What has happened to Free Republic

Me | Me

[FF578]

Has anyone noticed that the Liberal influence has spread here into Free Republic. I notice that less and less Conservatives seem to post here, and more and more Libertarians seem to be.

I get a letter from someone named NYpeanut who is mad because I posted a discussion based on the Gender Gap in voting.

I didn't make it up, there is really a huge Gender gap with Female Voters tending toward the more liberal candidate. The discussion went well without name calling, but this person seems to have taken issue to the fact that I pointed out women seem to vote more liberally than men.

All those who are newbies here are considered disruptors, and those who hold a more right-winged view than the average libertarian seem to be kicked out.

Why is this? Is this a Libertarian site now?

I have noticed more and more posters standing up for Abortion, Homosexuality, the Porn Industry and Drugs since I first came to this site back before the 2000 Election.

Are Christian Conservatives(Who make up a large part of the Republican core vote) not allowed here anymore?

Just because one holds to a higher power, and wishes to shape society in accordance with the laws of Almighty God, does not make one a Taliban Milita member.

[michigander]

Same Old Shi Stuff eh?

[Pistias]

let each make their own choice

about murder...is it right for me?

[Pistias]

Therefore, those who oppose our viewpoints are against freedom

They are against freedom (i.e., license), but are for freedom (i.e., liberty). Ever read The Republic? Lots of this sort of aristocratic vs. timarchic vs. oligarchic vs. democratic vs. tyrannical stuff in there.

[headsonpikes]

"I know plenty of hippies that have switched to chew."

This may be the only statement in your multitudinous postings that has a foundation, however tenuous, in reality.

But that speaks to your place in society, not to our concern about 'Big Brother'.

[freefly]

What you are seeing is people realizing that those who claim to be "conservatives"
are actually big-government socialists with a different agenda than the "liberals".
Republicans and democrats are both big-government parties. Both are actually "left-wing" socialists.
Each differs in the details, but both want big-government programs to force people to follow their personal agendas.
That is SOCIALISM (whether it is conservative socialism or liberal socialism, it is still SOCIALISM).
Libertarians (and the Constitution Party) are the ones that are truly on the right.
They believe in individual freedom and responsibility, not big government.
When people start waking up, they realize that big-government is using huge amounts of THEIR money
and is intruding in THEIR lives to support various socialist agendas.
Most people just want to live their own life and, if the other guy takes a road to hell, then that's THEIR business.
More and more people are figuring it out: they realize that they have been suckered by pro-big-government propaganda.
They may not be big L Libertarians, but they find that they are are little l libertarians
when they realize what the democratic, Republican, and Libertarians all REALLY stand for.
It's what this site is all about:
Rolling back decades of governmental largesse, rooting out political fraud and corruption,
and to champion causes that further "TRUE" conservatism in America.
You don't do that by supporting socialist parties.
Not even the conservative socialist party.

[bluefish]

Actually, it is people like you who believe your authoritarian approach to society will end with drugs and porn that is the problem. This is what I see as naive. You want to limit the argument to these issues and many libertarians fall into the trap of defending them to defend the greater protection of personal freedom. This is what allows you to come back and accuse them of being dope-smoking liberals blah blah. I haven't even defended drugs and you still resort to the refrain, not aware that my issue is a broader, more philosophical one rooted in a recognition of the slippery slope, which you conveniently bury your head in the sand and ignore.

You can't be reasoned with, and I have no desire to listen to baseless charges from a {WARNING TO WOULD BE ABUSE BUTTON PUSHERS - NOTE THE FOLLOW UP SENTENCE} pinko, porn loving, dope smoking, sister raping homosexual like yourself. Now see, that was rather silly, wasn't it? And the charge was no more grounded in fact than those you continue to level at me. I'm finished with you.

[maxwell]

All those who are newbies here are considered disruptors, and those who hold a more right-winged view than the average libertarian seem to be kicked out.

You're almost contradicting yourself, dude. The newbies are the ones who're dragging the place down in the first place. I mean, hell, look at me.

Whaddya mean by "more right-winged view"? I haven't noticed anybody (except flamers) having a problem with me saying I don't like flamers... for example... No shortage of gun-lovers around here. No shortage of homeschoolers. No shortage of folks who think Harry Potter is the Anti-Christ.

[maxwell]

the logic of libertarianism

BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[DouglasKC]

"I know plenty of hippies that have switched to chew."

This may be the only statement in your multitudinous postings that has a foundation, however tenuous, in reality.

But that speaks to your place in society, not to our concern about 'Big Brother'.

That's so sad that you have to surf through threads and respond to comments about hippies who have switched to chew.

Are you feeling okay?

[DouglasKC]

Actually, it is people like you who believe your authoritarian approach to society will end with drugs and porn that is the problem. This is what I see as naive. You want to limit the argument to these issues and many libertarians fall into the trap of defending them to defend the greater protection of personal freedom. This is what allows you to come back and accuse them of being dope-smoking liberals blah blah. I haven't even defended drugs and you still resort to the refrain, not aware that my issue is a broader, more philosophical one rooted in a recognition of the slippery slope, which you conveniently bury your head in the sand and ignore.

So...do you want to legalize drugs or not? We can expand the argument to porn after you answer this one... :-)

You can't be reasoned with, and I have no desire to listen to baseless charges from a {WARNING TO WOULD BE ABUSE BUTTON PUSHERS - NOTE THE FOLLOW UP SENTENCE} pinko, porn loving, dope smoking, sister raping homosexual like yourself. Now see, that was rather silly, wasn't it? And the charge was no more grounded in fact than those you continue to level at me. I'm finished with you.

Well what you don't know is that I always get the last word in.

[headsonpikes]

"Are you feeling okay?"

Thanks for your concern. I feel good...

I knew that I would, now...

AUTHORITARIANISM DOES NOT TRUMP CONSTITUTIONALISM.

No exceptions for chaw-addled mouth-breathers.

[mlocher]

why can't you decide...without making the decision for everyone else?

god set up a set of civil laws so that we could live together in peace and harmony. these are not religious based laws that discuss how to worship god. man must not set up a law that contradicts god's civil law. hence, we should not foster abortions nor should we encourage homosexuality. these two things are examples of murder and causing the break up of the family.

[beowolf]

Hi lady!-)

I think we now have a new word in the lexicon 'talibanism' connotating fundamentalists that would have everyone under their self-imposed yoke.

Here... after a while you won't even notice the irritation from the hairshirt or the scars from self-flagellation. Pain is your friend!-)

[beowolf]

Yeah, but ya gotta find humor in the material presented. That is the challenge!-)

[bluefish]

We could go on forever about legalizing drugs and the issue has been beaten to death on FR. This is why I prefer not to delve into it. That, and the fact that I don't pretend to have all the answers and refuse to polarize on one side or the other with absolutes. I have witnessed problems with the WOD and I have seen the slippery slope I mentioned catch NON-DRUG issues off guard, using the WOD laws, propaganda and governmental powers. Health freedom issues are important to me, and I am not talking about pot. This is what steers me towards libertarian arguments. I was just like you in my thinking until I saw certain freedoms eliminated by big government / big business collusion. When you pay a $10 "fat tax" for a big mac one day, you may understand what I am talking about and reconsider the wisdom of allowing government (which may be BY THE SHEEP but is not necessarily FOR THE PEOPLE) to make makre choices for society about what is moral, healthy, good or right for society.

[DouglasKC]

Thanks for your concern. I feel good...I knew that I would, now...
AUTHORITARIANISM DOES NOT TRUMP CONSTITUTIONALISM. No exceptions for chaw-addled mouth-breathers.

See post 770...

[DouglasKC]

We could go on forever about legalizing drugs and the issue has been beaten to death on FR. This is why I prefer not to delve into it. That, and the fact that I don't pretend to have all the answers and refuse to polarize on one side or the other with absolutes. I have witnessed problems with the WOD and I have seen the slippery slope I mentioned catch NON-DRUG issues off guard, using the WOD laws, propaganda and governmental powers. Health freedom issues are important to me, and I am not talking about pot. This is what steers me towards libertarian arguments.

So...do you want to legalize drugs or not?

I was just like you in my thinking until I saw certain freedoms eliminated by big government / big business collusion. When you pay a $10 "fat tax" for a big mac one day, you may understand what I am talking about and reconsider the wisdom of allowing government (which may be BY THE SHEEP but is not necessarily FOR THE PEOPLE) to make makre choices for society about what is moral, healthy, good or right for society.

I find it amazing that you are perceptive enough to discern my entire thought processes and motivation based on just a few written paragraphs.

Was it the LSD that helped you do this??

[mlocher]

republicans and democrats are both big government parties

there are members of the republican party that are for big government. most conservative republicans, on the other hand, are laissez-faire toward the economy and want to get the government out of our hair.

the reagan revolution cut taxation by about 25%. taxes during the clinton admin went up significantly. last year forbes ran an article on taxes and party in the white house. there was a very strong correlation: taxes go up during a dem reign and go down during a rep reign -- for every term since WW2.

i want government out of my hair. i want to spend more of my money.

the republicans give me a viable alternative to democrat's growing socialist program. they also (at least the conservative ones) believe in laws that are consistent with biblical civil laws in the old testament (jew, christians and moslem should be able to more or less agree to these).

all i know is that members of the libertarian party believe in as little government as possible. but i have yet to figure out the values that undergird the philosophy.

can you articulate these for me?

thanks!

[bluefish]

Was it the LSD that helped you do this??

No, you actually conveyed it all to me via telephone during one of your Mohammed Omar style seizures in which God told you what laws to impose on your fellow man.

[Whilom]

True Libertarians are not statist Liberals, but the Libertarian Party attracts to its ranks many, many Liberals with the usual Liberal agenda. Thus, they camouflage themselves as "progressives" in the Libertarian tent. True Libertarians are soul brothers of the anarchists. That's why anarchists are often called Libertarians who like to brawl; they're the rowdy element in the Party. How do statist Liberals and anarchists end up in the same Party with Libertarians? A shared vision: No rules except the ones they want.