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

To: wagglebee
Looks like you are alerting the founder to another who needs to be zotted. I'm sure he has all the help he can handle.

Can you cite a single verifiable fact about any other GOP candidate which has been disallowed here?

Is that really a serious question? I'm saying that supporters of all of the candidates are not under a similar set of rules, as has been explained to me over the past several posts by another poster. Argue with him, not me. I think they should all be vetted equally. But if Fred enters the race, you will see little appreciation here for the treatment accorded the other 3 major candidates.

I have little doubt that Rudy's aspirations for the presidency go back years (long before 9/11). If he was as astute as his supporters claim, he shouldn't have made leftist speeches to leftist groups.

I'm not even discussing Rudy, nor have I been.

274 posted on 04/20/2007 7:06:53 PM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies ]


To: MACVSOG68; Jim Robinson
Looks like you are alerting the founder to another who needs to be zotted. I'm sure he has all the help he can handle.

No, I was asking him if he could clarify whether any verifiable facts about any other GOP candidates which have been disallowed here.

I'm saying that supporters of all of the candidates are not under a similar set of rules, as has been explained to me over the past several posts by another poster.

I will grant you that some candidates (primarily Rudy and McCain) get more criticism here, but that is because their principles are inconcistent with conservatism. However, I have not seen where any candidate has been "protected" from criticism.

278 posted on 04/20/2007 7:15:37 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies ]

To: MACVSOG68

I think it is clear that, on a conservative site, you will have more lattitude to express as fact things that are less than factually accurate about liberals, because generally there won’t be liberals here to point out the errors and most people will be happy to hear bad things about the liberal.

When you make false statements about a conservative, you are much more likely to get yelled at, and if you do it multiple times you are more likely to get banned.

Frankly, I like it better when we tell the truth and only the truth about EVERY candidate, including liberals. I also don’t like the name-calling of liberal candidates. But that’s just me.

I certainly understand that nobody is going to leap to the defense of Hillary if someone like Mia treats Hillary like she would be worse than chosing the anti-christ for President, even though I don’t agree with that sentiment. But to think you can say whatever you like, regardless of the truth, about our conservative candidates for President, and not suffer consequences, is naive.

BTW, I think we are pretty good at policing false statements even about Rudy. And to the degree that we are not, I should think that such “smart” rudy supporters as Mia would be the FIRST to realise the harm in such attacks, and not turn around and engage in them about others. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and even if some posters don’t get punished for wrong, it doesn’t mean it is wrong to punish other posters for doing wrong.

If I speed, I deserve a ticket even if a hundred other people were speeding at the same time and didn’t get a ticket. “Everybody’s doing it” isn’t a good excuse.


287 posted on 04/20/2007 7:37:30 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies ]

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