Just a reminder: Free Republic is a conservative site

[Txsleuth]

Thank you so much for your message...

Basically, I have been saying it like that for weeks..(although not as well)...that the freepers and conservatives that are letting their anger possibly contribute to a dem win in November, which would jeopardize ALL our lives...is just plain short sighted, IMHO>

[RunningWolf]

I do not fear the evolutionists either.

But that is not the place WKB's comments were directed towards. His comments were directed at the evo threads themselves and what goes down there.

It does look that the Mods-'boxing refs' have been bought off at times. There is plenty of material to back that view up.

In this regard I think he has some legitimate observations (forget about mine here for sake of argument). Are you you aware how the threads seem to operate? Do you take a hands off approach to the threads? Are you okay with how the threads are 'moderated'? Are you aware as to the 'mod response' as far as what is perceived as personal attack, and the mod-response ratio to that? Are you okay with all the sac-religious imagery, mocking, ridiculing, etc that passes for debate in the 'name of science'?

I tell you that even 'evolutionists' that show up on those threads and do not regurgitate the 'ping list koolaid' are taken to task. I know from experience that just taking some of the evolutionist's own text and bouncing it back to him (on the same thread!) will will result in a deletion of my post and a warning to myself, while his post stays up. And these guys I came back at are your serial /one line hit job wonders - not exactly rocket scientists/ on those threads.

Believe it or not, I do not ask these questions in an attempt to change a direction to this forum (even if I could) because I really do not want that. But I am interested in your answers and your position/opinion if you have one.

Wolf

[steve86]

But step outside the box and think of what a political newcomer would think, perusing this board and seeing posts calling out for illegals to be shot on sight, Mecca to be blown up, etc.

Good point. There have been times, for example, when there were like 4 or 5 "turn Mecca to glass" (during hajj) comments in a row. I was just waiting for a screen shot of that to show up on CNN. In defense of FR, however, moderators have deleted comments on request when it was pointed out that they advocated genocide.

[The Lion Roars]

well said jim.

[daybreakcoming]

Do you think McCain will get the nomination? I don't. Every day that goes by, he gets further away from his goal. As to the eventual nominee, it's a toss up in my book.

[MissAmericanPie]

Jim, I understand your theory. And I will not lose my good congressman by staying home. But I cannot, will not vote for Cronyn when he comes up for re-election. He is a total loser. Got conservatives on the ballot? I'll vote for them. Even though I cannot see one thing we have won in the last six years. Not one. I know, we are in a fight for our very nation state and I believe Republican globalists like Cornyn are the worse thing we can have in office.

I wish there a process where-by a law can be voted on by the general public. Such as, no globalist may run for office given that their aim is to destroy the nation state. It is the same as putting Ben Laden in office as to put a globalist in office, they are two means to the same end.

Col. Oliver North is taking up the cause and hopefully people will fall in behind him and organize, demonstrate, and make our voices heard. I understand there is going to be a march in D.C. April 23rd. I plan on attending and hope other conservatives will also. Phone calls, faxes, emails, are not going to do the job. A sea of faces stands more of a chance. We shook them up in 2000 even though the press tried to ignore us. We should do that again.

[soloNYer]

It may be common knowledge to lifelong conservatives, but it really was somewhat of an epiphany to an idiot indoctrinated Dem like I was.

I don't think long-time conservatives know the power simple information has to change the minds of some of the left.

Kind of like the Matrix...many people in the matrix of the left are only forming opinions based on the press, teachers or the Dems who surround them (mob mentality). Many have never met a conservative (I didn't know any...or at least they didn't let on until I became one), and so didn't understand their views. It was easy to believe they were just evil, without questioning why they believed what they believed.

Now I know that the reason true debate does not exist (or didn't until alternative media and Fox) was that leaders of the left are afraid that conservatives make more sense then is let on by the MSM...and so they resort to charges of racism and ignorance.

[Jim Robinson]

Don't know much about him, so I looked up his rating on the American Conservative Union's voting scoreboard. Cornyn's conservative vote rating for 2005 was 96%, 2005 was 100% and lifetime (3 yrs) is 94%. Only 13 Senators have lifetime ratings of 94% or better. Most of the Democrats listed are down in the 20's, teens or single digits. I can't imagine anyone wanting to replace a conservative voting Republican senator with a Democrat.

We can only wish that we had senators with 94% conservative ratings here in California. Feinstein is at 11%, Boxer is a pathetic 3%. By the way, Hutchinson is at 91%.

http://www.acuratings.org/2005Senate.htm

[Jim Robinson]

er, Cornyn's 2004 ACU rating was 100% not 2005.

[Old_Mil]

"turn Mecca to glass" (during hajj) comments in a row. I was just waiting for a screen shot of that to show up on CNN. In defense of FR, however, moderators have deleted comments on request when it was pointed out that they advocated genocide.

Which just goes do show, you don't understand the definition of genocide. Such an action would be no different from the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

[Jim Robinson]

By the way, I notice the only vote in 2005 that Cornyn didn't agree with the ACU was a vote on a procedural amendment having to do with the FTC and emergency measures in energy markets. Hutchinson and Cornyn both voted for the amendment but it was rejected by the Senate.

[Ichneumon]

It does look that the Mods-'boxing refs' have been bought off at times. There is plenty of material to back that view up. In this regard I think he has some legitimate observations (forget about mine here for sake of argument). Are you you aware how the threads seem to operate? Do you take a hands off approach to the threads? Are you okay with how the threads are 'moderated'? Are you aware as to the 'mod response' as far as what is perceived as personal attack, and the mod-response ratio to that? Are you okay with all the sac-religious imagery, mocking, ridiculing, etc that passes for debate in the 'name of science'? I tell you that even 'evolutionists' that show up on those threads and do not regurgitate the 'ping list koolaid' are taken to task. I know from experience that just taking some of the evolutionist's own text and bouncing it back to him (on the same thread!) will will result in a deletion of my post and a warning to myself, while his post stays up. And these guys I came back at are your serial /one line hit job wonders - not exactly rocket scientists/ on those threads.

That's pretty funny coming from the guy whose standard behavior on the "crevo" threads is stuff like this:

I have been caught doing what, exactly?

Well for starters.., being a demented nut-ball of a kookcase in some bizarre fantasy land LOL

Wolf

posted on 12/20/2005 3:29:58 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

...and who repeatedly refers to evolutionary biology as a "cult" and science-literate Freepers as "cultists".

I'll be glad to post endless examples of your puerile personal attacks from the "crevo" threads if you want to keep trying to play the "innocent" injured party.

In fact, after watching you in action for many months, I was surprised on this thread to learn that you were capable of writing in a calm and reasonable manner for a change, and in full complete sentences, when you chose to. Previously I had no evidence that you could do anything beyond this level of "discourse":

What an utterly dishonest attempt to shift the burden of proof.

Well.., only if before the demented court of a raging megalomaniac paraplegic.

Wolf

965 posted on 12/18/2005 2:36:57 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

And:

Once again you make no case for evo-cultism

CUS U CANT

Wolf

1,847 posted on 12/20/2005 2:51:25 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

And:

No.., you said

//Humans and monkeys share common ancestry//

You make this claim

//Humans and monkeys share common ancestry.//

So what is the common ancestry? Real and specific facts...

NOW.... pathetic LIAR!!

Wolf

1,852 posted on 12/20/2005 3:38:13 AM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

And:

Its the arrogance of blind ignorance and tiny little minds.

Wolf

1,062 posted on 12/18/2005 12:05:51 PM CST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)

...and those are just from *one* thread... Hundreds more examples available upon request.

(Since I'm familiar with your tactics, I'm going to insist that if you try to play tit-for-tat and quote from my own posts, you do so by including the *entire* post, as I have done here with your posts, and not just take some passages out of context.)

So don't try to play innocent and complain about "personal attack", " mocking, ridiculing, etc that passes for debate", "serial /one line hit job wonders", when those phrases far better describe your own "contributions" than those of just about anyone else on the "crevo" threads.

You've gotten warnings and posts deleted because you've deserved them. And you've earned more than you've actually gotten, so count your blessings.

In closing, the "creos" and the "evos" both frequently feel that the moderators are being too tough on "their" side and too forgiving of the "other" side -- which to me is a good indication that the moderators are doing a fairly even-handed job.

[RunningWolf]

What an utterly dishonest attempt to shift the burden of proof.

Well.., only if before the demented court of a raging megalomaniac paraplegic.

Wolf

[RunningWolf]

Once again you make no case for evo-cultism

CUS U CANT

Wolf

[RunningWolf]

No.., you said

//Humans and monkeys share common ancestry//

You make this claim

//Humans and monkeys share common ancestry.//

So what is the common ancestry? Real and specific facts...

NOW.... pathetic LIAR!!

Wolf

[RunningWolf]

Its the arrogance of blind ignorance and tiny little minds.

Wolf

[RunningWolf]

Look I am not playing Innocent, but for the record I did not respond like that till after being taunted and provoked many many times with everything the ping-list threw at me. Or even worse, seeing the same thing happen to brand new people that showed up on those threads.

Why don't you post the context those posts came out of the threads they were in? Why don't you show where those posts by me were essentially 'to rescue' others that had wondered in to those threads and been swarmed upon by your compadres?

And BTW if that is an indoctrination of me, it pales in comparison to depth breadth and volume of the vitriol that flows out of those evo-ping list people in the name of science. And no real scientist ever behaves they way these people do, their behavior does indeed qualify as cultist (or at least gang) in that regard.

You have not posted any of the complements I gave you directly, Why is that?

But I guess already knew what your answer is although I thought you might be able to see beyond that a little bit. What I want to hear is his answer.

Finally here is just one example of what I speak of. The following is a long-term evos first reply ever to a brand new 'creo', and it was on a religion thread.

"Let me guess. You're a troll here to perpetuate the myth that conservatives are a demented bunch of ignorant anti-science psychopaths"

So I came back at the evo with his own statement, and left it all the same except I changed 'anti-science' to 'punk-evo'. That was enough to get my post deleted and a warning. That is just how warped and distorted the outfit operates on these threads. BTW his post is still there, along with his sac-religious imagery.

Wolf

[MissAmericanPie]

Both of their grades are horrible on the illegal immigration issue. Hutchison has a good grade over all for her tenure in office, but this term during this important vote, she is missing in action so far.

I know there are other issues. But none can compare to the issue of wheather we survive as a sovereign nation, or merely some psuedo illusion of a nation, full of psuedo citizens in the majority and demanding a no borders trade zone in it's place. There is no plan to control the borders, so we will have to legalize the next 20 million and the next 20 million and they will vote.

Your plan to kill off the Demonrat Party by voting Republican again and again sounds good, but is it workable given the close elections and the odds being stacked against us by the votes of legalized violators of our laws?

I'm open for, and looking for solid solutions. So do we roll the dice and teach RINO's that corporate money will do them little good when they find themselves in the hands of an angry electorate? Or hold our nose and vote for Republicans even if they are clearly globalists with a nation killing agenda? I have no intention of staying at home and punishing my great Congressman, but the ballot will be blank in alot of places. I saw this Conservative rebellion coming over two years ago, as conservatives woke up to the horror of extinction. We need a victory of some sort. But as long as we sit on our keesters do we deserve one? D.C. seems so impressed with demonstrators, why are we not demonstrating?

What do you see as the end reward for voting Republican again even if they are clearly against conservatives? I am open to just about anything at this point. Or if you had rather I shut up, I can go arrange my stereo wires, wash my car, curl my eyelashes...but I would sincerely like to know the details of how your agenda will work.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Sorry if it was too bothersome.

Not at all...

I just wanted to see more of what you might have said.

[Quix]

Do you have some examples of his globalism? I'm not so familiar with him these days.

[singfreedom]

I TOTALLY agree. I think it would be very bad form for us to organize a huge demonstration in the streets. For one reason, the MSM would obviously interpret it as a bunch of racists, or some such nonsense. It would be counter productive. Phone, go to their offices, and keep sending those faxes. I know they have "bean counters" who keep a tally of constituents' communication.

[JockoManning]

Thanks, Quix, for the ping.

Good Wednesday to you.

jm

[patriciaruth]

Well, I belong to the class of people that believes you help someone more by teaching them how to fish than endlessly supplying them with fish...

after you share your dinner with them if they are starving, of course.

I think the study of history and the use of reason can help societies skip several millennia of the natural selection lottery. One of our Founders, James Madison, did just that. He analyzed every system of government in history he could find writings about. He was one of the major writers of our Constitution, and we owe him a great deal.

But all this is very abstract.

You have basically accused the U.S. and Americans of arrogance and/or provincialism (a charge I don't deny but see as a trait naturally selected), but you have not been specific mentioning which laws or cultural norms of ours we should not expect other nations to adopt.

So, I don't expect other countries to embrace baseball or American style football. I don't expect other countries to wear fashions popular in the U.S.

What are some of the nine and sixty tribal lays prevalent in other countries that you believe are right, and that you believe we are arrogantly insisting are wrong and must be changed? Perhaps you could name 2 or 3 specific things you disagree with us about, so I have a better sense of what is offending you.

Do you believe that there are any barbaric customs in other countries that are worse in practice than our "barbarian" insistance on labeling some tribal lays as "wrong"?

[patriciaruth]

I happen to appreciate the discussion among the Founders about whether to establish a religion in the U.S.

There was a great deal of concern that only a moral people could rule themselves. And some Founders believed that if government didn't financially support religious institutions to instruct people in moral behavior that the American people would become unfit to govern themselves.

Who is denying that we historically are a Judeo-Christian based society? I don't believe Sir Francis made that assertion.

For myself, I believe that the watchmen watch in vain any society not mindful of God's grace.

But I also believe in freedom of religion, possibly because I had an ancestor who was a Hugeunot and had to flee France into Germany to avoid being killed because of religious differences. Thus I will defend anyone's right to believe or not believe specific religious tenets.

That does not mean we should let our society degenerate into an amoral morass. But we should carefully look to see where the failures to create a basically moral people are occuring and discuss remedies carefully so that freedom is protected as well as protecting the society from total hedonistic degeneration.