I agree with over 90% of how Jim defines this site -- that's why I'm here. There are a couple of issues I disagree with, but that doesn't bother me at all, and Jim has never struck me as someone demanding 100% compliance.
I hope that Jim continues to defend those principles and maintains Free Republic as a site that fights for those principles. I believe the vast majority of Freepers agree with that.
But when it comes to party politics and elections, neither Jim nor any of us get to define the candidates, the parties, who runs or who doesn't. We all have a free choice to support candidates and we all have the right to vote (except for MadIvan) -- but we usually do not get to vote in November Leap Years for candidates who agree 90% or more with the above. In some states, like Maine, 50% is the best that is politically possible.
In 1980, we had a great campaigner who was also quite conservative. I was 100% behind Reagan. That summer I met GHWB on my campus (senior year) after he was nominated at VP. Had Free Republic existed then, my guess is Reagan would have been the overwhelming choice.
This cycle it is more difficult. We're not facing an unpopular Jimmy Carter. We've had instead eight years of an increasingly unpopular Republican President. The 'rats are gaining ground -- although their perfomance in Congress so far shows that they are not ready for prime time. Winning the White House next year will not be easy.
We need a good candidate. Rudy is by far the best known, most popular, most able to appeal to the whole country (especially independents), most respected among elected Republicans, and the least conservative. McCain is viewed as a weasel. Romney has several problems. Gingrich may not run, and he has a lot of baggage. The other candidates are mini-mees.
Some Freepers -- like me -- believe Rudy is the clear choice despite his liberal views on some issues because his promise to appoint originalist Justices mitigates his personal social views, because he has the best chance to win, and because of his track record in NYC on issues like taxes, crime, economic growth, etc. I also believe there isn't another candidate out there with anywhere near as good a chance at winning.
Other Freepers -- including our illustrious Founder and Owner -- believe on principle that supporting Rudy is unacceptable because of his positions on issues of deep concern such as abortion and gun rights are unacceptable. They doubt his pledge on Justices -- fair point -- and/or refuse to support him even if he would appoint originalists because he is just personally not what they want to see in 1600 PA Ave. After eight years of Bubba that is understandable.
What I think needs to be said is that sincere, honest differences over the better strategery -- oppose or support Rudy -- should not be confused with the basic mission statement of Free Republic. I believe electing Rudy is the best chance to advance those principles -- given our other, limited choices. Others disagree. But at least for me, with only limited choices I do not accept that voting for any candidate means I endorse all of his views. I don't. And I suspect most of the Rudy supporters do not accept all of his views either.
I support Jim 100% sticking by his guns on the mission of Free Republic, and I hope Howlin and other Freeper Warriors stick to their guns too. Candidates and politicians come and go -- principles are timeless.
I want to commend and congratulate you for a well written and excellent statement of your point of view. I disagree with you quite thoroughly. But people here can learn from your civility. Well done and well stated.