Posted on 09/14/2011 5:17:57 AM PDT by Zakeet
That comment was totally out of line....nasty as hell...you make such a comment to someone you dont even know who could be mortally ill?
That is incredible...I don’t expect that from you
The zeal for Sarah Pain here has created far more ill will than it has ever generated positively...and for someone likely may not even run
I have never seen worse behavior by some than by those who see themselves defending Palin.....nothing Scanian said approaches the vitriol heaped on him here
Sad....and it helps Palin not one bit
Worst group behavior I ve seen herein 11 years...makes howlin,illbay and sinkspur seem like sweethearts by comparison
I want someone who can beat Obama and who is running...the more culture warrior the better...right now Palin is sitting it out and I more questions now than I ever did....its been downhill since her first incredible few speeches....slowly anyhow....her populist tone of late...no.thanks
I want no part of this bloodlust
Sarah will always have support here but her star has dimmed out in the real world...
That you for your best wishes, thoughts and prayers, my friend.
You’ve done some excellent analysis and commentary, WarDad.
I am tickled-thrilled to find such logical thought on this thread.
You know, if the Editor wanted to make the acquaintance and talk to me about my alleged “bitterness,” I have all my personal information in my Profile. He could pick up the phone and find out for himself what I am like but I suppose some folks “do better in groups,” as a JD officer once told me as a kid. So he prefers to attack on a thread instead of talking to the supposed “enemy” personally.
And that’s what Sarah’s gang is acting like: a bunch of JDs. Presumably. they are adults and fairly intelligent people or FR wouldn’t interest them but they have fallen victim to a personality cult.
I think we all have read enough history to know how that generally turns out. I love my country, the Constitution, supply side economics, and all the generally accepted principles of conservatism. To some people here, that doesn’t matter-—just how you feel about Palin.
We should strive to be a nation of laws and principles-—and NOT a naqtion of men. Or women.
Such has become increasingly rare on this board - sad to say.
I said many months ago that Sarah needed to do something about her voice. Rather that recognizing a real problem there, I would hear that bad sound systems are at fault; or (a one size fits all excuse), I was parroting the MSM Sarah-hate.
That last one is especially dumb. Now, I don't mind being insulted all that much, but I really resent having stupidity hurled at me in a feeble attempt at argument.
Every reasonable problem with her as a candidate has a convenient, boilerplate response with a garnish of personal invective in way too many instances. A few days ago, I saw a Mod pull a personal attack and admonish. I was hoping perhaps a memo had gone out to actually enforce the rule.
Yes...”NO personal attacks.” And that SHOULD be enforced.
It’s one thing to disparage politcians and other public figures who make themselves known, another to blast other FReepers, most of whom try to protect their privacy and identities.
I couldn’t agree with you more about the voice. It is shrill indeed. The more emotional she gets, the more shrill she gets.
Good to find another wise FReeper here who is interested in logic and factual information and doesn’t care for personality cult thinking.
Or maybe I should say, “lack of thinking.”
Have always admired you, but I’m going to have to disagree with you this time. In fact, I find myself disagreeing with you more and more lately.
Such is life, I guess.
I suppose implying that people who don’t agree with are shrill, unwise and not thinking is not a personal attack. I suppose if you attack a whole group of people it’s not a personal attack.
Unreal.
Posts from this group that use truly vile and vulgar accusations have been reported to the mods and allowed to stand (child molester, NAMBLA member and I hope you die in a house fire are just three actual examples).
I have received more than a few e-mails telling me that many of the mods belong to that cadre and their behavior supports that statement.
They have chased many long-time freepers away from the board and have done nothing but make this place look bad. One wonders sometimes who is in charge.
This definitely re-opens the door for the right to bring up all of the old stories of Obama.
We don't even have to respond to the accusations against Palin. Just say that "it's up to her to respond, but did you know . . . ?
Drag out all of the drug using and dealing, homo affairs and lack of college records!
Throw it all back in their faces BIG TIME!
I don't mind a discussion of Palin on the issues. Her resigning as governor, for example, is open to fair disagreement among conservatives. Likewise her support of McCain in 2010.
But this rubbish from a liberal stalker who moved in next door to her? And that junk yesterday about Gardasil in Alaska when it was entirely a federal initiative - an obvious effort from a Perry spinner to draw moral equivalence and deflect Palin's criticism of Perry's chief of staff who left to lobby for Merck? Perry is the one who has to address that issue, not Palin. Whatever you think of Palin now, she has a history of taking on a corrupt GOP and corporate establishment and beating them.
Most Freepers who have been here for some time have long ago learned to access the motives of those who put forth stories as a tool for determining their potential veracity. The FReepers who don't are either willing to be duped because it fits their preconceptions or are spinners who are trying to damage the candidate/representative/person in question. Neither speaks well, yet to them it is the fault of those pointing out their failings as creating some kind of hostile enviroment, when they are the ones bringing liberal and RINO anti-conservative hostility into FR with their support of such MSM trash.
As I said earlier - if you kick a dog enough times, don't blame the dog when it eventually bites you.
So you refuse to make a personal wager?
If you were a newb doing that, you would get zotted on the spot. And it isn't just Palin, anyone who pushes liberal attack talking points is suspect on FR.
Sane posters will put up such articles for purposes of vetting and rebuttal. Trolls use them to tear down conservative politicians they don't like.
If you don't like your treatment, try sticking to conservative points of discussion. If you insist on rolling on liberal dog turds, don't blame other FReepers when they point out that you stink as a result.
I don't mind a rough-and-tumble. Just don't complain about the lack of adherence to Marquis of Queensbury rules when you start out throwing a sucker punch.
And that is a fair critique. My wife, for example, doesn't like her voice.
But that is not what the poster in question is being criticized for. It is for his embrace of this liberal trash attack on Palin - in a post that was removed - that is drawing fire. Along with his giving substance to the volume of attacks on Palin giving an indication that there is something there - threby supporting the very agenda that is driving the volume of attacks.
I don't have a problem with conservative discussions of Palin, Perry, or any other politician - all of them have issues. I do have a problem with so-called conservatives embracing liberal attack points against those politicans. If it was a newb doing it, they would get zotted. But old-timers seem to think they should get a pass for doing just that.
,,,,, sounds like a tip that should be submitted to the bamster’s new paranoid website “ ATTACKWATCH “ . I’m sure the bamster would love to straighten out all those rumors or actual facts .
Well, whether the writer is a scumbag or not doesn't matter to me given that he's not running for office.
That being said, I'm not a Palin supporter, but I could care less about this. It's just mud, some of it may be true (or not), but you simply can't base political support off unverifiable mudslinger, else the mudslingers get veto power over whom we elect.
The one irony that jumped out at me was that our current President has openly admitted to snorting coke, yet the media treats that fact as having no weight or relevance. The only virtue of mudslinging like this is that it is an opportunity to get that fact out again to contrast an unverified (and unverifiable) allegation against Palin with an acknowledged fact about Obama.
He's not quite as bulletproof as we was in 2008, and perhaps it would be worthwhile if folks were informed of facts like this that were gneerally hushed up in the media back when he was at his most godlike.
Even the NY Times has a hard time with McGinnis’s book:
The writer of that column goes into fair detail about the volume of charges that McGinnis puts forth. Using your stated standard on this thread, Scanian, that the sheer volume of allegations against Palin indicates there must be something behind them, please square that with the critique of all of the allegations put forth in the Times column. Note that it becomes clear in the article that the author is no particular fan of Palin’s.
btw...I don't care who she screwed or what drugs she may or may not have taken....all my objections to your idol are strictly about her performance as an elected official and her hokey-pokey dance of self enrichment while stringing a bunch of chumps along since quitting her las position.
So in your opinion, pointing out that a given attack is from a liberal hell-bent on destroying Palin and is a highly questionable construct is an act of ignoring cracks in the halo.
And then you wonder why you get flamed. The NY Times article I linked to above says McGinnis undoes any legit points he might have to make about Palin by mixing in so much garbage that the reader cannot tell what is trash and what is real.
And your approach does the exact same thing. As I noted above in a different posts, conservatives can disagree about Palin's history. But your approach throws liberal mud into the discussion. So spare me your hysterics. If you want Palin supporters to act in a more civil manner, try improving your own approach as well. You don't put out a fire with gasoline, and liberal gasoline is exactly what many of your posts add to the debate.
That is understood...McGinniss is her sworn enemy and very extreme about it, having rented the house next door and all.
HOWEVER, even if every one of the charges in the book were disproven, I would still have multiple objections to a Palin candidacy. Just her advocacy of Title IX and justification of AA for woman athletes shows me that she is no anti-government constitutionalist when it is convenient for her to take a liberal position. And there is the matter of her voice. I mentioned yesterday that she could deliver an excellent, conservative speech which would look wonderful on paper but with her delivery would come out shrill and possibly abrasive depending on her level of agitation.
IOW, it’s her tone. Her conservatism is mostly strong but her tone is way too hard for me to take.
But who am I? Why would anybody care what I or any other FReeper thinks?
We are still entitled to our own opinions, aren’t we?
I am not going to flame anyone who raises conservative points of discussion regarding Palin, and your points above are just that. I may disagree with them, but I will respect them as being put forth from a conservative point of view. And regarding her voice, my wife feels the same way about it. So it isn't just you in that regard.
What really raises my hackles is when an FR poster embraces liberal attacks on Palin that are either falsehoods or just raw character attacks like what McGinnis did. A core function of FR is to fight the liberal and establishment RINO corrupt big-government duopoly and the lies they use to attack anyone who is a threat to their control of such. Whatever you think of Palin, she did just that in knocking off Governor Murkowski and beating the corrupt Alaska GOP machine. We need more politicians who can do that and then not turn around and not get corrupted once they have the power themselves.
I will freely admit I can get VERY heated when I see someone on FR give any kind of credence to those attacks. We should ALL fight these attacks, even if they are against a candidate we don't particularly like. I have criticized Bachmann and Perry over conservative issues. But I also have criticized spinners and MSM liberal attacks on those candidates. To me, it's like the scene in Animal House - "He can't to that to our pledges - only WE can do that to our pledges."
We need to defend conservatives when they are under attack from liberals and establishment RINOs, not join in.
If Palin critics see that as some kind of Palin worship, they are way off base. Probably because they feel no qualms against picking up and using the liberal attack hammers when it suits their own opinion and agenda.
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.