I've been here since June 23, 2001.
25 years, hoping to make it to 50...
Posted on 08/07/2026 2:50:49 AM PDT by Bill Russell
Yesterday, the President signed new Executive Orders expanding the definition of who is excluded from Birthright Citizenship. While there is an absolute likelihood that all those really smart attorneys and other people in the Executive branch came up with the updated policies independent of anything I floated here, in the blogosphere, and through indirect channels, I will take it as a win. Even if independently arrived at by others, the ideas floated here definitely appear to have been ground into the sausage making process of the new policies.
Never underestimate the impact of Free Republic on national debates! -- Back in 2008, when I was a completely unknown congressional candidate running against one of the most corrupt and powerful congressmen in US history and did not even know what FreeRepublic was, it was a Freeper (Hope you are still out there and in good health, Rusty!) who elevated my campaign on this forum and got the attention of Michelle Malkin and other members of the national press, enabling my campaign to give John Murtha a run for his money. With that history in mind, here are the links to the original article on July 19, 2026, and the new Birthright Citizenship Executive Orders:
Mitigating the Birthright Citizenship Threat from Communist China and Other Nations https://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/4388975/posts?page=1
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/08/continuing-to-protect-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/08/ending-birth-tourism/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2026/08/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-ends-birth-tourism-and-protects-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
“”Indeed.
The influence of this legendary site is definitely a magnet to trolls/bots.””
***
In a trip down memory lane.... I found a 2011 post of Buckhead’s addressing the “tone” of FR. Even back then... it was a tad bit....””heated””....lol.
To: Huck
Huck, I agree completely.
“FR ain ‘t what it used to be. It’s just bozos and yahoos yelling all day long.”
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/2714112/posts?page=204#204
None of that has anything to do with U.S. foreign policy. Do you think you’re posting to someone living in Israel?
Where exactly has that “toehold” gotten us in 2026? We can see it slipping away before our eyes over a completely unnecessary and politically disastrous military campaign.
Tony Snow, R.I.P., used to come here to mix it up, and admitted that party types used to test market party/government messaging here to see if it would fly before putting it out to a broader audience.
Most people view Alberta’s Child as a troll, not a deviant from “party orthodoxy” as he/she/it might put it.
I tend to agree.
There are a core group of people, at least ten of them, whose posts largely reflect an anti-Trump bias which they endeavor to hide under a veneer of “I’m the real conservative here because I oppose the “Endless War” in Iran”.
They are the same people who spam the forum with articles from CNN, Mediaite, New York Times, and The Guardian, all with the specific purpose of promoting dissension within the Trump Administration and demoralizing Conservatives.
The comment by Alberta’s Child characterizing operations in the Persian Gulf as “ this stupid war with Iran”, implying Trump is “stupid” for doing it is a typical one on any given day.
Of course Trump isn’t stupid.
Of course he knows that downside of taking action like he did before an election exists. Of course he understands those things.
He came in off the street, not a politician, not privy to the machinations of politicians and weaponized government, yet he was stupid enough to learn those things on the job in the most difficult job in the world, and won the Presidency three times. They managed to steal one of them, but he learned his lessons in those four years in the political wilderness.
And we have people on this forum who are exemplified by Alberta’s Child who, having never been to a meeting on these issues, never had access to the intelligence, and never been privy to any internal discussions, are all too eager and willing to accept the word of “anonymous sources” in articles from the New York Times that have four authors on them.
We have them on this forum.
They say he didn’t think of the impact on elections. They say he didn’t have any plan for his action. They say he didn’t have a plan for the closing of the Strait of Hormuz.
I tend to have a very dim view of these people, and on any given day, we have a handful of these same people who spam the forums with “articles” from the likes of CNN, Mediaite, The Guardian, The New York Times, and on, and on and on.
People like that might well be characterized as “geriatric anti-Trump trolls wearing MAGA hats that they have set aflame” to paraphrase the lexicon of one of them.
That’s one sign of high intelligence: recognizing the Ring of Truth.
I was.
Speaking of FR influence....Is Buckhead still around? I think he broke the Dan Rather fake but accurate NG letter....IIRC
“”I tend to have a very dim view of these people, and on any given day, we have a handful of these same people who spam the forums with “articles” from the likes of CNN, Mediaite, The Guardian, The New York Times, and on, and on and on.””
***
Exactly, spot-on and thumbs up. I agree with everything you just said. Thank you!
And historically, Hamas has been a Sunni Islamic faction, not Shi'ite.
Yes. I noticed that the Media struck the tuning fork on the anti-Vance movement, and the usual suspects on Free Republic picked that up and began their buzzing on this forum on the exact same frequencies.
Funny how most of the anti-Vance people on this forum are the same ones who characterize Trump as "stupid". Just a coincidence, I am sure.
It was Congressman Billybob (John Armor, R.I.P.) who directed me to FR in 1998. Signed up around the March for Justice, but was one of the 1/3 or so that got caught up in that database mess up and had to re-register in 1999.
Over the years I have created a couple of words (bumper sticker length) or occasionally a sentence or so and posted them here.
So were well received, some were not.
But—regardless I kept seeing them showing up in conservative publications/blogs/videos etc a month or even a year or two later.
My exact words.
Coincidence?
Perhaps sometimes, but definitely not all the time.
This site can be read by one person who uses a phrase in an email to someone else who uses it with someone else etc etc etc.
Be wise, folks, and someone may learn from you and repeat what you said.
I once heard it casually mentioned on a morning drive talk radio program in the Atlanta area circa 2009. Was surprised to hear it.
People should be able to have civil discourse, and disagree.
However, when one resorts to describing others that disagree with their self-esteemed "opinions" in derogatory terms like "geriatric parrots wearing MAGA hats", it defeats the purpose of civil discourse and purposeful discussion is not possible.
The problem with your comments is that even the smartest people make mistakes.
Remember the “brain trust” that LBJ had on Vietnam?
They were truly “the best and the brightest” and they made one monster mess.
Some of us think that is happening now.
Could we be wrong? Sure. We are human.
But—we work with the data we have.
I've been here for more than 25 years. According to my home page, I have 164 threads and 116,340 replies to my credit.
That's an odd way to be a "troll," I'd say. In fact, I stayed here the purges and self-exile of the mid-2000s where it was considered heresy here to oppose "the stupid war with Iraq." And I managed to do this by being consistent in my posts on any given subject. You can see my simple profile page to explain the most basic principles that haven't changed in 25+ years.
I called out George W. Bush as a retarded baboon before Donald Trump made it fashionable more than ten years later.
Just sayin' ...
Please see my previous post, and I'd love to see you post some examples of what you've presented here.
I have made a good number of posts here in the last few weeks defending J.D. Vance. At this point in time I consider him a more reliable figure to promote an America-first political agenda than Donald Trump is.
I've been here since June 23, 2001.
25 years, hoping to make it to 50...
You do realize that this particular line of argument can be applied to any decision made by any President when it comes to foreign policy, right?
By this logic, not a single civilian had any right to question the foreign policy decisions of not just Trump, but Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, etcetera.
Given that the ability to declare war is constitutionally vested in Congress—the branch directly representative of the people—the concept that we should never question or criticize decisions made by the executive is utter bunk.
Which brings me to this particular line: [their]posts largely reflect an anti-Trump bias...with the specific purpose of promoting dissension within the Trump Administration and demoralizing Conservatives.
Trump was elected to accomplish specific things, and to not do other things. He campaigned on no more "stupid wars" in the Middle East.
Nobody voted for Trump to start a stupid war with Iran. (And I guarantee that if Biden or Obama had done the exact same things that Trump has done thus far, he would have been railing on Truth Social about how poorly it's been handled.)
Nobody wants Trump to continue the war with Iran, because it is a distraction from more important things domestically.
One of the hallmarks of a Conservative point of view is that they accept the world and human nature for what it is; as such, reality checks are a constant necessity.
So if a reality check like the above is "demoralizing" to you, then that's your problem.
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.