Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Some Conservatives Need To Be Taken To The Woodshed (vanity)
Me ^ | 18-October-2005 | Erik Latranyi

Posted on 10/18/2005 8:18:22 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi

It is time to take some conservatives to the woodshed.

With a heavy heart, I write the above after visiting Free Republic this morning.

Why?

Simply our discourse is degenerating. I am dismayed at the amount of name-calling taking place in these pages. I am even more dismayed that this name-calling is being conducted by conservatives against conservatives.

I understand the anger and disappointment stemming from the Miers nomination, but also inclusive of the budget deficit, education department, immigration, etc. These are matters that bother me as well.

Unfortunately, the tone on Free Republic bothers me even more. When conservatives call each other names and friendly disagreement over issues degenerates into those proclaiming to be "real conservatives" versus "phony conservatives" we only bow to our lowest common denominator.

Rush Limbaugh calls this the "conservative crackdown". In many ways he is right (as Rush is so often). Conservatives do not want stealth candidates. We worked hard to win and will continue to work hard to increase our majorities and enact our agenda.

We are proud conservatives and we want to proclaim this from the mountain tops!

We also want those who represent us to be proud as well. We do not want apologies. We do not want stealth. We do not need to hide behind "compassionate conservative" labels.

We are the majority and we will remain the majority as long as we continue to educate the public about what conservatism is and why we demand responsibility from both the individual and the gov't.

However, lately, we are calling each other names.

This is liberal-speak. We do not want to stoop to the level of our enemies. We should not use their tactics, either.

Conservatives use logic and reason to support our ideas. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

We are not doing that, folks!

Too many of us are so caught up lately that we forget how to be civil. If you want to call names and use the F-bomb, go to DU. You will find that language replaces truth and fact everywhere.

And that is what names do, isn't it? Names replace truth and fact.

But we are conservatives. Truth and fact are what got us this far and it will be truth and fact that continue our rise to roll back 80 years of liberalism.

Some of us back President Bush and trust his judgement. Some of us do not. That is OK. That is healthy for our movement.

What is unhealthy for our movement is this name-calling.

Let it stop. Let us debate Harriet Miers over facts and truth. Stop pronouncing yourself a "true conservative" and anybody who backs President Bush a "Bush-Bot". That is liberal-speak.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bohica; bush; bushbot; callawaaahmbulance; conservatives; fakeconservative; holierthanthou; miers; pedantry; poopoohead
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-159 next last
To: Alberta's Child

I just find it downright laughable when a big-government hack like William Kristol publicly denounces the nomination of Miers for not being "conservative enough."




And you are backing the nomination because Bush nominated her or because she is the "most qualified? I suspect it is because Bush nominated her and you trust him. Admirable, if naive.

If Bill Kristol is a "Big Government Hack"....what the hell is George W?


101 posted on 10/18/2005 9:28:48 AM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you are not willing to fight the Meiers nomination, I don't care what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Dr. I. C. Spots
What would Moe Howard say about all this??

Say Uncle!


102 posted on 10/18/2005 9:28:58 AM PDT by w_over_w (GO ASTROS!!! Make it to the big one . . . this time?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: bray
Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops

Everyday . . . and then some.

103 posted on 10/18/2005 9:30:30 AM PDT by w_over_w (GO ASTROS!!! Make it to the big one . . . this time?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: bray

Calling people with deeply held beliefs "bushbots" is pathetic ignorance.




Kissing the buttocks of GWB is NOT a deeply held belief. It is the selling out of what beliefs you do have because he is our President. I am not saying you are doing this but oh so many are, esp on the borders.


104 posted on 10/18/2005 9:32:25 AM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you are not willing to fight the Meiers nomination, I don't care what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
Disruptors turn out to be people who only come on to these threads to stir up trouble.

I whole heartedly agree. I do notice though, that some genuine Freepers can be abrasive. Canadian Freepers are aware of this. This is the assumption that ALL Canadians are of the ilk, that is typical of much of Canada's ruling elite.

So far so good. Nothing like free speech. This is possibly the ONLY site of respectability where I can sound off. Sure I could go on a hate site- ain't gonna do that.

It is the master himself that sets a standard- the El Rushbo. Rush will get a mild flaming, he then utterly charms the flamer- ie: sort of that he might believe that person is really a reasonable human being deep down. If not, they are toast.

I try to educate some of the flamers, about our 37% popular vote Liberal government.

To be flamed, is the price I now am willing pay. P.S.(Laughs).

105 posted on 10/18/2005 9:48:53 AM PDT by Peter Libra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy; Erik Latranyi
I believe that you are proving this thread initiator's point. No discourse at all, just attack, attack, attack.


If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
Also, please see The Backside of American History
You'll love this 187 page .pdf (1.99 MB)

106 posted on 10/18/2005 9:50:24 AM PDT by rdb3 (Have you ever stopped to think, but forgot to start again?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
Notice which side responds to you by name calling and which side wants a discourse.

You make my point beyond shadow of a doubt! You have nothing to offer other than cheap name calling. As for the borders, you won't allow any discussion on that issue.

Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops

107 posted on 10/18/2005 9:50:58 AM PDT by bray (Islam IS a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
"Conservative" branch of the Republican party as represented by the tantrum throwing George Will, those with the tendency to go off the deep end like Rush Limbaugh have done a lot of damage with their childish behavior and need to grow up, start acting responsibly, doing more good than harm and behaving like mature adults.

Since you failed to provide an example of what you're talking about, one is left to conclude that "childish", according to you, is defined by disagreement with Bush. Sorry, but that's a very childish attitude on your part.

108 posted on 10/18/2005 9:55:10 AM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; bray

I believe that you are proving this thread initiator's point. No discourse at all, just attack, attack, attack.




I have sat here and watched for weeks as the Pro-Meiers side hurled invective after personal attack at those who think for themselves and do not toe the party line. I have read this vanity and most of the replies to it. They are all about how the anti-Meiers folks are so mean. Yes we are. When we are fighting back. I have seen posts by bray on Meiers threads and now here he/she is whining about this garbage. I, and many conservatives I know on this forum WILL NOT stand by and watch our President screw up by the numbers on so many issues and not call him on it.

If some folks, who believe the man walks on water can't handle that and want to start hurling names and insults, we can fight back just as hard.


109 posted on 10/18/2005 9:59:10 AM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you are not willing to fight the Meiers nomination, I don't care what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: HelloooClareece
What I find so disconcerting is the group who proclaims to love the constitution so much that they are unwilling to give this woman a fair hearing because they feel that by not being a legal scholar or judge that she is unqualified to sit on the SCOTUS. That is precisely what the drafters of the constitution wanted to avoid.

No, the drafters of the Consitution did not want to avoid the public coming to their own conclusions using information available to them, and instructing their servants based on that information.

110 posted on 10/18/2005 10:01:40 AM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
If some folks, who believe the man walks on water can't handle that and want to start hurling names and insults, we can fight back just as hard.

I don't think the man can walk on water. Nevertheless, have it your way. I've said my piece.


If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
Also, please see The Backside of American History
You'll love this 187 page .pdf (1.99 MB)

111 posted on 10/18/2005 10:04:42 AM PDT by rdb3 (Have you ever stopped to think, but forgot to start again?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: TBP
Nice post. Bears Repeating. This was my tipping point. I had tried to ignore all you just mentioned.

Bushbots are not just anyone who backs Bush on Miers, but those who back him no matter what he does, who backed him on Federalizing education, on McVain-Vaingold, on the largest entitlement program in 40 years, on his massive ag spending, on AIDS aid for Africa, on his refusal to do anything about the borders, on issue after issue after issue. And they back Miers too, not for substantive reasons (as some do, although I disagree with tehm), but because they "support our President." Sorry, but that's not a good reason.

They support open-borders Republicans over Minutemen. They support RINOs in Senate and House races over principled conservatives -- after all,the White House backs them, so that's reason enough, isn't it? If you have a good reason for supporting any of this, that's one thing. I may disagree, but I can at least respect it. But "we have to support our President" is not a good reason. Sorry.

112 posted on 10/18/2005 10:07:28 AM PDT by wardaddy (Peace and love and warm hugs to everyone...sandalwood and patchouli too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Peter Libra

Well .. I welcome Canadians to this site, and I've never forgotten how the Canadian Embassy hid Americans.


113 posted on 10/18/2005 10:09:05 AM PDT by CyberAnt (America has the greatest military on the face of the earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

Erik, I have to ask, are you from the South? I only ask because, being from the south myself, I know that respect and manners are held in the highest esteem in that region, right below duty, honor, country, family.

Great thread, BTW.


114 posted on 10/18/2005 10:11:37 AM PDT by Warren_Piece (Nashville, TN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: tertiary01
On KSFO this AM they talking about this very topic. The Republican party is proving to not necessarily be the best vehicle for representation of conservatives, and that conservatives might just need to find another party.

Again, what kind of conservative? Are you talking about social conservatives, fiscal conservatives? I've never actually met a social AND fiscal conservative, though many lay claim to the title. Fiscal conservatism is always sacrificed to obtain the "correct" social goal.

115 posted on 10/18/2005 10:16:20 AM PDT by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

Oh yeah? Well, stop slouching!

Eating our own...Time to make a new start in Free Republic.
7-26-04 | Bob J
Posted on 07/26/2004 7:41:11 PM PDT by Bob J
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1179142/posts

Breaking: Miers indicates to Senate she support banning most abortions
AP wire | 10/18 | JESSE J. HOLLAND
Posted on 10/18/2005 7:48:37 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1504575/posts


116 posted on 10/18/2005 10:18:06 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Down with Dhimmicrats! I last updated by FR profile on Sunday, August 14, 2005.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
If Bill Kristol is a "Big Government Hack"....what the hell is George W?

President of the United States of America.

117 posted on 10/18/2005 10:18:12 AM PDT by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
Kissing the buttocks of GWB is NOT a deeply held belief

Yeah, right!! You must be looking through some thick glasses to come up with that response. Your side is all over this thread calling us names and nobody is returning fire.

We have no problem with you disagreeing with the President. We have a problem with you calling him names. It is disgraceful to the Presidency and the Country which you claim to be saving. Playing the victim card is a bit weak after all the threads you've trashed.

Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops

118 posted on 10/18/2005 10:19:44 AM PDT by bray (Islam IS a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Warren_Piece
Erik, I have to ask, are you from the South?

No, Warren, I am from Pennsylvania. But there are still some who believe in civility.

119 posted on 10/18/2005 10:20:15 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi (9-11 is your Peace Dividend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Actually, Hamilton did say that a nominee should only be voted down for "special and strong" reasons. I don't think. WAAAAAAAAAAH!!! I don't like the bad lady, daddy! Nominate who I want!!! is either a special or a strong reason. Y'all want an originalist and yet you want to change the original intent of the advise and consent role of the Senate.
120 posted on 10/18/2005 10:24:04 AM PDT by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-159 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson