How Free is Free Republic

kuro5hin.org ^ | Mon Dec 29th, 2003 at 09:53:55 PM EST | felixrayman

[visagoth]

I didn't find this posted here on FR - so here we go.....

	How Free is Free Republic? By felixrayman Mon Dec 29th, 2003 at 09:53:55 PM EST
	Free Republic is an online story and discussion site similar to Kuro5hin.org, but with an explicitly conservative bias. The site proclaims itself to be "an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web." Intrigued, I proceeded to offer some comments to stories there, addressing some factual errors and dissenting with some conservative views. The result was a quick lesson in the right-wing view of free expression. The experiment left an open question - where do you go on the web to engage conservatives in open debate? Where is the right-wing version of k5?

One article on the Free Republic site entitled "Dean Finally Shoots Self Somewhere Other Than Own Foot" attacks Howard Dean for his statement that "The capture of Saddam has not made America safer". The poster of the article goes on to claim, "If any of the Left is paying attention, Dean has just officially proven the he is DEFINITELY clueless when it comes to foreign policy. Another in a long line of RATS that just doesn't get it". My reply that "Actually it's pretty obvious that the capture of Saddam hasn't made the world safer - international airline flights had to be cancelled a few days ago due to threats of terrorism and in Iraq the last few days have been as bloody for coalition forces as the days before Saddam's capture" was removed by a moderator within a few minutes. A comment posted to another Free Republic story, "Howard Dean: The Mayor of Milwaukee", in an attempt to belittle Howard Dean's fiscal record claimed that the budget of one county in Illinois was larger than the budget of the state of Vermont. It claimed the budget of the County of DuPage, near Chicago, to be $1.6 billion, and that the budget for the entire state of Vermont was $73 million. After a quick google search, I found this assertion to be incorrect. The reply I posted 'The "$73 million" figure you quote is for the Vermont Municipal Employees' Retirement System, not the entire Vermont budget. Vermont's budget calls for 1.8 billion in state spending with another billion in federal spending', was removed within a few minutes. The Free Republic claims in its help section that, "While Free Republic is not edited or censored, it does reserve the right to remove any postings that are considered inappropriate. Examples of inappropriate posts are those that are off-subject or contain advertising, pornography, obscene material, racist material, Nazi (or other hate group) material, materials promoting violence, threats or illegal acts, etc". It would be interesting to know under which category my replies were considered to fall. For another example, a response to the story "You Might be a Leftist If . . ." read, in part "The only meaningful difference is between those who believe in the original intent interpretation of the Constitution and those who do not. Those who believe in the Constitution believe in individual liberty. Those who ignore or rewrite the Constitution do not believe in individual liberty. This is the only difference which matters. " I responded to this poster with the comment "Individual liberty? Didn't the constitution as written specifically allow for the continuation of slavery as an American institution"? Within minutes, the post was removed by a moderator. In addition, after this third reply, my ability to post comments on the site was revoked. So obviously, the Free Republic is not free, except in the sense that the German Democratic Republic was democratic, or the sense that supporting the PATRIOT Act is patriotic. Web site operators certainly have a right to set whatever rules they choose for their users. And a quick test showed that there are sites with a left-wing bias that are just as cowardly as Free Republic when it comes to allowing an actual debate. The question remains, are there any sites with a conservative bias that allow such debate?

Full discussion: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/12/27/173837/60

---

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - 2001 Kuro5hin.org Inc.

[Do Be]

Good job. Keep deleting their posts and throwing them out. They don't get it. They never will.

Happy New Year and God bless to all.

[kimmie7]

I must agree with you. Like most here at FR, I am not a member of the 'sheeple' population, and I research everything I can to make an informed decision. I lurked here a long time before joining for that reason. After I had read, researched, and felt my IQ growing ( ;-) ) I determined that JimRob is definitely one of the good guys, and FR is a great place. I wish I could make JimRob rich...he's done a great thing here for not only for we conservatives, but news addicts as well.

[optimistically_conservative]

As always, if something is pulled you feel should stay, let us know.

Thanks!

[Republican Wildcat]

A few of them. Others over there are venting their frustration that their efforts at disruption have failed as they have been subject to the ZOT.

[Dont Mention the War]

Apparently they had a mass exodus of lefties to some other site, equaling things out a bit.

Do you know where to? Just curious.

[Republican Wildcat]

Exactly as I suspected. Thanks for the info.

[Britton J Wingfield]

to http://www.hulver.com/scoop

according to one poster in the thread in question.

Haven't really looked at it, though.

[sawyer]

I have trouble with this as I have always played the devil's advocate. It just seems to be how I look at life so I do not do well on this type thing. I can still hear my father asking us,'What is that thing on top of your head for if not to think.' We always needed a better reason than everyone does or said, in growing up.

[Dont Mention the War]

I've posted quite a few things that are not necessarily within the FR scope, and have never even been warned. However, I've also been around here for a while, and it seems to me that long-time posters get more leeway. I can't think of any forum where you can go in and start throwing bombs immediately, and not be banned.

Quite right. On a lot of discussion sites, mailing lists in particular, newbies are automatically put on probationary status the moment they register, and all their posts must be approved by a moderator before anyone can read them. Only when they are deemed to be nondisruptive are they taken off probation.

[Republican Wildcat]

It got me ticked because you can call me anything you want, but if you label me as anything other than conservative, I'm going to get ticked.

Communist Anarchist! . . . . . . . . just kidding. :-)

[The Raven]

If we were a free country and IF we never had liberals and IF everyone had followed the Constitution instead of rewriting it - we'd have a federal government the size of a pea and we wouldn't have a Free Republic web site because it wouldn't be needed. And I would have retired at age 40 because the US growth rates would be 20%/year - poverty would have been long gone and wouldn't be typing this.

[CyberAnt]

Thank you Jim for making FR the only place I spend hours visiting.

[jagrmeister]

LOL. Liberals learn the hard way that uninformed, unintelligent commentary is not suffered on Free Republic. Coherent dissent that is well thought through will gladly be entertained. Unfortunately, what passes for "intelligence" amongst liberal rabble are half-baked conspiracy theories, naiviety on matters of national security and foreign policy, and knee-jerk opposition to Bush's policy consisting of hollow, laughable accusations.

If the charge is that we do not suffer fools gladly at FR, I plead guilty.

[CyberAnt]

"try to hard to be heard"

Because they believe that being "heard" is Free Speech. Free Speech is the RIGHT TO SPEAK, not the RIGHT TO BE HEARD. Liberals haven't figured that out.

[sauropod]

"The scope of FR allows a pretty wide range of debate. If I were to characterize it, though, I'd say it's closer to libertarian-anarchist than conservative."

I would disagree. Its just that the word "conservative" has been redefined. cf: CPAC.

[sauropod]

Thank you for the clarification. 'Pod.

[glannon]

kuro5hin is left-wing? stupid mods.

[Annie03]

LOL- how right you are. DH & I discuss this often. Also no one is required to furnish a platform for what one wants to say. Lefties don't get that either.

[Kay Soze]

One breif section of the four screen pages of rules at DU:


They sure have alot of rules for liberals!


WHO IS WELCOME ON DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, AND WHO IS NOT

We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals.

This is a "big tent" message board. We welcome a wide range of progressive opinion. You will likely encounter many points of view here that you disagree with.

We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned.

If you have been banned from Democratic Underground, you are not permitted to log on again using a different username. Previously banned members will be immediately banned, regardless of behavior.

People who repeatedly and willfully break the rules, or who generally engage in rude, antisocial behavior, will be banned. It doesn't matter if you are a progressive or a long-term member of this board.

[weegee]

My reply that "Actually it's pretty obvious that the capture of Saddam hasn't made the world safer - international airline flights had to be cancelled a few days ago due to threats of terrorism and in Iraq the last few days have been as bloody for coalition forces as the days before Saddam's capture" was removed by a moderator within a few minutes.

Boo frickin' hoo.

The capture of Saddam won't end ALL evil in the world and only a simpleton would extrapolate the statement that "the capture of Saddam has made the world safer" to mean so.

So far another despot, Lybia's Qadaffi, has seen the writing on the wall and helped to make the world safer by ending his own WMD program. Saddam won't personally pose a threat either as he is in custody and those who held out hope that he would return to power have been proven wrong.

Rome wasn't built in a day.