[Bahbah]

LOL. I think you have it covered.

[riri]

I agree that Liberty Post can sometimes be out there and I often wonder if I have accidentally logged onto DU sometimes but, there are quite a few good, former Freepers there. Freepers that I wish were still posting here!

[NRA1995]

Well, given how things are going with our Mexican border, I DO think ultimately we'll need troops defending it. And I'm neither a DUmmie nor a LOOny.

[boofus]

Illegal immigration IS a big deal. So far the president has not stepped up to the plate. In fact he's trying to cut deals with La Raza and other criminal rights organizations. The president also calls concerned citizens vigilantes when they decide to DO THE JOB THE GOVERNMENT IS NEGLECTING at the border.

Hundreds of jihadi terrorists could have crossed the border between AZ, TX, CA and Mexico along with all the illegal immigrants and drugs being smuggled every day.

Opposed to illegal aliens does not equal a vote for Hitlery. No way in hell I would vote for Mrs 'We are going to take things away from you for the common good' Klinton, but Bush needs to fix the border situation.

[politicalwit]

Have you taken your medication today? If so, you might want to increase the doseage. What a useless rant!

[zippee]

Are we supposed to care about this? I'd rather clean a toilet than visit one of those sites...much less spend time comparing them.

[Alouette]

They both hate Jews and Israel.

[SoDak]

This is an invaluable post, full of insight, sanity, and well-thought-out analysis. Thanks so very much for posting it and sharing it with all of us. In no way do I feel like I lost 5 minutes of my life that I'll never get back after reading it.

[rhombus]

Of course Hillary will be crushed in the 2008

From your keyboard to God's ears... I think the novelty of a female just might be enough votes to make the difference. I don't like it, but if that many people could vote for someone as dull-witted as Kerry... Well at least I look forward to seeing how Bill Clinton handles his new role as "First Gentleman".

[dirtboy]

LP is hardly monolithic. You need to spend less time worrying about other websites and more time reading the posting guidelines here at FR - such as the prohibition against putting vanity posts into Activism/Chapters.

[Tacis]

I've long believed that the viseral hatred of W by these idiots (at least, some of them) is an issue of self-loathing, self-hatred. They backed Willie, a genial, middle of the road kind of good ole boy. Willie suckered them and proved to be the filthiest, most corrupt politician ever. But, Willie forced them to lie for him, take his side in hopeless crimes and, in doing so, turned them into corrupt waste like he is. These turdophiles couldn't turn on Willie because it would be the same as turning on themselves. So, the refocused their bile on some one else, W.

The Conyers, Waxmans, Pelosis of the sewer, will always try to paint the Republican as being worse that Willie. They can never redeem Willie, claim that he is clean but they can argue that, as bad as Willie was, he isn't as bad as [the current Republican].

The dems are haunted by Willie and terrified of him because they know his filth and corruption. The recent dem ranting about "no proof of a connection between Saddam/Iraq and 9-11/OBL" had nothing to do with the war or Iraq. It was a attempt to divert attention by the dems so that no one would suggest what they already knew to be fact, that Willie had long been involved with OBL, the Saudis and Saddam and had profited mightily from Iraqi oil money. Hatred of W continues to be diversion from the further damage that the dems KNOW Willie can do to them!!

[Rebelbase]

LP is decent and good execpt that it hosts the BB which is nothing more than a cut-n-paste circle jerk that uses hatred of FR and its founder for porn.

[Rembrandt_fan]

"The Dummies hate the Republican party because it has crushed all their hope of a communist America ruled by a left wing European style kooks."

Er, okay. No big fan of the Democrats, but even less enamored of pointless hyperbole branding them communist sympathizers, which might be true of a MoveOn-type minority but certainly not of the whole. My grandfather, for example, was a lifelong, pro-labor, New Deal Democrat. No one in his right mind would label him or those like him a communist. Which brings me to my next point...

[spodefly]

The fact that you spent so much time compiling this list of faults might also qualify you as being slightly obsessive. :)

I don't pay attention to Democratic Underground. A few years ago I might have signed up there and crafted my online presence to fit that arena just for the entertainment and educational value. I don't care about playing that game anymore. They look to me like lots of young idealistic and mind numbed kids. Many of them will grow out of their lefty obsessions as they mature. As for the old fools there, you already know what they say about old fools ...

Regarding LP: the signal to noise ratio there is slightly worse than here because there is less moderation. There are a couple of very obsessive posters with vendettas against FR. There are several freaks of nature there that defy any attempt at sane logical discourse. But there are also numerous posters there that really, all things considered, should (still) be here. I believe it would be better for the debates if they were.

Since you have brought up these other 2 sights, it inevitably brings the need to compare them to FR.

FR is not without its faults, although it is clearly the best bulletin board for conservatives by far.

There is a complaint that could be lodged against FR that I believe is valid and easily observable -- the level of Bush worship here is off the scale in terms of its unhealthiness.

I like the guy. I voted for him. He has done things that demonstrate he is a true leader, which is rare among politicians. He is personable and likable. He has numerous worthy and admirable qualities.

BUT for God's sakes, he is not perfect. In fact, he has some significant and glaring flaws both in terms of style and substance. He should not be above criticism.

He is a lifelong politician from a family of lifelong politicians, and for that reason alone deserves additional scrutiny as to motives and objectives ... and that scrutiny cannot come from a position of adulation and worship.

But to criticize Bush here is almost the same as taking the Lord's name in vain. FR looks, in that regard, to be an extension of the Republican Party. If someone from the 'other' sights was critiquing us, I believe that would be one of their biggest complaints. And it is a critique that is not without some merit.

[Jibaholic]

I would consider myself a pretty typical right-winger, but I think Bush has been complete and utter failure when it comes to reducing the size of the Government.

[finnman69]

Yup, thats about right.

[GSWarrior]

What is common? Both represent a small minority of their respective parties. Most people don't lurk or post on policital websites, I'd wager.

[JCEccles]

He is the worst President ever

I think it's simpler than you have put it. For malcontents such as these people, President Bush is the "worst president ever" because he is the current president.

[Sloth]

because FR do not ... endorse the StormFronters and the Minute Men project

Equating the two is a vile dishonesty.

[ex-snook]

" he is not following the Buchanin Doctrine of isolationism, "

Obviously you know so little about Buchanan's positions that you can't even spell his name. Buchanan is for American interests only. He was for the war in Afghanistan because of the attack on this country. He is not for wars to defend the interests of Kosovo, England, Israel, South Korea, Taiwan, Kuwait.

Pat does not want America's military to be the robot-cops to be sacrificed for the world. That isn't isolation, that's patriotism.