Replies

Whats the mission statement have to do with elitists who pay for the “privilege” to belong?

You're mixing two different discussions there, but I'll try to answer you.

First of all, your twerpy snark about 'elitists' is out of order. Jim is asking for our input on the question of funding. There are some Freepers who've consistently donated in the high range since joining. Many haven't, but still try to throw something in the pot at every Freep-a-thon. Do you consider those who consistently manage to generously donate, 'elitists'?

If the funding model changes, and those same people now donate for Premium level memberships annually, should they now be considered 'elitists'?

Your charge is repugnant, and you ought to retract it.

As to Jim's Mission Statement, that answers the confusions about his policies regarding free speech 'rights' on his website. As long as Free Republic is his property (which it most assuredly is), he gets to define the goals, purposes, and policy of the site. Folks who want to stray outside the boundaries of his very clear statements regarding this, are essentially going out of agreement with his Mission Statement.

It couldn't be any clearer to me. Read it again, and slowly digest every word. There's nothing unambiguous about it. It's almost laughable to me that some people continue to be baffled when he shows someone the exit who disagrees.

....."As to Jim's Mission Statement, that answers the confusions about his policies regarding free speech 'rights' on his website..... As long as Free Republic is his property (which it most assuredly is),.... he gets to 'define' the goals, purposes, and policy of the site.... Folks who want to stray outside the boundaries of his very clear statements regarding this, are essentially going out of agreement with his Mission Statement. ...... It couldn't be any clearer to me...... There's nothing unambiguous about it. It's almost laughable to me that some people continue to be baffled when he shows someone the exit who disagrees.".......

I agree....and it is baffling why some don't get this. With Newt still standing in this race, and folks knowing what stands at risk in the general...why on earth they're 'already' supporting Romney defies imagination, IF indeed they are the conservatives they claim.

Further the threads evidence more than just wanting to see Obama out...it often seems like they're 'Promoting Romney". Why do so when they surely know how Jim and others here see Romney as equal to Obama? To me they are asking for discord and to be challenged.... it's just the way it looks on the threads.

I think the anger and bitterness we see is their efforts to change peoples minds about Romney isn't working, rather they're being challenged head on, and yet they want to air their opinions favorable about him none the less. And this is why some are attacking other posters....