Replies

Thanks, NewLand, for the welcome(?) and for the clarification of the purpose of the site. I must admit, however, that I had originally
found this particular discussion of the administration and the degree to which it demonstrated an adherence to traditional conservative ideology to be quite thought provoking. This was why I was disappointed when the conversation seemed ultimately to degenerate.

I agree that if issues are to be debated, that contributors, both
guests and Freepers, should include citations of sources. It would
make all contributors' arguments more credible. In fact, it seems to
me that well-referenced debates over the issues could go a long way toward the type of grassroots activism that this site advocates. The occasional apparently dissenting view, as it emerges in the forum, could be seen, rather than as a threat, as an opportunity for Freepers to articulate as objectively and convincingly as possible the position of conservatives in response to the view in question. Whether these arguments serve to "convert" the aberrant poster is immaterial, because they would accomplish the more important goal of continuing to build an archive that defines (with civility) the conservative view in contrast to the "opposition".

Finally, I would like to point out that I have not seen anywhere on
the web page any indication that if a poster "quacks" like a liberal it
is suddenly open season. I did notice, however, at the time of my
first post, the request, "Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts." Unless I have misinterpreted this
request, every part of it seems to have been ignored with regard to
communication with and about Alan17b. MelissaA