Posted on 12/14/2013 10:33:19 AM PST by The Bat Ladys Husband
First of all, let me say that I have been a lurker on FR since 2000. My wife (The Bat Lady) has been registered and a poster since the same time. I generally use FR as a news source and in years past as an info source for FR organized protests/demonstrations. I don’t generally comment on articles because I mostly agree and don’t need to preach to the choir. However one article fired me up and I finally register in August 2013.
That being said, I recently commented on an article regarding Steve Stockman running against John Cornyn. Knowing a lot about Texas politics I said Stockman was not a viable candidate. OMG! You would have thought I said I pissed on Reagan’s grave. I was called a troll, a Cornyn plant, a GOP-e (if my friends had heard that they would be laughing their asses off.) With all the name-calling I had to look to see if I was on FR or DU. Conservatives pride themselves on the quality of their debate versus liberal knee-jerk name-calling. I guess some here on FR can’t raise themselves above that level.
Sticks and Stones! But more disturbing to me is the rise what I like to call the FR-e. Those are the posters that think that because they have been on FR for a long time that they are some kind of royalty and that newcomer’ comments and insights have no validity if they do not parrot their particular perception. I was called a noob “prattling"
(prat·tle talk idly or childishly: to talk in a silly, idle, or childish way silly, idle, or childish talk)
Just because someone has recently discovered FR or recently joined after lurking they prattle? Oops, my bad, I guess they don’t prattle if they agree with the pompous long-term freeper. Maybe we could cut back on the fundraisers if we encouraged new members rather than drive them off or turned them off with vitriolic discourse and vicious name-calling
(vit·ri·ol·ic adjective - filled with the intention or desire to do evil.)
If you haven’t looked at the Home page (click Free republic at the top left of the browse page) I invite you to look again: Jim Robinson states: “Believing that the best defense is a strong offense, we (myself and those whom I'm trying to attract to FR) support...”
Jim is trying to attract people to FR. How does denigrating a new reader attract them to FR? Being a victim of a verbal knock-out game by a supercilious FR-e certainly does not encourage a "newbie" to participate or even hang around
(su·per·cil·i·ous adjective 1. behaving or looking as though one thinks one is superior to others.)
Certainly all long time members don’t fit this category but those who do know who you are (or maybe you don’t) and so do we.
Sorry for the double post - oh dopey me.
So where do you go for the grown-up, well-mannered, but still ardent, focused, and fired up crowd? I there still a “Heart of Texas” group I could join?
“I’d like to add this photo of Ingrid Bergman to our discussion.”
Absolutely and why not?
I agree with ya and I have been around a while
But I don’t think FR is capable of dealing with much dissent anymore ...(if it ever was)
What are you trying to hide??
I think you guys are talking about Jack Thompson. (Jackpeace)
Well as rants on FR go you get a C-. But I usually don’t pile on newbies just for being new.
Welcome aboard and get a thick skin because people here will tell you what they think no matter how long you have been registered.
“You remember something that never was. If anything, it used to be more rough-and-tumble than it is today.”
That is true. When I joined in 2000, I was afraid to post ANY opinion unless I totally agreed with someone who had been a member longer than I had been, because newbies and others got stomped over and over and it was brutal. Then, I was too busy running the state of Texas to post, would read when I could. I was finally able to come back “full time” and it is not as nearly brutal as it was in the early years.
I must apologize, he grew those spikes and scales after drunk ng my coffee.
Nothing civil about those times.
/johnny
Please don’t speak to a lady like that. No need to name call just because someone does not agree with you. Good day.
>> “Was it the same guy that was stalking Connie (Clinton’s A Liar?) “ <<
.
No, that was Eschoir.
stick Cornyn up your backside, you newby socialist .
“I’ve never seen anything like that happening.”
Eh, somebody said something along those lines to me once, and I really don’t think I was even quoting my blog.
But from what I’ve seen elsewhere and on far more “mainstream” sites than this FR is one of the politest places on the web.
Some of the religion threads and the creation/evolution stuff seems like it gets pretty heated; and yes the politics stuff does too (I remember the fights over Harriet Meiers in particular) but it would be pretty boring if we all sat around saying: yes you’re right, I agree 100% all the time.
Well, years (and God) have taught me that it’s better to look for the positive in a situation. Even when it means getting condemned by the negative-meisters.
The human approximations that are made for the sake of human politics seem often to militate against that.
In real life, the way people carry on is fluid. They may do well one day, then poorly the next. Sometimes they have long standing bad habits, but even those may be broken (and replaced by good habits).
In the world of politics, we often pigeonhole people, and the idea of God operating through an unappealing vessel is (very wrongly) often treated as heresy.
This amounts to wallowing in self fulfilling doom prophecy.
Lefties are often more shrewd than “we righties” are. They will patiently deal in shades of grey when trying to get exactly the hue they want. They use all the virtues, sometimes masterfully. In the meantime with us it’s like show that holy halo untarnished or get outta here! And God? Who’s he? He’s the one who will give us the applause that we so richly deserve? (As we think.)
Man that is so, so spiritually WRONG. On a fundamental plane. I have tried to make clear a saner philosophy about the Lord and things spiritual wherever I have gone, even getting aggressively in the face of the negative-meisters where I believe the Lord wanted it. I don’t think I have gotten it all perfect but I think I have earnestly attempted to bring what would be a vast improvement.
So I'll ask now.
Did you vote for "Dirty" Dewhurst over Ted Cruz because Cruz wasn't a viable candidate?
>> “Perot debates were particularly rough” <<
On FR? - When?
What are you smokkin?
You should have seen some of the foil wearing isolationists that challenged some of the ideas I tried to advance after the 12 election - implying that you aren't who you say you are is usually the first chunk of bile that comes flying out.
I've been around since the 2000 election. I come here because it gives me confidence that I'm not the only one who thinks the way I do when I get my fill of MSM “liquid sunshine / stay calm, all is well” BS.
Some of the people here don't really specialize in rational debate. They'd rather fire off quasi-educated semi-witty put downs and drive you off the site.
Well, hang around. Those cats are only a small percentage of the larger group here. I've been encouraged by kindred spirits here far more often than put down by “conservative geniuses” camped out in their mother's basements.
Always remember: Anonymity and a witty nickname are a keyboard commando's best friends... well, that and his mom...
RLTW
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.