Posted on 02/25/2007 3:24:10 PM PST by Rudder
I went to all that trouble to come up with a good analogy and you didn't even try it on. If Rudy supporters won't engage in debate, what are y'all doing here, pullin' our pickles?
"I've yet to read one post from a Giuliani supporter saying they will stay home if Hunter gets nominated. I've yet to converse with a single Hunter supporter who states he or she will vote for Rudy if he's nominated. "
***Using your own words, then, which candidate is more dangerous for the republican party? The one who doesn't generate division or the one who does? Your own words show that there is support for Hunter from the middle ranks, but no support for Rudy from the socon base. "You support the team you play for." The socon wing expects your support for the most socially conservative candidate. If you can't do that for your team, then maybe you have betrayed your team.
I'm NOT a Rudy supporter... I'm just trying to get you to folks to undertstand that sitting out solves nothing. I'm also firm in my belief that candidates are incapable of splitting a party. The only people who can split a party are the folks too stubborn to set aside their concerns (typically over a single issue) for the sake of the party.
The party is split by the people who leave...it is 100% on thier shoulders. You will not change my mind on that point and you will not get me to accept any rationalization that justifies damaging the party.
American Conservative Union: 2005: 92%, 2004: 87%, Lifetime Score: 92%, That makes him tied for 120th place among active Congressmen in Lifetime Score
Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW): 109th: 71%, 108th: 51%, Lifetime: 70%, 2% below the Republican House Average Lifetime Score of 73%
National Taxpayers Union (NTU): 2005: 56%, 2004: 56%, Lifetime: 63%, 1% below the Republican House Average of 64%, Average of 130th place among Representatives.
Club For Growth: 2005: 49%, 187th place out of roughly 230 Republicans: Here are some of the more troubling votes: YES on No Child Left Behind, YES on Sarbanes-Oxley, YES on the 2003 Medicare Drug Benefit, YES on 2005 Highway Bill, YES on the 527 bill. Hunter also went 0 for 19 on the Flake anti-pork amendments. Despite being a member of the Republican Study Committee, Hunter frequently votes NO on their fiscally conservative annual budgets.
Wastewatcher, January 2006: "Buy America" Rips Off America “Buy America” provisions have been inserted into legislation, especially defense bills, for many years. Usually, such provisions are removed from the final version of the defense legislation. That happened late last year, when Senate leaders and administration officials convinced House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) to drop the provision from the fiscal 2006 Defense Authorization Act, which was then signed into law by President Bush. The Buy America clause would have blocked the Pentagon from buying military equipment from international companies that receive government subsidies. The removal of this language constitutes a victory for taxpayers and national security. More competition in Defense procurement can only result in better value for taxpayers and improved equipment for military personnel.
I'm NOT a Rudy supporter... I'm just trying to get you to folks to undertstand that sitting out solves nothing.
***Looks like it would make a good tag line. Especially after looking at some of what you stir up on the Rudy threads.
I'm also firm in my belief that candidates are incapable of splitting a party.
***Oh, why didn't you say so, up front? You won't explore the analogy that I post, you're basically saying you won't listen because you're a "firm believer". If only we could get all of that out of the way then we wouldn't waste each other's time.
The only people who can split a party are the folks too stubborn to set aside their concerns (typically over a single issue) for the sake of the party.
***Here, let me stop wasting your time. I'm a firm believer in knowing that once someone shows they have no intention of exploring the issue, I can't debate on an intelligent level with them and I consider it to be a waste of time. Why on earth would you spend 7 years on a socon forum trying to convince socons that they look at things the wrong way? What's in it for you?
The party is split by the people who leave...it is 100% on thier shoulders. You will not change my mind on that point and you will not get me to accept any rationalization that justifies damaging the party.
***History would be the judge in that regard. When the Whig party broke up, it was the moralist anti-slavery wing of the party that carried it into the republican party and it was the reed-in-the-wind Whig lemmings like yourself who were credited with the destruction of the party. I will take you at your word that I will not change your mind on such points and wish you the best in your pursuit of changing socon minds, Don Quixote.
I like to stir things up on the Rudy threads because I resent the small number of Hunter supporters waving the bloody shirt of conservatism for this obscure congressman. He does NOT define conservatism.
Yes...it is pointless to debate me about candidates splitting parties. You will not convince me that the burden falls anywhere but on the shoulders of those who choose to sit out. You'd have better luck trying to tell me water isn't wet.
You want to place the accountability for someone's actions on another person...I choose to keep it where it belongs, on the person committing the act. Unless one of us changes our perspective on that, this is pointless.
Thanks for being so civil...I hope we can focus on the numerous issues we agree on as opposed to the few we apparently disagree on.
Since you're not a socon and you admit to stirring things up with socons, perhaps you missed this message from JimRob:
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America.
That's wonderful news...show me a post where I denigrated any of those specific values.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
den•i•grate –verb (used with object), -grat•ed, -grat•ing.
1. to speak damagingly of; criticize in a derogatory manner; sully; defame: to denigrate someone's character.
2. to treat or represent as lacking in value or importance; belittle; disparage: to denigrate someone's contributions to a project.
It didn’t take that long for me to find posts where you “speak damagingly of; criticize in a derogatory manner; sully; defame, and treat or represent as lacking in value or importance; belittle; disparage. If anything I would characterize your overall posting behavior denigrating.
It boils down to this, "socons" want to dictate the stance of the nominee on a single issue (abortion).
***Putting the term “socons” in quotes is a denigration. Using straw argumentation denigrates the position as well as the gravitas of the issue.
If they don't get thier way, many will stay home rather thn support the ONLY party that has tried to do anything substantive to end abortion.
***This is criticizing in a derogatory manner – if they don’t get their way.
Once the nominating process ends, assuming he wins, Rudy will be the lead candidate for the party. You support the team you play for. Either that or you find anew team.
***This denigrates the choices we have. And pushes us to consider other alternatives at your suggestion. And in the same vein of argumentation, you end up denigrating socons for considering that choice.
The Looming GOP Rift: Will the Right Secede?
Posted by Skip Ripley to Kevmo
On Bloggers & Personal 02/27/2007 12:58:20 PM PST • 146 of 148
I like to stir things up on the Rudy threads because I resent the small number of Hunter supporters waving the bloody shirt of conservatism for this obscure congressman.
***This is a denigration of socons and an exaggeration of the language -- obscure congressman, bloody shirt, small numbers.
Just what ARE Rudy's qualifications that make him the "BEST man to lead as CIC?"
Posted by Skip Ripley to EternalVigilance
On News/Activism 02/26/2007 2:37:08 PM PST • 455 of 483
I'm not Giuliani supporter you dithering idiot...I've stated in numerous threads that I hae no intention of voting for him in the primaries.
And where the hell do you get off questioning how "classy" I am? You cast the first stone wonderboy, not me
***Insults are a denigration. Bad language, well, that’s not that big of a deal though it’s against the posted rules…
Just what ARE Rudy's qualifications that make him the "BEST man to lead as CIC?"
Posted by Skip Ripley to EternalVigilance
On News/Activism 02/26/2007 11:31:44 AM PST • 440 of 483
Please... the little temper tantrums and hissy fits put forth by some of the "socons" on this board are worse than anything I posted.
Frankly...I'm sick of the "RINO" term being tossed about willy nilly by a minority faction within the party at anyone who doesn't lock step with the complete socon agenda.
To be more brief...bite me
***Insults again, “bite me “ is disrespectful and a denigration. The RINO term isn’t “tossed about willy nilly by a minority faction within the party at anyone who doesn't lock step with the complete socon agenda.” That’s hyperbole, not necessarily denigrating, but what would possess you to come to a minority faction site and say such things? I contend it is a denigration of Free Republic.
Just what ARE Rudy's qualifications that make him the "BEST man to lead as CIC?"
Posted by Skip Ripley to takenoprisoner
On News/Activism 02/25/2007 11:15:56 PM PST • 397 of 483
Who cares what the demos say? That's some pretty specious logic you're employing there. By all means, don't vote for Rudy in the rimaries...I sure as hell ain't. But when the general elections roll around and if he's the nominee you shoud vote for him.
Or get the hell out of my party
***This “get the hell out of my party” thing is a denigration. It also goes right to the issue we’re discussing here, which is that a party split is looming due to such sentiments being expressed in similar fashion. Keep in mind that THIS IS NOT A REPUBLICAN website. It is a SOCON website, and since you’re an admitted ‘non-socon’, it’s up to you to act graciously if you want us to listen to you. So far the rudy team is completely missing the ball, and if anything, is proving to us that he is not suitable to be president. Team rudy fails miserably to make the case.
Yep...I've been testy towards some PEOPLE. Now...once again..show me where I have been critical of the conservative ideals that are the basis of this site.
Please understand...I do not accept the notion that "social conservative" and "conservative" are interchangeable. There are amany conservatives who don't consider themselves social conservatives...Dick Armey for one.
Oh...BTW, the use of quotation marks is not pejorative in and of itself. In this case the use of quotation marks around the term socon was intended to denote that it was a nickname...as in Rudolph "Rudy" Riuliani
Here's 2, just in the post that I put up.
what would possess you to come to a minority faction site and say such things? I contend it is a denigration of Free Republic.
Or get the hell out of my party
***This “get the hell out of my party” thing is a denigration. It also goes right to the issue we’re discussing here, which is that a party split is looming due to such sentiments being expressed in similar fashion. Keep in mind that THIS IS NOT A REPUBLICAN website. It is a SOCON website, and since you’re an admitted ‘non-socon’, it’s up to you to act graciously if you want us to listen to you.
Thank you.
I missed the part that says this is a "socon" website...
***Yes, it appears that you missed the "pro-life" thing, which was on my checklist when I joined. That's also one of the things I posted earlier and you casually overlooked it. So what else did you miss? Is it a big mystery to you why JimRob shows disdain for Rudy?
The other aspect of the conversation that precipitated my outburst is my anger towards my fellow party members who want to issue threats about "staying home" if they don't get a candidate who is 100% in agreement with thier social agenda.
***This is where you go off into the weeds. This assumption that it's 100% or nuthin'. Solibs like Rudy don't even give me 30%. Your statement is a tremendous exaggeration. This habit you have of hand-waving over what you read and then focusing on an exaggerated portion of it is called straw argumentation.
As a side note...you tend to use the royal "we" quite a bit...did someone elect you the group spokesman for the "socon" cause?
***Is that slot open? I'd like to throw my hat in the ring!
Skip's actions speak louder than his words. Here is what Skip Ripley says on his home page, while it's still up.
FreeRepublic.com has become little more than a bitchfest for disaffected social conservatives to whine about being ignored by the media, the evil RINOS and even thier pets. It's boring and dumb...so I'm out of here. Perhaps I'll come back in 2010
This was posted on another thread.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1792854/posts
To: Kevmo; Jim Robinson
I wasn't going to post here...but you've given me such a concrete example of the stupidity I'm talking about that I really have no choice.
You have the gall to call me a "newfangled conservative" when you have no idea where I stand on any substantive issue within the conservative movement. The only thing you know about me is that I am critical of socons and thier attempts to fracture the party. So it has come to that. If you even criticize the folks who choose to call themselves "socons", you are not a real conservative.
Screw you
I am not a social conservative. I am a CONSERVATIVE. WE put Reagan in Washington and WE made the Contract with America a reality in 1994. WE kept the traitor John Kerry form becoming CIC.
No subgroup did that, the CONSERVATIVE movement did that.
Great site you have here Robinson...I hope it's turned into all you hoped it could be. Please delete my username
188 posted on 03/01/2007 7:07:51 AM PST by Skip Ripley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
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.