Posted on 06/25/2002 3:42:21 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
my brother rarely posted anything on this forum. He got the boot because you put the interests of a foreign country above your own and pushed the abuse button.
Interesting to hear LF referred to as "the nut house" after its owner so eloquently complimented Jim & FR. Ah well.
You're correct in that I didn't get elected but that happens all the time to candidates--there can only be one winner in a contested race. The only thing I took hard was Jim Waltermire's death (the GOP candidate for governor)--at the time he was the Secretary of State and responsible for checking into election irregularities. After his death, we regrouped and tried to get Attorney Marc Racicot of the A/G office to check into it....but he couldn't be bothered. The Bob Dornan race and the Louisiana race of a few years back are quite reminescent--the GOP really wasn't interested in finding any irregularities or illegalities.
As to what among a number of things has spoiled my disposition towards the GOP....I don't like liars whether they are Democrat or Republican. If its bad for the Democrats to do it, it should be bad for the Republicans, too. I love my kid brother, but wouldn't vote for him for any office either--he's a liar as well.
Not all LiFers are out to destroy FreeRepublic or attack JimRob. I was a "Freeper" long before I was a LiFer. I still post here (I'm not hard to find). The purpose of FreeRepublic is to "support our Constitution and look for honesty, integrity and honor from those in government." To that end I support FR and what it stands for - both by posting and by donations. I and many other FReepers/LiFers defend our country and Constitution at both sites. And anyone that has seen my posts on either forum knows that I am proudly Christian, American, a conservative, and southern.
When I first joined WiMom had threads discussing the Constitution and Federalist Papers, PhiKapMom had threads about tax-cuts and the Senate. Other threads were about supporting Ashcroft, and running commentaries kept the cubicle-bound informed. I talked with hundreds of other posters about dims, the elections, W, and everything in between. I looked forward to the fund-raisers, and posted words of wisdom from Ronald Wilson Reagan, a man that I consider to be one of our greatest Presidents.
I support our 1st Amendment rights to free-speech, and opined about the suits against FR. And about the freedom to exercise our religion, and the right to keep and bear arms. And privacy, the right to a fair trial, and the sovereignty of the states. FReepers GalFromTheBay and Billbears started and maintain a daily prayer thread and endured abuse because of it - yet I certainly think that our country is is need of prayer, and that some things only God can change.
I cannot support any politician - no matter what label is affixed to their name - if they violate their oath of office. No matter if they are a Dim, or a Republican or anything else. Anyone that crosses that line - who knowingly and willfully supports a position that is contrary to the Constitution - I cannot support or defend. To that end I can utilize my rights to the soapbox and ballot-box, by seeking to remind others about how far we've drifted. I know their is no such thing as the perfect candidate - I simply prefer to search for the one that matches most closely what I hold dear.
Some dissent is tolerated on both sites, what value is their in a mutual-admiration society? If someone has an opinion and not just an insult, then no matter how much I disagree with them I value their opinion.
Jim Robinson and John Deere can clean up posts as they see fit on their sites. Each site has it's attraction. John Deere wrote, "Liberty and objective reasoning always trump immoral concepts of human interaction that depend on coercion and weak minds for their survival." I'm proud to support both sites.
There's another right you are ignoring, and that is the right to own and manage one's property.
We have real freedom. There is not a single person anywhere on the internet in America who does not have real freedom. Everyone can voice their opinion somewhere on the internet, somewhere in a printed publication, somewhere on the radiowaves, in a letter, at city hall meetings, over the phone to friends, on the streetcorner, in the park, etc. But nowhere is it written that others are obligated to make sure you are heard, and nowhere is it written that others have to publish your words or provide audio support, batteries, paper or bandwidth for other people's rants. Everyone can get their own web sites, radios, printing presses, cardboard signs, and paper, but no one has to buy, maintain or deliver these things for people. Refusal to do so isn't a restriction on freedom.
On the web, sites can be had for free, although that is certainly not a right. I've got my own web sites, a free one and a paid one, and so far I have never gotten myself banned no matter what was posted on either of them. Anyone can get their own web site and post their rants, because there is nothing stopping them from doing so. Jimrob hasn't stopped a single person from getting their own site, nor has he ever vowed to bring down other people's sites as his detractors have on occasion vowed to do to FR.
But if everyone had the freedom to post whatever they want on your web site, or mine, even when we don't want them to post on our web sites, or manipulate our forums, or spread propaganda, then WE would not have freedom. The first ammendment isn't there to protect anyone's right to be heard or to be read on other people's property. The first ammendment isn't there to dictate to web site owners what is and what isn't 'fair,' or 'free.' It's to make sure that Government can't take away your right to speak- not to prevent someone from kicking you off of their property for yelling in their yard, or off their web site for any reason they please. It's to keep government from taking YOUR printing press away, but not to prevent the owner of the press from repossessing a machine that you used but haven't paid for. Jim Rob is nowhere near as powerful as people make him out to be, nor are the moderators. They simply cannot stop anyone from starting their own web site and posting to their hearts consent on it, even if the moderators or JimRob were so inclined- which they aren't. So they cann't 'censor people,' or prevent a person from voicing their opinion. They CAN and rightfull so, prevent people from using the web site as if it was communal property.
I don't understand why people think they have a right to someone else's web site, or why, when denied posting privileges on a web site which belongs to another, they think this impairs their liberty. It simply doesn't impair their liberty in ANY way. Why don't all these whiners write angry protest letters to EBAY or Amazon.com, National Geographic, the St. Louis Post, Democrats.com, the Red Cross, Catholic Church web, the Sierra Club web, or some blogger's web site for not allowing any stranger who stops by to take up as much bandwidth as he pleases with any topic or rant he pleases? It's simple- the whiners know very well that EBAY, Amazon.com, National Geo, the Post, Democrats.com, the Red Cross, the Catholic Church web, the Sierra Club and a bunch of bloggers own their sites and they know very well that those site owners, instead of wasting their time trying to explain the difference between 'my' web site and 'your' web site, will simply ignore the whining or send a response like this: 'What part of 'site owner' don't you understand?'
Does the Lutheran Church web site HAVE to host Islamic web pages, or vice versa? Would it be 'free' if they were so obligated? No. It wouldn't be freedom if they did so, it would be 'web welfare.'
Why is it that people think they have ownership and 'inalienable rights' on this site simply because they know how to log in? Did Jim pass out stock certificates or deeds? Is there some legal proof that those who complain about being 'denied rights' have any legal rights at all to post here? I sure haven't seen any proof of ownership from them.
Sadly I must agree. I enjoyed those threads, but there were only a few that cared enough to post :o(
If you haven't been censored, what are carping about?
While they were doing the exit interviews during the primary, the die hard democrats were saying they were fed up with the status quo. This is Milwaukee, the leader of socialist government and voting conservative. For the first time in Milwaukee's history, a *gasp* conservative was elected to a high position. If conservative reform can happen in Milwaukee, it can happen everywhere! There is hope! The mere fact that lifelong democrats are seeing the light, there is hope!
When you're the best at something, others tend to either imitate or attack.
Not every land, but there were times when God did indeed instruct His people to do just that....whenever it was certain that allowing any to survive would in one way or another be destructive to them.
That's the JR I knew. Kudos to you sir.
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.