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.
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."
Everyday . . . and then some.
Calling people with deeply held beliefs "bushbots" is pathetic ignorance.
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).
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)
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
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.
I believe that you are proving this thread initiator's point. No discourse at all, just attack, attack, attack.
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.
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)
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.
Well .. I welcome Canadians to this site, and I've never forgotten how the Canadian Embassy hid Americans.
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.
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.
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
President of the United States of America.
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
No, Warren, I am from Pennsylvania. But there are still some who believe in civility.
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.