I’ve watched this from the beginning.
And in your individual case, you may be right.
But there are an equal number of instigators on both ends. Anyone who acts like it was only the fault of the “Evil Rudy Supporters” simply isn’t being honest about things.
Anyone who acts like it was only the fault of the “Evil Rudy Supporters” simply isn’t being honest about things.
***That’s how I see it. Honestly. That’s why I came up with this boilerplate for the more-heat-than-light threads:
As a Duncan Hunter supporter I am choosing not to engage in debate on this Rudy Giuliani thread on Free Republic. As a freeper I am disappointed that there are fans of a liberal presidential candidate trying to push socially liberal views on this socially conservative forum. In particular, I have noticed that the Rudy G fans do not answer posts questioning the qualitative substance of their candidate, or the posts are met merely with insults. And in short, I have noticed that rudy followers are simply rude.
Hildebeast is eminently beatable, this nonsense about rudy being the only one who can beat her is horse manure and impolite on this socon forum. For example, this article:
“Long Shot GOP Candidate Brownback Just Five Points Behind Clinton”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1798666/posts
We know that it simply means it’s very early in the race and that even no-name candidates are only 5 points behind Clinton. So the rudybots should stop supporting a social liberal on this social conservative forum and pick a real winner, rather than a ridiculous loser liberal like rudy.
The 2 polls on Free Republic put forth an obvious SOCON (only Hunter fits that description given) versus a SOLIB (it certainly fits rudy).
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=171
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=172
Rudy splits the base.
I have noticed time and again that rudy supporters rudely send up the false dilemma of “who would you vote for, Hildebeast or Rudy”. This particularly impolite at this early of a point in the primary cycle. Since this is a socon forum (not even a GOP forum), it is very impolite to ask double-bind questions, especially this early in the race.
Since team rudy is so fond of its own false dilemma, I would expect them to answer this false dilemma.
My contention: If rudy gets the nomination, he splits the base, possibly splits the republican party, and loses the election.
Rudy followers’ contention: If Hunter gets it, he wins the base and loses the election.
Hypothetical to answer the rudy followers’ hypothetical. Both sides losing to Hillary.
Side A: The solib republican splits the base. The MSM turns on him the moment he is nominated. Hillary wins. Republican party is split.
Side B: The socon republican wins the nomination, loses to hildebeast in a tough fight. Republicans are united against the hillary presidency.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?
Win-Win false dilemma:
Side A: Solib wins presidency by ignoring the socon base and permanently splitting the republican party.
Side B: SoCon wins presidency by (obviously) relying on the socon base.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?
Regardless of who wins or loses, Free Republic and the republican party is better off with Duncan Hunter than Rudy as the candidate. This social liberal candidate is simply not healthy for the republican party nor for FR. And rudy followers are proving to be very impolite freepers.
Duncan Hunter’s campaign website
http://www.gohunter08.com/
Sam Hunter: Duncan Hunter’s Ambassador to Free Republic
3/13/2007
Posted on 03/13/2007 10:11:39 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1800187/posts
Sam has been answering questions, unlike the crickets we hear on rudy threads.
Statement of Jim Robinson, Founder of Free Republic:
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc.
That’s why socons are signing petitions such as this one:
http://theconservativedeclaration.wordpress.com/
Conservatives:
Rudy Giuliani is an unacceptable Republican nominee for President of the United States. He is pro-abortion, pro-partial birth abortion, pro-registration of handguns, and pro-homosexual rights. He is the most liberal Republican candidate for President in our nation’s history.
Conservatives should leave no doubt that we will not support his candidacy under any circumstances. Therefore, we have created the Conservative Declaration of Independence to publicly state our position regarding the Republican Party’s consideration of a liberal as our Presidential nominee.
Please email theconservativedeclaration@hotmail.com to add your name to the list of signers.
Article II Supporting Evidence
Rudolf Giuliani explaining his liberal views:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVBtPIrEleM
Rudolf Giuliani explaining his position on abortion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALDfwXIYUX0
Rudolf Giuliani dressed as female:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IrE6FMpai8
Interview with gay couple Rudolf Giuliani lived with when Sept 11th occurred:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_2001_Sept_11/ai_78265968
Ban on Partial Birth Abortions:
“No, I do not support that (a ban on partial birth abortion), and I do not see my position on that changing.”
Abortion:
“There must be public funding of abortion for poor women. We cannot deny any woman the right to make her own decision about abortion because she lacks resources. I have also stated that I disagree with President’s Bush’s veto for public funding of abortion.”
Immigration:
“There is not a Mayor or Public Official in this country who is more pro-immigrant than I am.”
Gun Control:
“I am in favor of gun control”
“You know I am in favor of that (registration of all hand guns)”
Gay Rights:
”I support domestic partnership legislation and I signed it.”
Free Speech:
“I am a big supporter of McCain-Feingold and have been for a long time”
Party Loyalty:
”Frankly, I would like to run on all the lines. The liberal line, the conservative line, I would like to run on the Democratic line if I could figure out how to do it.”
“But there are an equal number of instigators on both ends. Anyone who acts like it was only the fault of the “Evil Rudy Supporters” simply isn’t being honest about things.”
I will concede that I don’t know the posting history of many of the participants on this thread. But from what I’ve read, and gathered of past history, the conflicts weren’t just a result of this thread, but a long time on going history of conflict.
The point still remains though, that nearly all of the banned posters decided it was their ‘day in the sun’ to make as spectacular an exit as they could.
The disrespect for not only options, but the owner of this site, was prevalent from the beginning.
The fault,although not apparent in some cases, , was hugely obvious in the others.
And they were generally the banned posters.
That's probably true. But if the differences are irreconcilable and you have to choose one side to ban, it stands to reason that you're going with the more liberal side. After all, this is a conservative site.