Examiner columnist blasts "FreeRepugnant.com"

sf examiner ^ | Feb 15, 02 | Debby Morse

[churchillbuff]

FreeRepugnant.com

By Debby Morse Of The Examiner Staff

AFTER MY COLUMN last Friday about President Bush's decision to classify fetuses as children, I received a spate of angry mail. One kind soul e-mailed me an alert that the column had been posted on FreeRepublic.com, "The Premier Conservative News Forum," and predicted that I'd be getting "an onslaught of hate mail from rabid right-wing freaks."

(Quick glimpse at some of the messages I got: "Is that the way you spend all your time? Hating people?" "Would you look down from Heaven and defend your mother if she had aborted you?" "Your panic and fear is obvious by the way you write.")

So I thought I ought to pay a visit to the Web site. On the FreeRepublic home page, I was welcomed thus: "We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!" No objections there from me. Freedom of speech; gotta love it. And who's in favor of political fraud and corruption? Not I. Still ... I don't know why, but that "Hoo-yah!" unsettled me. (Maybe because it's like "yahoo" backwards?)

Anyway, the site is a collection of forums and postings on various umbrella topics such as foreign affairs, activism and philosophy, with links to sites like the Cato Institute (a libertarian forum on public policy), the Drudge Report, the Heritage Foundation (a conservative think tank), the Rush Limbaugh show and the Linda Tripp Defense Fund (with a post-make-over photo -- hey, why not?).

And here's the best part: It's a great opportunity to "eavesdrop" on the conversations of people who chat there, seemingly secure in the belief that they are among friends and can say whatever they want. They can! First Amendment! But, boy, a lot of what they said there about my column is even nastier than what they e-mailed to me. * * *

LET'S LISTEN IN. Breakem writes: "Come out with your legs up and let the baby go and nobody gets hurt." Clintonh8r says: "Debby's a little crampy today, huh?" MissAmericanPie wishes me this fortune: "May her uterus be as barren as her soul. I pity the unlucky man that finds his way there, or the baby that tries to find warmth, love, or life in that cold, void, steel locker she calls her uterus."

Some of the postings were so bizarre that saner heads felt obliged to butt in and warn them to cool it. Following a useless exchange of comments that fetuses are "respiring" beings, Hank Kerchief pleads: "These continued ignorant arguments are playing right into the hands of the pro-choice movement. Please think before helping to increase the number of abortions being performed every day."

One of the shoddier bits of logic came in an e-mail: "You hate President Bush because he is a conservative and a Republican. I despise you because you are a traitor to this country. You tear down a president during wartime with false charges. You may be a citizen of this country, but you are not an American. You are also a pretty lousy feminist; you promote an outdated, divisive political agenda that does not serve women. You want to deal in reality? Here is the scoop. Most of my friends and I have concluded that being home is a fabulous choice. We choose our families. You liberals choose an outdated, dangerous political agenda which certainly contributed to the 9-11 horror. Liberals elected President Clinton who 'fiddled' while bin Laden plotted. You mock the victims of 9-11 with your despicable column."

Honey, I'm going to have to revoke your license to argue.

I also received an e-mail with a photo of a very mature fetus' arm protruding through -- what? -- a hole in a pregnant belly? A bloody image meant to shock. Turns out the same photo is posted on the FreeRepublic thread about my column, but the contributor, calling himself Revelation 911, confides that it's actually a picture of in-utero surgery and that the gestation went full-term. * * *

THESE PEOPLE SEEM to hate women. Even MissAmericanPie says, "No doubt her kind are very odd, the Jane Fonda militant female type. I've always kind of pictured Eve as being like that, more feline than female, resentful and rebellious against everything she was meant to be, finding no satisfaction in anything else either."

There are a couple of ugly remarks regarding anatomy and even rape, and a bunch of digs at San Francisco. A few people suggested it was time for another earthquake here. It was supposed to be funny, but it amounts to a wish for my death. There's a lot of that among pro-lifers, I guess. Someone suggested advocates for choice should commit suicide!

After reading "arguments" like that, I'm more dedicated than ever to wanting to keep my body private.

E-mail Debby Morse at dmorse@sfexaminer.com

Read the postings at : www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/624590/posts

[TLBSHOW]

ok

[UB355]

indexing

[RonDog]

Got guts, Debby?

If so, welcome to the party, and roll with the punches.

If not, get me a beer...
because some of us paleo-feminists are working up quite a thirst trying to break up this Big Government's Co-Dependent Girlfriend Idea you're proposing for every woman in America...

Hoo-yah, Mercuria! You go girl!

FYI, Debby: "Hoo-yah!" is the "traditional BUD/S send-off" of the Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL school:

[Dec31,1999]

I think you will agree that the more objectionable posts such as the ones I refer to will not be too much to delete. I mean, if we can not get rid of the few posts advocating mass murder and extermination of an entire race of people then we deserve what criticism we get.

Sounds like a clever rationale to curb free speech. Sort of like communist party propaganda. You should be more honest.

[sweetliberty]

"If not, get me a beer...because some of us paleo-feminists are working up quite a thirst trying to break up this Big Government's Co-Dependent Girlfriend Idea you're proposing for every woman in America..."

Bravo Merc! It really makes me angry when females like that presume to speak for women. She sure as h**l doesn't speak for me. Never did, never will! I believe that God made men and women different for good reason and while we can do a great many things that were traditionally considered to be reserved for men, there are many things we are not cut out for. I also believe we have the power to plan careers and many other wonderful things. I believe that the most noble purpose for which we were designed was having children and that it's the greatest honor we could have to be entrusted with the raising and teaching of the next generation of Americans. And finally, I believe that a woman has many choices, including reproductive ones, but when a pregnancy occurs at an inconvenient time and messes up your plans, that's when you change your plans.

[ItsDocGerbilsWorld]

THESE PEOPLE SEEM to hate women

50% of murdered babies are female but I bet old gal doesn't bother herself with thinking about that (or much else).

[ItsDocGerbilsWorld]

She is probably ignorant of it's meaning. She's a newpaper columnist, after all, and doesn't need to know what she's writing about.

When I went to college, if any of my friends dared mention "journalism" as a major -- parents would go nuts. It was understood that people who went into "journalism" did so because they weren't smart enough to do anything else.

[The Right Stuff]

Rev; isn't that the photo of the baby that had in-utero surgery, was patched up and delivered full term?

Drudge lost his TV show over insisting that the viewers see that remarkable photo.

[Dec31,1999]

On Fox News Channel, no less! They've done a lot, but don't really have the cajones they need.

[RonDog]

I wonder how many of those Emails were sent by Liberals to denigrate Conservatives and FR.

You may be right.
I am not yet sure that we need to break out the tinfoil hats, though, and assume a conspiracy of crafty liberals - although I certainly would not put such fraud and deceit beyond them.

First, most liberals are not that bright, or they would not BE liberals. ;)

And second, she must not have received very many REALLY nasty e-mails - from ANYBODY - or else she would have referenced them more directly.
I agree with Dan Day, in post #230:

"...Read her examples again -- despite her "oh my god!" reaction to them, they're *awfully* tame compared to the sort of stuff you'll find on *any* spirited internet discussion on *any* forum. I've personally received countless examples of *far* worse attacks -- *from liberals*. Hell, I have a long file of posts I've collected which consists of nothing but liberals wanting to discuss the penises of gun owners (that seems to happen an awful lot on gun-control discussions -- if anyone's fixated on penises, I can tell you it's not the *Pro*-gun people...)

If she got any "really" bad stuff, why is she only quoting the "nyah nyah" posts to "prove" her belief that FreeRepublic is full of nasty "hating" conservatives? (Furthermore, how does she know which emails came from *FreeRepublic* regulars, versus people who came across her column in other ways?)

Her examples of "hate" don't rise above "we don't like you very much..." - Dan Day

[The Right Stuff]

Whoa, Chris...that is one of the most insightful things I have read on FR (and I've been around since '98). You've got it nailed. Have you written a book (preferably a college textbook) yet?

[Dec31,1999]

It's been my pleasure to have spent the better part of the day reading what some of the smartest people in America, have written on this thread.

[Dan from Michigan]

THESE PEOPLE SEEM to hate women.

So disagreeing with Morse and despising her stance on abortion means we hate women? WTF is she talking about? This is a rant by a lunatic. That's not my opinion, but an undisputable fact.

Maybe if these pro-abort lunatics ever met someone that was born 3 months early, they would have a different take on the subject.

[Revelation 911]

Drudge lost his TV show over insisting that the viewers see that remarkable photo.

Its the same pic - I didnt know this was the pic that did him in though - (we dont have cable)

[Dan from Michigan]

Sour spleeen venting from some feminist whack who spends her days snorkling in the noisome sewer known as Sodom on the Bay.

Ignore her.

I'm with you on that. I wouldn't waste my time on her.

[Salvation]

If the writer is still lurking, let me reassure you that the picture of the tiny hand grasping the surgeon's finger is legitimate and you can view it on UrbanLegends.

[Fraulein]

Bump!

[Salvation]

Baby Samuel

[RonDog]

If the writer is still lurking, let me reassure you that the picture of the tiny hand grasping the surgeon's finger is legitimate and you can view it on UrbanLegends.

Sort of. Unfortunately, the folks at http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/outrage/thehand.htm have started to EDITORIALIZE quite a bit in their "explanations" of Urban Legends, and taken some considerable liberties with how they define the "legend" that that are attempting to prove or debunk.

In THIS case, they say that the "legend" is:

Claim:   The U.S. news media suppressed a story about an amazing in-the-womb fetal surgery.

Status:   False.

...so that they can call it "FALSE."

Check it out for yourself. It is very disappointing (to me) to see such a LONG (and largely irrelevant diatribe) posted there, but they DO eventually concede THESE facts:

"...The remarkable operation (and picture) described in the piece above (taken from an article in the 30 October 1999 issue of the Irish Independent)... ...describes surgery performed in the womb on a 21-week-old fetus to correct an occurrence of spina bifida...

...This photograph was the center of a controversy in November 1999 when Matt Drudge walked off the set of his Fox News Channel program after network executives refused to allow him to display the picture during a segment about abortion. Drudge (an opponent of abortion) insisted he wanted to use the photograph to demonstrate a point about fetal development and intended to identify it correctly; Fox felt that his using the picture would have been misleading because it depicted a completely different medical procedure (emergency fetal surgery) and would therefore have been a misrepresentation. (This picture has been mislabelled on many Internet web sites as a photograph of an abortion in progress rather than a fetal surgery.)

Although this story and picture may not have been "shown on every television newscast and run in every newspaper in America," they were given widespread coverage here. The print version of the newspaper USA Today ran a lengthy article with photos (including the one shown above) about the surgery nearly two months before the Irish Independent piece cited above, and they ran a follow-up article when little Samuel was delivered by Caesarean section three months later. Additionally, a segment about a similar surgery was aired on the TV news program 20/20 in January 2000. This may not be "every television newscast and newspaper in America," but a prominent story in the USA's largest daily newspaper and a top-rated news program provide no small audience..."

Bottom line:

If you get to define the "legend" - in this case as "not getting enough media coverage" - you can call just about ANYTHING "FALSE."

[Salvation]

RonDog, I would agree with you about the UrbanLegends site.

I misspoke. The site I posted was from Truth or Fiction.com. I don't use UrbanLegends any more. Maybe it was just that slant that helped me find a new site to check out weird emails, etc.