Posted on 10/28/2012 9:26:10 AM PDT by DeprogramLiberalism
Creepy people buzz around Barack Obama like a dog who rolls in his own crap attracts flies.
This post catalogues the many scoundrels (190+) that Barack Obama has associated with throughout his life and career. Behind only Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama is probably the single greatest example of liberal principle number five (from the Nuclear Counterarguments Book Series: #1 Deprogramming Liberalism with Nuclear Counterarguments): A contemporary liberals honorable motives and noble fight against contemporary conservatism excuses all liberal failures and indiscretions.
The people and organizations that Barack Obama has palled around with paint a very ugly picture of dozens of Marxist/socialist/communist sympathizers, dozens of Islamic radicals and sympathizers, dozens of liberals who just dont like America, dozens of anti-Semites, dozens of anti-white radicals, dozens of domestic terrorists and sympathizers, and dozens of liberals who just cant seem to pay their taxes.
[Sample]
124.) Vashti McKenzie Member of Presidents Advisory Council Marxist preaches Black Liberation Theology Remember Rev. Wright The Weekly Standard Archived-Articles Obama abuses faith office to promote his radical agenda
125.) Jim Wallis Member of Presidents Advisory Council Marxist preaches Black Liberation Theology Remember Rev. Wright The Weekly Standard Archived-Articles Obama abuses faith office to promote his radical agenda
126.) Ron Bloom Manufacturing Czar Marxist FREEDOM EDEN Ron Bloom Mao and Free Market Nonsense Someone Else in the White House Digs Mao San Diego, California Talk Radio Station 760 KFMB AM 760kfmb
127.) Malik Zulu Shabazz Invited to the White House National chairman of the radical New Black Panther Party Surprise! Guess who visited White House New Black Panther Malik Shabazz Obama Evoked Tenets of Black Liberation Theology in Selma
October Surprise: The Barack Obama Scoundrels List
(Excerpt) Read more at deprogrammingliberalism.com ...
Excellent reference source. Bookmarked. Thanks for the post.
Bump
What seems to have caused you to excerpt your own material?
My first thread. I may not understand it properly. Can you explain?
Surely.
If you are the author of the material as you claim, then there is no need to excerpt it.
You can post it in its entirety.
Excerpting your own material puts you in the category of folks who are just here to advertise a blog.
And those folks are scumbags.
I figured my blog post was too big to post here in it’s entirety. And I will freely admit I want traffic for my blog (and hopefully sales of my Nuclear Counterarguments Book Series). But it is not like I am not offering substance in return for a visit - in other words, I’m not “just here to advertise a blog”. That particular post is the result of months of research and compilation over a period of years.
I guess I don’t see where the line between scumbag and substantive contribution is - it seems a little foggy to me.
Thanks for the response.
It's right next to that excerpt button you mashed.
We are not your hit farm.
In the spirit of open joyous welcome we feel whenever a new blogger decides to favor us with his finely crafted and well researched material, The Boss (that would be the guy who owns this site) has written a post that pretty much covers the etiquette expected from you, as a n00bie blogger.
I’m not going to try to reinterpret what is very straightforward and well written, so here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2882227/posts
I still don’t get the attitude. You want people to provide substance to Free Republic that draws hits for Free Republic, but you demean those who would provide substance in return for a visit to their blog. Seems kind of one-sided to me.
Please don’t get me wrong. I do not sense hostility from you toward me, and I harbor none for you. I appreciate your input on this matter. I have been a member of many forums and have seldom witnessed strict restrictions on linking to one’s own blog as long as it is to something substantive. Usually forums see that as beneficial for their members and the forum itself. (Mind you, I am fairly new at blogging and just had my thread on Hannity’s forum deleted because I linked to my blog even though I provided pretty much the same intro as here. Evidently they are even stricter than here at Free Republic.)
Tell me. Is what you say from the legitimate rules (can you point them out to me - thank you in advance), or a sort of group agreement among members, or just your personal opinion.
I have much content of substance to contribute to Free Republic, but it is also a lot of work to produce. I dont think a reciprocal link directing traffic to the majority of that substance is much to ask, but of course it is not my forum so I cant make those decisions. I dont want to step on anyones toes.
Again, thank you for your responses. I very much appreciate them.
OK, I read the post and following thread. I am much clearer on the board’s position. Thank you.
So when I post my full blog entry on Free Republic, is it acceptable to also present a line of promotion at the bottom of the post with a link?
Like: This post is from the Nuclear Counterarguments category of the Deprogramming Liberalism blog. For more go here. [link]
Or like: Deprogramming Liberalism is devoted to explaining the contradiction between contemporary liberalism and individual liberty. [link]
Or: The Nuclear Counterarguments Book Series is a political reference library like no other. It can be accessed through the Deprogramming Liberalism blog. [link]
I am thinking of something like a tag line or signature (but only for the original post) - they are very popular with most forums. Of course, it would be entirely optional for readers to go to the link - the full original post would be offered above.
(...and you don't even want to know about the Viking Kitties!)
Sounds good.
The link back to Free Republic sounds fair.
I have a fully charged proton pack.
And I have a way with kitties - they’ll be purring so loud you’ll need earplugs...
Thanks for your responses.
My blog posts are generally related to my Nuclear Counterargument Book Series, and so links to specific book descriptions are included in the text. Is this a problem? Here are a couple of examples: Roundup of Liberal Apocalypses « Deprogramming Liberalism and Intellectual Psychogump Plays Stupid Right Before Your Eyes « Deprogramming Liberalism
Also, what about my Nuclear Counterarguments Book Series images inserted into my blog posts? Can I include them in the post on FR?
One more thing. I am not trying to be contentious. I surveyed a bunch of other FR posts in the Bloggers and Personal forum to get a feel for it, and stumbled across a number of recent posts that were blog post excerpts:
Lets Get Real, General Powell
.It IS about Race
BENGHAZIGATE OBAMA WATCHED BENGHAZI ATTACK LIVE SAYS LT. COL. TONY SHAFFER
Hurricane Sandy Brings Out Last Minute Prepping
Hurricane Sandy Brings Out Last Minute Prepping
Did Obama Fire General Ham Of Africom For Attempting To Buck His Order And Rescue Stevens
General Petraeus It Wasnt Me Or Anyone Else At The CIA
Gallup believes turnout may favor Romney in a BIG way
Obama's Declaration of Indpendence
I looked at the comments and no one complained about them being excerpts. Do they have special privileges because of being long-time members, or because they contribute monthly, or something. Again, I am not trying to be contentious - just trying to understand.
Thank you for your being patient with me.
Smyrgly will be watching .....
Read Jim Robinson’s post #552:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2636843/posts?page=552#552
“I have no complaint if a good conservative blogger posts his own material to FR, not as an excerpt to drive hits and discussion back to his blog, but rather to impart useful information to OUR readers and to promote and join in on the discussion and conservative activism HERE on FR.
If a blogger cant or refuses do that, and if he constantly complains or fights with our participants over it, then Id just as soon he doesnt post here. Its not my job to make his content or his presentation or cooperation acceptable to our readers. Thats his job. And if he cannot do it or refuses to do it and continues posting brief excerpts only and obviously attempting to draw away our participants while loudly complaining about it, then I have no sympathy for his complaints and the more apt I am to ban his account and blog.”
That should pretty much clear things up.
>It sounds like you’re asking what an acceptable level of spam is.<
Depends on your definition of spam I suppose. I don’t link to my books gratuitously - the instances are directly related to the post substance (there are 16 books in the series covering literally hundreds of political and ideological topics). The book images are probably a little gratuitous in the sense of promotion. I’ll leave them out of my FR posts.
Thanks again for your time.
“Nice ... kittie...”
Thanks for taking the time to post that - good context in that post by Jim Robinson.
Quoting from your reply:
” He (Jim Robinson) purposely left a little gray area so his Mods could have latitude in dealing with this issue.”
This article makes points that we believe are important to be exposed here at Free Republic.
In this case we published this even though it is an excerpt, being as it would be much too large of an article if it were posted in it’s entirety.
Keep in mind that we review the posts of new members and post those we feel should be published.
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.