[ABG(anybody but Gore)]

I'm not weeping for the departure of any Rudybots, junior. I'm upset that good FReepers, for years, many longer than you, were banned because they chose a candidate against the main train of thought around here.

And in case it hasn't dawned on you ABG, if McCain, Giuliani or Hiliarly get to the White House, the net result is going to be the SAME.

Now I know you have to be a sleeper yourself. As bad as McCain and Giuliani are, there's no way on Earth they could ever be as bad as The Wicked Witch of the West Wing.

Junior, there's bad, and there's evil. If you can't figure out the difference, go back to DU...

[Politicalmom]

Are you going to tell Jim to go back to DU, too?

[djf]

I am fairly inclined to think that it will be made clear to Rudy that if he ever hopes to get the nomination, he has to tow the line on certain conservative principles like second amendment rights and abortion.

Rudy’s position and statements in large part reflect that he was mayor of one of the largest, most diverse, and liberal cities in the country.

Time will tell.

[mkjessup]

Now I know you have to be a sleeper yourself. As bad as McCain and Giuliani are, there's no way on Earth they could ever be as bad as The Wicked Witch of the West Wing.

Uh uh, wise up Daddio. Ask Jim Robinson what he thinks about John McCain in the White House, the guy who gave us CFR, the guy who calls John F'in Kerry (one of YOUR favorite guys, eh? *NOT*) "my dear friend". Giuliani? Give me a freakin' break. There is NO difference between the majority of Giuliani's positions and the positions of the 'Rat Party. Consult freeper Spiff's handy comparison chart if you haven't already seen it.

Junior, there's bad, and there's evil. If you can't figure out the difference, go back to DU...

I can't go back to where I never was Pops, so don't even try that lame tactic with me. There is bad, and there is evil, that is true. And they work together cooperatively to destroy that which is good.

If you can't figure THAT out, you need to go have a nap and come back when there are 10,000 posts in this thread and take a long around, eh?

[presently no screen name]

If you can't figure out the difference, go back to DU...

How obvious is it that there are hillary pawns here and have been for some time?

[WFTR]

I'm not weeping for the departure of any Rudybots, junior. I'm upset that good FReepers, for years, many longer than you, were banned because they chose a candidate against the main train of thought around here.

I hated seeing so many Alan Keyes supporters banned in 2000. I thought that many of the people we lost were great FReepers and many that we kept were idiots. However, I don't think anyone was ever permanently banned for supporting a different candidate. Instead, some were banned for being disruptive and insulting in what they said in support of their candidates. I was one who supported Mr. Keyes and criticized Mr. Bush very strongly, but I mananged not to turn everything into a personal attack. As a result, I was never banned. I also learned to step away from the forum for a while when the "Bushbots" were being too shrill and insulting.

One thing I've noticed about the current situation is that some of the "Bushbots" who were insulting towards critics back then are on the receiving end of things now. If the experience of having to take insults or be banned teaches them a little humility, maybe the whole forum will be better when they return someday.

Bill

[Syncro]

I'm upset that good FReepers, for years, many longer than you, were banned because they chose a candidate against the main train of thought around here.

That hasn't happened even once. It's amazing how many times that has been posted. Tell a lie enough and people will believe it. A liberal tactic.