I saw nothing in Lurker's comments that warrant a personal counterattack. He is right. There will be nothing done, there will be "no hell to pay" if the Democrats ram the fairness doctrine through and shut down talk radio. We're all sophisticated enough to know that they probably won't go the fairness doctrine route anyway, they will probably set up community Soviets and let them shut down talk radio. But whenever the facts on the ground, why are we spewing rubbish? Why are we fulminating about resistance that will never materialize?
If you're willing to say that there will be consequences to shutting down talk radio, you should be willing to lay them out when challenged. If you assert an alternative plan, you should be able to tell us about it when challenged.
Why do we accuse Lurker with a 10 years cyber trail on Free Republic of being a traitor? If you disagree with his opinion argue a point but lay off the ad hominem.
Yesterday in a different context I published posts which contains the following thoughts. My point is that we should have had a lot more "defeatism" on these threads for the last six or eight years and, maintaining faith that Republicans of national importance read these threads, perhaps we might have encountered a different destiny in the last two elections. Many, many times as I predicted the electoral disasters to come, I was pilloried as a "defeatist." It does not matter if one offers affirmative ideas, it only matters that one fails to cheerlead. We will never save conservatism, and therefore never save the Republic, if we are incapable of dealing with reality no matter how unpalatable the prospect. Here is a portion of yesterday's post:
What this means is that our side is virtually impotent. It means that when the Democrats propose one of the worst pieces of legislation in living memory which is risible in its waste and corruption, the liberal machine rolls over the only open microphone left to us: talk radio. Soon even that soapbox will be taken from us.
What this means is that when you hear cheerleaders on these threads in the run-up to the next election, and the election after that, assuring you that the polls don't mean anything, that they have talked to their grandmother who is going to vote Republican for the first time in her 90 years, that the people will never permit the country to turn socialist, do not believe them. They do not even have the first understanding of the demographic landslide under which Republicans must survive like troglodytes.
The time to come to a sober understanding of our dilemma is not after the electorate has been bagged by the Democrats and their media, it is now. We must now understand what we're up against and we must begin now to fashion tactics and strategies to survive the coming Republican crackup. Those of us who predicted in writing on these threads the oncoming electoral disasters of 2006 and 2008 long before these elections took place, have earned the credibility denied to us during the Bush years.
Unwilling to appear a sorehead, I neglected to add the truth that smears of "defeatist" only prevent any realistic effort to grapple with reality.
The LEFT has a track record of paying personal visits and murdering people. We'd be much better off without any of them of course, but it takes more than mere argument to "convert" them to the truth ~ knowing that, we must continue to be on the lookout for the first stages of their violent nature so that they don't ever get to make those personal visits.
L
Why don't you ask your friend Lurker about that? As far as I know, he is the one trashing every Rush thread he can find with utterly nonsensical comments like, “Rush is as dangerous man, as dangerous as Obama.” He calls him a fat fraud and other personal insults. He offers no positive commentary. So your comment “If you disagree with his opinion argue a point but lay off the ad hominem” should be directed at him.
Why are we fulminating about resistance that will never materialize?
How do you know that? You can't possibly know what's going to happen in the future. Certainly we the people can directly influence the political landscape in the future at future elections. There are going to be national elections in 2 years, and if we get organized and get quality conservative representatives, we can put a good number of democrats out of power in the House and in the Senate. Also, as a group we can influence policy making, though I agree that having the House, Senate, and WH in the hands of socialists that will make that difficult, for now.
Elections have consequences, and those who couldn't vote for a GOP candidate because he wasn't “conservative enough” are now wallowing in the path of defeat and self-destruction, indulging in empty rhetoric, and pointing the finger of blame to those on our side. Those who didn't vote and allowed this two-bit commie with no job experience to become the most powerful man in the world have no credibility in telling the rest of us who worked hard against Obama that our ideas won't materialize. Indeed, those who will ultimately get something done are those that are active.
And I haven't personally called Lurker a traitor, but just by reading some of the comments on FR today, I've found out the Lurker has attacked the Republican Party, Rush, Hannity, as well as several Freepers. That to me is certainly unduly negative and has no place on FR.
You three have been around these threads for a long time, approaching nearly 10 years each
Well, for starters, these threads haven't been active for nearly ten years. They have been posted in recent days! But besides that, I've been in politics since my dad got me involved at 8 years old, though I'm still young I've been in the political arena for far more than 10 years. However, you aren't a spring chicken either. You've been on FR for 7 years and you still don't understand that most Freepers aren't defeatists. Sure, some are (as we can see on this thread), but most people are positive - and the reason we come to this site is to join forces based on our common conservative ideals.
Once one “of us” starts trashing us and attacks us, then something is broken. Disagreements happen, sure, and they are normal and can be productive. But bitter negativity isn't helpful. Yes, we have a difficult road ahead. Yes, anecdotal evidence often isn't meaningful. But 2008 isn't the last election the USA will ever have. We will win some and we will lose some. That's the mature approach, not unbridled negativity.
If you're willing to say that there will be consequences to shutting down talk radio, you should be willing to lay them out when challenged. If you assert an alternative plan, you should be able to tell us about it when challenged.
The consequences are largely legal. Reinstitution of the Fairness Doctrine will be challenged in the courts. Our side will win some of those battles and lose some of those battles. Radio host Mark Levin is personally looking forward to being invited at Congressional hearings, as well as launching law suits to challenge a new Fairness Doctrine. He isn't alone, either. These cases will take years to settle. They just may win, too. And in any event, that buys our side more time, and the GOP can make inroads in Congress and maybe win a chamber (or two). It's happened before, it can happen again. There are other consequences and strategies, but I need not explore them here. One, I don't claim to know all the strategies those on our side may have. Second, why should anyone on our side publicize detailed plans of our defensive strategy?
And one more thing... no one has attacked L, he attacked Rush and attacked Freepers with his comments, and we simply responded in kind, so stop whining! But hey, I guess you felt the need to do a friendly little rescue, huh?
P.S. Going to play tennis and enjoy it.