Posted on 04/24/2007 10:22:39 AM PDT by Al Simmons
About me:
Lurker - since 1998
Member - since 1999
In self-imposed exile - since April 2007
The tone of the debate and the attacks on long-time fellow Freepers for the cardinal sin of daring to support Rudy Giuliani in early 2007 around here have really saddened me. Instead of fighting the enemy FR is now imposing an 'ideological purity' test on FR members. The well-oiled train has gone off the rails and Mr. Robinson risks becoming the next Joe Farah - a fellow who started a great website for conservative news and opinions, but who gradually drifted off to la-la land, losing all credibility - and readership - in the process.
He has set himself squarely in the Internet media spotlight, doused himself with gasoline, and and lighted himself on fire - a fact that has not escaped the attention of the left-wing lunatics at Daily Kos. Their reporting on what has been going on at FR is perhaps the first factually true account published on their site.
Jim, if that quote of yours about setting up an organization to 'Swiftboat Rudy' is accurate as quoted in their article, the only thing I have to say to you is that you ought to be ashamed of yourself, as you have now become the back-stabber of the conservative cause.
If you wish to marginalize this site by turning it into a narrow "several-issue" forum, that is your right. Just as it is my right to choose to not participate here any longer.
But you will be disappointed if you think that the crude, illiterate "goon squad" you have allowed free rein around here (dmw, narses, dirtboy, extremely extreme extremist, ReaganMan and several others - if I have slighted anyone, please email me if you want onto this list) will elevate the level of intellectual debate.
The result has been predictably in the other direction. That is what happens when you hire a bunch of brown shirts to enforce your own brand of political correctness.
Well, guess what? Politics is 99% BS and one can quite nicely live one's life without the need to bloviate about it. I know how I am going to vote. I could care less about anyone else. Life is too short to waste my time around here when I am clearly one of those made to feel like they are not welcome.
So, go ahead Jim -
MAKE MY DAY. BAN ME. I DARE YOU.
(it was a joke! Sorry - I forgot the /sarc tag.)
Find a tall tree and a short rope and be done with it.
Thought Two: Most people who complain about such things are somehow personally offended that everyone else doesn’t agree with them. Disagreeing with you and wanting your opinions squashed are two entirely different scenarios. Just because some people prominently and consistently disagree with you doesn’t mean JimRob or anyone else is sending a ‘good squad’ after you. I myself have often posted what at first appeared to be minority opinions on various threads, only to watch in wonder as others rose up to defend and support my opinions. And, of course, sometimes I remain squarely alone with my thoughts. It’s the nature of the beast.
Thought Three: He’s been banned - which probably shouldn’t have happened. The only cause I can see for suspension of this account was ‘calling out’ other Freepers by ‘name’. However, I am of the opinion that when such things happen you should let it go - the poster has exposed himself to criticism, let it come. If you can’t take the heat...
Free speech is a two-edged sword. When you choose to exercise your rights you must be ready and willing to accept replies. Just because you have the right to express your views does not mean I am bound to accept them, nor does it mean that I must remain quiet so that the world may bask in the beauty of your words. When you speak in America you have invited 300 million responses. Deal with it.
We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
-- May 13, 1940, House of Commons
Crude and illiterate I can understand, but when did you two form a goon squad?
Wow. And to think I'm married to a great-grandma. (LOL! It's okay, I'm a great-grandpa.)
"FReep" is a verb, or a noun describing the act of FReeping. The abbreviation for Free Republic is "FR".
That said...
The good judgment or lack of good judgment with which it’s run is of legitimate concern to all conservatives. We don’t have much, so what we do have needs to be good.
Bullshit. Having a "legitimate concern" about a privately owned website is moot. If you don't like it, don't donate. But there is no committee to create someone else's idea of "good judgment" or cohesion.
"We don't have much"? Get cracking then. Please send me a link when it's up.
I'm so disappointed. You made it too easy.
I see that he took you up on your dare, Al.
Thank you ma’am. I most apprciate what you have said. You said what I did without removal of your comment.
But that begs the question ... do we accept it as a given, as the original poster seems to be saying? Or do we work to change it. I vote for the latter.
Only if you ignore the dynamic which will have 30+% of the electorate voting against whatever Democrat is running. Only if you ignore the votes Tancredo can bring in.
If all the dead folks in all the graveyards voted Dem, I doubt short of either pogrom or fraud, that they'd get 95% of the vote.
Conservatives are constantly told they will sink the Republican Party and elect a Democrat if they don't vote Republican.
So nominate a Conservative.
The rest of the people who will vote against Hillary or O'bama will get on board. (At least that is what we are told when a less than conservative nominee is proposed).
I really don't see too many likely Republican voters pulling the lever for a Dem because they are all fired up for abortion, open borders, gay marriage, or gun control, just to mention a few salient issues.
Telling people that their perfectly legitimate posts are "incoherent and stupid" is a form of abuse, which you are guilty of. No one reported your abuse, you crybaby. Go cry to mommy.
Hmm. A Hildebeast presidency with the GOP fighting tooth and nail, or a Giuliani with everyone cooperating with him.
I’ll take door number one.
The reality is that we survived eight years of Clinton and in many ways it strengthened conservatives. Rudy would DESTROY conservatism for decades.
I don’t know where you come from or what you been taking but Rudy is by no stretch of the imagine a Conservative. In fact, Rudy won’t even do until a Conservative gets there.
Rudy view of the issues is, by his own mouth and words, closer to the Clintons than the Conservative point of view.
And you aren’t paying attention. Fred Thompson is generating tons of support He will declare, conservatives will rally behind him, along with Libertarians, and he will beat the leftists.
Fred Thompson's position has always been generally and substantially pro-life. However, when first running for office in '94, he did a say he thought the "ultimate decision rested with the woman." For me, that takes him out of the 100% category.
Again in general, it's probably fair to say that he has a strong federalist view on the legal aspects of the problem. Personally, he has taken a strong pro-life stand based on his convictions since 1996. He has also said Roe vs. Wade is bad law and should be changed.
I think it also fair to say that of the top three contenders right now, Fred Thompson does have the clearest pro-life record. Rudy has the least creditable record on abortion, with Romney far above Rudy, yet still far below Fred. Romney has made long, involved, clearly pro-choice statements recorded in public, as has Rudy, but has more clearly "broken with his past." But to me, both are problematic on this issue. Fred is not.
True. Where is the chest beating emotional outrage, the flying tears, the “deep” thoughts of the real navel gazer?
Not much of an opus, not much of a position.
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.