Posted on 05/16/2009 7:03:22 PM PDT by trying17 (AKA DrGop0821)
Even Sean Hannity has written off Free Republic, saying "Everyone I knew basically left because of so much childish immature personal attacks, the propensity there to eat their own." [Listen to Sean Hannity’s Statement about Free Republic. ]
I was suspended from "conservative" site Free Republic for having an opinion. It's amazing that a so called site dedicated to "Free" would ban someone for having an opinion.
I encourage anyone to feel free to post my material on Free Republic or elsewhere as I will no longer be posting on that site. (If anyone knows of other open forums similar to Free Republic please let me know.)
There are many amazing people over there who support true conservatism and value the opinion of others in the name of advancing our cause.
However the site is too often dominated by a select few radical Right Wing nutjob bullies who are completely intolerant and hypocritical. They are no better than the Liberals they speak out against. Many simply nitpick and chastise others just to make themselves feel better.
The hypocrisy is astounding and intolerable at times.
My account was "Zotted" according to their lingo for being a "troll".
Many "FReepers" complained that I was "pimping my blog".
However, from their own "rules":
For all of you who have blogs or personal web sites that you would like to discuss or promote on Free Republic, here's the place to do it.
Our Bloggers & Personal forum is for:
Posting from your blog.
Posting from other peoples blogs.
Posting from your personal web site.
Posting from other peoples personal web sites.
Promoting your blog.
Promoting other peoples blogs.
Promoting your personal web site.
Promoting your favorite web sites.
Posting from your favorite outside forums.
Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!
Zot - verb, to get kicked off FR in an undignified manner That's what most people think "Zot" means, but it's not correct.
The history of "Zot".
There are one or two individuals who, for whatever reason, enjoy signing up new accounts here every single day to post leftist drivel. Sometimes they are vanities from DemocraticUnderground. Sometimes they are articles from other far-left sources. Sometimes they are nothing but vile doctored images or profanity laced tirades. Sometimes they are from legitimate sources but happen to strike the eye of the poster as being something that would infuriate conservatives.
The posters in question always post the articles, and then don't reply. They then post other articles, again not replying. This was going on for months. Jim would confirm by looking at the IP addresses and other aspects of the user's 'footprint' that it was the returning troll, and we would nuke the accounts. This went on for months.
Then some of the opportunists who wanted to harm the forum started a whispering campaign, complaining about articles being deleted. They would play off of the fact that the trolls' articles were being pulled to complain that there was some sort of agenda of squelching legitimate conservative postings going on by the moderators.
One day I decided to try something new. I decided, instead of letting the trolls get what they want and have their posts up as flame bait, and instead of pulling the threads outright, I would move their post aside and replace it with something that hopefully others would find humorous. I would do this out in the forum for all to see. The original piece would be available through the history link for the curious, who could see if there was some sort of censorship campaign going on. And the freepers could have fun mocking the troll if they so liked.
It so happens that the way I did it the first time was using a screen shot from Caddyshack, where the pastor gets hit by a lightning bolt. Being a bit of a fan of the comic strip "B.C." I captioned the photo with the lightning bolt sound that Johnny Hart used in his strip- ZOT! That is where the term Zot originated.
Now, sometimes we "zot", and sometimes we simply pull it. It depends on a number of factors, including how busy we are at the time. But whenever you see a Zot, you can be sure that the user was a 'newbie' who was doing their hit-and-run posting, and that if you as a well-established freeper thought the article would have made an interesting discussion, then you could probably post the same piece yourself without incident (although the most vile of the stuff probably would get pulled, and Jim reserves the right to remove anyone who he feels is constantly trying to push leftist propaganda on the forum). Anyway, that is the history and background behind zotting.
***
I will continue to do my part to advance Conservative ideas and bring down the radical Left.
Free Republic sucks!
Related:
Free Republic Purge: Conservative Web Site Bans Giuliani Supporters
Banned at "Free" Republic
IS FREEREPUBLIC.COM BECOMING THE PEOPLESREPUBLICOFCHINA.COM?
Not So 'Free Republic'’—The Shot Heard Around the Net
You addressed your post to me, with a copy to altair. I hope you realize it was altair who wrote the above...
Thank you.
Ah, gotcha! Funny song!
FRiend, the northeast's reputation is not unjustified. Who was the last true conservative to be elected to a position of significant influence in that region?
Name five more.
Sure, true conservatives like you can be found up there, but the bulk of the northeastern GOP is squishy enough to guarantee liberal dominance.
P.S. Your point about the founders is a non sequitur. You can't support your assertion about the current condition of the northeast by citing examples more than two centuries old.
hehe! :^D
Yowsah!
Wow! I thought I was the only one who had read that book (when I was a kid). I wasn’t even sure that was the name. Thanks. I looked it up on Amazon and just bought the book for fifty cents. Too bad the movie is only available on VHS for $40.
I did. I was supporting your position.
Thanks! And you stated it much better than I ever could.
A state with a brutal dictatorship is "successful"? I've never heard that definition before.
President Bush campaigned on a platform of getting us out of foreign wars, not starting new ones. That's part of why I voted for him in 2000.
In case you hadn't noticed, something happened after Bush was elected.
And 9/11/01 changed everything.
Let's stay out of entangling foreign affairs. Just Say No.
So, as far as your concerned, 9/11 didn't change everything. I can respect the consistency. But I also firmly disagree with your position.
This is a typical position of Ron Paul and those who support him. He believes we should act based on 18th & 19th Century demographics and rules of engagement. What's lost is the fact how the World has progressed since then, and how this has impacted World affairs. Nations are no longer separated by oceans and continents. Nations who are in no real proximity of one another have the power today to severely impact another's safety and prosperity. 9/11 is a perfect example. And it didn't even stem from another "nation" per se; just a group of hate-filled bigots with the ingenuity to make it happen. And crawling into our shell, and removing ourselves from the World stage, is not going to make them go away.
Letters of Marque, disentangling oneself from World affairs simply doesn't work today. Yet it is the agenda of some (not many, but some) to apply Old World practicality to today's involved problems. Not a good idea, and not very safe...
We may "just say no", but will they?
At bottom, it should come down to one question: What is in the national interest?
We should all be able to agree on that.
Is it then possible that we might have national interests beyond our borders? That is the argument.
And, of course, we positively do. Vital interests of a security nature (e.g., enemies overseas). And vital interests of an economic nature (e.g., the free flow of oil at a market price).
How can one make a convincing argument that we don't?
One might as well ask why we have aircraft carriers? Are they not there to protect and enforce our national interests overseas?
You bring up the economic aspect while I dwelt solely on the security aspect of World relations. But both bring out the fact today’s World is a complex place, and while we, or any nation may wish to dwell in safety and harmony, that usually isn’t the way it is because there are those, yesterday, today, and tomorrow, who wish us harm; both securely and economically. Setting ourselves apart will impose self-afflicted damage to the nation, as well as not keeping us safe from harm as some may naively believe.
While Dr. Paul’s comment is indeed “the sort of facile comment you’d expect to hear from an America-hating left winger”, I don’t think he can fairly be called one.
You should be zotted, again, for not posting links to your claims (resources).
I can’t believe you really have a blog, or else your 11 year old child does your posting for you. Copy and paste? WTH is that? Learn to post links, or at least, learn to copy source and post that!
Curious. Why do you come back? Do you need a quarter to call nine waa-waa, or a wambualnce? Or do you just like the pain and humiliation?
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.