Posted on 04/21/2007 6:42:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
We've got some real challenges facing us. FR was established to fight against government corruption, overstepping, and abuse and to fight for a return to the limited constitutional government as envisioned and set forth by our founding fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and other founding documents.
One of the biggest cases of government corruption, overstepping and abuse that I know of is its disgraceful headlong slide into a socialist hell. Our founders never intended for abortion to be the law of the land. And they never intended the Supreme Court to be a legislative body. They never intended God or religion to be written out of public life. They never intended government to be used to deny God's existence or for government to be used to force sexual perversions onto our society or into our children's education curriculum. They never intend for government to disarm the people. They never intended for government to set up sanctuary cities for illegals. They never intended government to “rule” over the people and or to take their earnings or private property or to deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech, free religion, private property, due process, etc. They never intended government to seize the private property of private citizens through draconian asset forfeiture laws or laws allowing government to take private property from lawful owners to give to developers. Or to seize wealth and redistribute it to others. Or to provide government forced health insurance or government forced retirement systems.
All of the above are examples of ever expanding socialism and tyranny brought to us by liberals/liberalism.
FR fights against the liberals/Democrats in all of these areas and always will. Now if liberalism infiltrates into the Republican party and Republicans start promoting all this socialist garbage, do you think that I or FR will suddenly stop fighting against it? Do you think I'm going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?
Do you really expect me to do that?
All I’ve done is stand up in defense of some of my Freeper friends who I feel have been treated shoddily here in the last week.
***Maybe if you looked at some of the rudy threads prior to last week you would see how all of this came about. Looking at one without the other is putting on blinders. JimRob is making this place more hospitable to social conservatives, which was the original intent when he started this forum. Who goes onto a socon forum and denigrates socons, and why? And when the owner of the forum decides to get rid of such agitators, that’s his prerogative. I agree with it. There are still rudy supporters here on FR, so this isn’t about supporting rudy.
We are ripping our hearts to shreds on what ifs.
Time to settle down and say: What am I going to do today?
***Sounds good to me. If no one posts that stupid false dilemma rudy or hildebeast what if, I won’t post my false dilemma/fight-fire-with-fire response. After all, that’s all it ever was — a response to get them to back off in supporting a liberal candidate using liberal tactics on a conservative forum. But it keeps coming up, time and time again, even after dozens of freepers have been zapped in the bug zapper.
Step back from the monitor and think a minute. Nobody here foisted a candidate. He decided to run. He's a factor.
Some people, in fact some people I like, said they'd support him.
Well, okay. Where's the crime in that?
What the hell is wrong with discussing the candidates nearly a year before the first primary civilly?
Instead of banning, try persuading. Instead of telling people to leave and then chastising them for doing what you ask, why not be civil? Is that too much to ask?
This whole thread disgusts me.
There is no reason to demand a purity test at this forum. What's even more freaking amazing is that the machete-wielders on this thread aren't for anyone. We have yet to see them set out who they support, just who they oppose, and who they want led to the bugzapper.
This is perhaps one of the lowest moments I've seen at this forum.
I pray that it will recover.
This whole thing was so needless. Of course, the machete-wielders will disagree. Carry on.
See post 14,839.
**BEEP!** Wrong. But thanks for playing!
I have read the thread. I do know that waaaay back upthread there was a post where one guy offered money to Jimrob to ban someone. As I recall, it didn’t exactly work our for him ;’}
As I recall there was another post where someone suggested that one particularly odious (now former) FReeper be banned. His wish was coincidentally granted.
There has been no grand call for banishment. To suggest such is not only disingenuous, but offensive. I won’t speak for the management (couldn’t if I wanted to), but I don’t think they were especially concerned whether someone favored one candidate over another. What they became concerned over was the unscrupulous methods that were being used in the advancement of that candidate.
So (again speaking only for myself) welcome to FreeRepublic. Kick off your shoes and stay a spell. Behave yourself, or you’ll be dog gone...
Securing the boarder with a wall/fence/patrol is not CLOSING the boarders
When you use the word "close" it means you shut down the boarders on all sides by land/air/sea and we become and isolated country
Damn! You caught me. /s
Hitting the bong early today, huh?
“Of course, the machete-wielders will disagree.”
I do hope you are not putting me in the machete-wielder group.
And that is your right to your opinion
LOL....
“The incivility became awful; my guess is that Jim decided he had to put a stop to it.”
Calling someone an asswipe isn’t a particularly good way to go about that.
FR is a site for conservatives to assemble and discuss issues and candidates from a conservative perspective. It is not, and has never been, a place that tolerates liberals or the support of liberals (apart from allowing murrymom to squeak every now and again).
In that sense I guess you could say there is a "purity test" in effect here. That should come as a surprise to no one--at least no one who has read FR's charter.
Gonna get my hickry stick after you, CM....LOL!
Oh gawd. Thank you for your welcome. Is there a newbie thread I can check out for some other good tips?
Nothing wrong with it at all.
Instead of banning, try persuading.
I agree with you completely. Unfortunately, the folks supporting Rudy weren't attempting to persuade.
Let's be honest about what really happened here:
1. There was a group of posters who have used vicious and divisive tactics for quite some time.
2. Since these tactics were generally employed in the defense of Pres. Bush, they were allowed.
3. These posters assumed they could use the same tactics to promote Rudy. What they failed to consider is that Rudy is far more liberal than Pres. Bush, and so cover wouldn't be provided for the strongarm tactics.
"Stop your unappeasable single issue voting" is not a persuasive statement. Nor is "you've had your boot on our necks for far too long" intended as a persuasive statement.
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.