Posted on 01/30/2003 12:33:13 AM PST by L.N. Smithee
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:41:45 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Something strange happened during the 2000 Gore-Bush election fiasco you may have missed.
CNN, which was running 24-hour special election coverage, hosted a program with conservative columnist Bob Novak shortly after the disputed election results were returned. Novak was adamant that Al Gore should quit trying to steal the election and concede. To bolster his point, he brought up the results of CNN.com's public-opinion poll "Should Al Gore concede?" Poll results showed that a full 89 percent of the thousands of people who had visited CNN.com and voted had agreed -- Gore should give up the ghost.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Hey, William, you hunk you, lol, how about reading what you idiots post! Pot meet kettle...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't both the Examiner and the Chron now owned by Hearst? Or am I just thinking Examiner? (I mean, not that that changes the fact that it *is* slanted left -- although the Chron is heck of a lot better than the Globe or NYT, I'll give it that)
--CWL
Here, here! She says she actively "monitors" us; if she does, then she sure as heck is reading *this* thread, so hey, Joyce, why can't we hear YOU on here? Post up. WE would like to contact the Chronicle. Anybody there? :-)
--CWL
What? Like calling the French "cheese-eating surrender monkies"? Like comparing Hitlery's thighs to bean-bag chairs? Like pointing out Scott Ritter is a hypocritical, Iraqi boot-licking pervert? Not only should my speech be tolerated (because my observations are 100% the truth), but my speech is protected under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.
It seems to me that the liberal left-wingers are, in fact, the most intolerant group of snot-nosed, sissified, hate-mongering, arrogant, anti-American wimps I can think of. For them, the only tolerable speech comes from their own putrid, festering, phallus-filled oral cavities.
(Sorry, I got carried away. I don't like being called a wackjob.)
I wonder why that is? Could it be that the Clintons are EVIL LIARS who have gotten us in a HUGE MESS overseas because Hillary's "husband" was chasing his "intern" while OUR COUNTRY was being ruined?
Yes, we are mostly good, honest, hard-working people who have HAD IT with LIARS, SCUM and FOOLS who think we are STUPID and can't think for ourselves. They must be talking about themselves. Like a bunch of cattle being driven to market.
Repeat after me...right-wing, scary, zeolots, etc., etc. It's getting old folks. Try a "new" strategy. Hillary's "vast right-wing conspiracy" didn't work years ago. It's not working now either.
Oh, I know, I wasn't disagreeing with, just stating (or re-stating, I guess) the obvious. However I wouldn't put much *weight* on how important the online polls are. I guess it's cuz I know how easily they can be swayed...This is also why Dick Morris' pipedream of "online voting" ain't NEVER gonna happen (or if it does, will be the worst experiment this country has ever dabbled in).
--CWL
Hey Joyce, we are reading the crap you wrote. How about posting here so we can "talk to you". lol! Unless, of course, that was a lie.
Okay, I just spat water on the monitor. :-) But HOW CAN YOU LET THEM OFF SO EASILY, I ask? :p
--CWL
P.S. "Oh, I'm sorry, you wanted *arguments*? This is abuse!" ;-)
Now they are using their resources to intimidate those groups (such as here). A common theme in this piece is that thoughts are allowed here that would be suppressed elsewhere.
"Speech is tolerated there that wouldn't be elsewhere."More deliberate is the attempt to recast Freepers as the new "militia group" of cyberspace:"And it's not typical of that group, but it does speak to a level of tolerance for violent speech on the right that I don't think is appropriate.
"But then, well, there are those other tactics some FReepers have been known to use."Between the compliments, we are being demonized by the Left. Welcome to the club."A small number of FReepers believe so strongly in the ultimate good of their goals that they don't mind advocating or even participating in activities that are scary, violent and illegal."
"Still, it's incidents like this that show a certain scary side of the FReepers."
"There's definitely a sort of hardcore wackjob segment of FReepers"
"And under any other presidential administration, the FReepers might be such a radical fringe that they wouldn't matter much."
"The FReepers represent a narrow fringe within the Republican realm," says Pitt. "And all the people who believe what [FReepers] believe are now running the government."[How narrow can the fringe be if controls all branches of the federal government?]
"I have no doubt most FReepers are honest, law-abiding people. It's just the lunatic fringe I worry about."
-PJ
Excellent points, and I've always BEEN in the club. :p Bring it on, I say, bring it on. :-) People listen to Rush; people post here; they can't stop it. We're also exercising another right at FR -- freedom of assembly. :p
--CWL
P.S. The most damning thing about the article is the lack of...*ding*...a conservative voice, perhaps. But then again, we were all mailed and asked our opinions, right? :-)
Yeah right. Do the math.
Didn't Sharque get canned for reporting this lie?
Then you might want to start by cleaning up your leftist lunatic fringe. It may take you a while because it is so large a portion of your party.
Why do you think Free Rublic was started? How did we grow so large? Joyce, you have missed the boat.
You want to see lunatics? Go to David Allen's Democratic Underground site and peruse the hateful and often unintelligible garbage spewed out a la Linda Blair in The Exorcist. You liberal elitists are arrogant to the point of irrelevancy.
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.