore the site apart, as its founder and chief administrator first cleansed commenting ranks of Bush supporters, then, later, rallied to his support.
At the heart of the latest controversy: the fight over the conservative bona fides of Rudy Giuliani.
Over the past few weeks, chaos has reigned in the “Freeper” community as members sympathetic to the former mayor's candidacy claim to have suffered banishment from the site. They were victimized, they say, by a wave of purges designed to weed out any remaining support for the Giuliani campaign on the popular conservative web forum. Another significant chunk of commenters have migrated away from the controversial site over the action, according to a number of former site members and conservative bloggers who have been tracking the situation.
In a plaintive post on the blog “Sweetness & Light,” exiled commenter Steve Gilbert, who says he does not support the former mayor’s campaign, blasted the site’s new “anti-Giuliani, anti-abortion jihad.” Since George W. Bush was elected president, he wrote, “there haven’t been any large scale [Free Republic] purges to speak of – until now.”
The fight began one month ago, when site founder Jim Robinson posted an anti-Giuliani manifesto titled: “Giuliani as the GOP presidential nominee would be a dagger in the heart of the conservative movement.” Then the virtual ax started to swing. Longtime posters to the freewheeling discussion threads, used to serious no-holds-barred web etiquette, were still stunned by the intensity of the anti-Rudy activity; conservative blogs buzzed with the development.
“Jim Robinson has been going on a tear demonizing Rudy Giuliani, because Rudy (agreeing with the vast majority of Americans), is personally opposed to abortions on a moral level…” complained a user on the GOPUSA Web site. “Anyone who posts any support for Giuliani at the site, if it's at all forceful, will be banned.”
(“Normally, we don't allow complaints about other conservative forums,” chided the moderator, but “…because it is being discussed all over the Internet, I'll make an exception.”)
Just a few months ago, Rudy Giuliani placed second in an early Free Republic straw poll; now, his support on the site has been virtually eliminated. “After the ‘April Purge,’ I don't think there are any Rudybots left around here,” noted Free Republic commenter “upchuck” in one recent post. “And if there are, they're not posting pro-Rudy stuff :).”
The forums weren’t the only venue for the Free Republic’s new antagonism toward Mr. Giuliani, which coincided with a wave of comments expressing similar sentiments from other corners of the conservative movement. A few days after Mr. Giuliani’s equivocal Roe v. Wade comments at the Republican presidential debate on May 3, a new “STOP RUDY NOW News & Information Thread” was featured on the site, and a newly-created stand-alone category debuted via a link from the homepage: “The Giuliani Truth File.” (So far this campaign season, Mr. Giuliani is the only candidate – Republican or Democratic – to be singled out for that level of scrutiny from the Free Republic.)
Why Rudy? Why now? Some conservative bloggers and former commenters contacted for their view of the continuing controversy say they believe that site founder Jim Robinson holds ideologically middling Republicans like Mr. Giuliani responsible for the GOP’s congressional loss and current woes. (They asked that their names be kept out of this story for fear of antagonizing the famously frisky site regulars.)
Others claim that the former mayor’s top-tier status is spurring frantic site administrators into action. Finally, one popular theory holds that the Free Republic is secretly hoping for another Clinton presidency that would send its Alexa ratings soaring back to levels it hasn’t experienced since its halcyon days of the Clinton impeachment, when a since-soured relationship with blog pioneer Matt Drudge and overwhelming anti-Clinton sentiment in Republican ranks helped make Free Republic one of the hottest Web sites in the nation. It hasn't recovered that luster since the Bush administration took over.
“It’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s an observation,” said one blogger, who describes himself as a half-hearted Mitt Romney supporter. “They’ve still got a brand name that means something, but they’re not what they were in terms of real-world impact. A Hillary presidency would get them there.”
Robinson himself could not be reached for comment, but his original post laid out his case against Mr. Giuliani – a graphics-heavy presentation of some of the former mayor’s most damning moderate quotes in mainstream media venues, along with a color-coded report card tracking his less-than-doctrinaire positions on abortion, immigration, gays and guns.
Robinson, it should be noted, famously blasted George W. Bush’s presidential candidacy back in 2000, before a dramatic late-campaign about-face that saw him emerge as one of the GOP ticket’s biggest supporters. But whether or not Free Republic experiences a similar election-year shift this cycle, the site’s current campaign is spreading a dangerous primary-season meme of Rudy Giuliani as big-city liberal – and turning one of the most influential web forums in conservatism into an exclusive gathering place for those who share that view.
So you think that even though Mitt might get the nomination he “would lose the general election”.
And that without knowing who the Dem nominee he’d be running against would be? If the Amnesty/”Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill” is going to be used as a toss-up ball, with both parties basically telling us they want to get it passed and so should we, the Republicans AND Democrats are going to have to do yet MORE gauging in more subtle ways as to who their nominees should be, because they have yet to show much awareness of just how much dissatisfaction with the bill there is to large parts of BOTH their parties. Things are way too touch and go now to be calculating anything, perhaps.But Romney is the one who comes across as the one who actually even RECOGNIZES the importance of the issue-—except for Hunter, the rest of them seem to dance around it, with McCain out-Demming the Dems on it. He has REALLY been shameful, I have never heard such dishonest demagoguery of an issue from anyone who still won’t call himself a Liberal.
Well?
Romney’s just being what he is: A crass political opportunist. Not that many months ago, he was singing the praises of all of the worst aspects of the current shamnesty bill. Bleh.
I doubt he’ll ever come back, I know I wouldn’t under similar circumstances.
Still, I do miss his posts.
Well what?
Hmmm... crickets. Even after you basically called him a coward.
You mean this?
Well what?
You made this an issue, posting the link. What about it?
So, Howlin’s comment was sitting there, festering for 2 months. I’m going to bump this item because I’ll use it to remind myself that JimRob does need to be pinged on occasion to outrageous behavior. It’s not being a brownshirt, it’s doing the right thing. Also, it would have been the right thing for Howlin as well, because she wouldn’t have gotten discovered for her outrage right when JimRob was turning up the heat.
Well?
I made an issue?
You replied to one of my posts saying that the link was bad. I posted a correct one. If that link resolves to what you have printed then, yes that I meant that.
Well?
We were pestered, ridiculed, cursed, and laughed at by that band of bothers.
***Is “band of bothers” a typo or intentional? I kinda like it. ;-) Good post.
Here is what you stated up thread.
What exactly is the context you are referring to. If you could be specific. Thank you.
I’m curious as well. If you’re so unhappy here, why come around? What’s the point?
Do you agree with the core mission statement of Free Republic?
My guess is that none of these questions will really be answered. I gather from the increasing tone of your messages that you’ll be opusing out soon.
Well?
Assuming that you did, in fact, take a look at the page of posts, you saw that it wasn’t just one impetuous or inappropriate comment made on one thread, but rather, a series of increasingly hostile and contentious comments on a number of threads. I believe the link I posted was to an exchange with Jimrob.
I am only speculating as to what cinched it for him as I wasn’t there. A number of posters on this thread (and the bugzapper thread as well) inquired as to why TM got bounced and I got curious as well.
Well?
I took a look. What specifically are you referring to in regards to your "context" statement?
I took a look. What specifically are you referring to in regards to your "context" statement?
Well?
You know who else is NOT banned? Inspector Harry Callahan.
He was a regular around here for a long time - - had more than a few late night laughs.
I wonder if he even knows he’s FR alive?
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.