I think he's just missing his orgone-treatment...
Posted on 12/01/2002 1:23:55 PM PST by BraveMan
What a long way Free Republic has come! From its birth in 1996 as what began as just a place where hardcore conservatives to post the latest news and analyze it, Free Republic two years later had a significant role in the neutralization of the Clintons - as it became the organizing point for enormous protests ridiculing Bill Clinton over Monicagate everywhere he went in the U.S. early in Monicagate throughout 1998. Some top liberals even blame Freepers for Al Gore's defeat.
Very early in Monicagate, Freepers brought Free Republic out of just being a sort of giant cybercafe for dissidents to talk things over - and made it into a very-effective organizing point for giant protests against liberals and liberalism, like the one in Houston at a Clinton fundraiser that not only like most greeted Clinton with hundreds of dissidents ridiculing him for his adultery and perjury, but even found a fire engine to hang a giant sign on that read "Bill Clinton Is A Four-Alarm Fraud." Freepers in Florida hung a giant sign on a cabin cruiser to float in a strategic position just offshore a fundraiser of his there. And here in North Carolina, about 30 Freepers picketed an Al Gore fundraiser in Raleigh's Volvo district in May 1999 - some dressed as Buddhist monks. The Clintons/Gore Regime just couldn't escape the conservatives from hell.
Other liberals were no luckier. The "Rosiecott" that ended Corporate America's willingness to indulge leftist politics was in large part organized on Free Republic. Freeper-organized boycotts were to Rosie O'Donnell's career what a later gay boycott was to advice-talk radio host Dr. Laura's.
But - just six years after its founding, just four years after the height of its power - Free Republic today is largely a total waste of time. As a reader commented, it isn't accomplishing anything anymore - with the giant protests against liberals formerly organized on it by Freepers over; as he agreed last week, the sole positive things it now does are to provide rapid dissemination of news, even from small-town dailies, to dissidents everywhere - and to guide dissidents to the various dissident newspapers that really are hardcore.
Some social issues are almost unmentionable on Free Republic today. More than one Freeper has griped that posted articles on immigration often just disappear. Other Freepers have been just blacklisted from Free Republic - for offending the sensibilities of founder Jim Robinson or the small clique under him that largely actually runs Free Republic now.
Today, Free Republic is every bit as handicapped as founder Jim Robinson - but by another problem. To all too many Freepers now, anyone calling themselves a Republican is God's brother - and cannot be criticized, no matter how Clintonesque their views on many social issues may be. And to all too many Freepers now, Pres. Bush really is God - uncriticizable, no matter what.
To make Free Republic great again, a number of things have to happen. First, all involved - from ordinary Freepers to "JimBob" himself - have to accept that having an (R) next to one's name doesn't make a politician beyond criticism. Second, all involved must also accept that Pres. Bush isn't God. And then, all Freepers must commit to doing again what made Free Republic great - hounding any politician at odds with Red Nation's masses on social issues; if that means picketing Pres. Bush everywhere he goes if he hints at amnesty for illegal aliens or tacit support of racial quotas, that's what it takes.
Free Republic didn't become great by being a Chinese-style "Democracy Wall" for dissidents to post articles from "mainstream" newspapers to and then discuss them. It can only became great again the same way it originally got great.
Hey, it's Jim's carpet. If he doesn't want someone to pee on it that's that. BTW, isn't censorship when the gov't muzzles someone?
WAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!
Must be a Buchananite
3 posted on 12/01/2002 1:30 PM PST by AppyPappy
To: SamAdams76
You'll notice on the Alamance site that there is a lot of immigrant Mexican bashing. That seems to be a fixation with the "hate Bush" crowd.
11 posted on 12/01/2002 1:34 PM PST by AppyPappy
In this whole article you couldn't find anything specific to disagree with on point. Instead you had to change the subject to more Buchanan bashing.
Could it be the writer is just a nut? No, according to you he must be a Buchanan nut. LMAO.
Buchanan pulled down 0.5% of the vote, yet he's the guy you fixate on whenever someone challenges your belief system. How about shooting down some of this guy's arguments on point? It may not be the thrill that bashing Buchanan is, but it could lead someone to think that you actually understand some of the subject matter. Instead we're treated to your comprehension of the illegal immigration issue.
Everything boils down to immigrant (Mexican) bashing for you. Frankly I don't see people trashing immigrants per se. I see them talking about illegal immigrants. You did know there was a difference didn't you? Or did you?
In 2001 the INS took over 900 thousand illegal immigrants into custody. Something like 95% of them were on the southern border. The INS states that they capture between 40 and 60% of those who attempt to cross the border illegaly. Front line INS agents claim it's more like 10-20%. Outside illegal immigrant watch-dog groups claim it's actually more like 5 to 10%.
If the illegal alliens that are captured each year represent even 1/3rd of the total attempts, that means that over 1.8 million illegals enter this nation each year, without getting caught. That's a major issue for me.
When the allies landed at Normandy, they had something like 350 thousand troops. During the first campaign in the Pacific, they had 250,000 troops. We're talking on the order of five to seven times these numbers entering our nation every year, year after year after year. Perhaps if you tried real real hard, concentrated on the subject for a period of time, and actually contemplated some of the information offered up on this and other forums, you might be able to understand at least some possible area of concern here. But then perhaps I'm still giving you too much credit.
I think he's just missing his orgone-treatment...
The liberals were saying virtually the same thing in 1994 when they were gutting the military.
Re-written to make a parallel:
"But - just four years after its pounding of Iraq, just four years after the height of its power - the US Military machine today is largely a total waste of time. As a liberal RAT commented, it isn't accomplishing anything anymore - with the giant attacks against Iraqis formerly organized by it by Generals over; as he agreed last week, the sole positive things it now does are to provide rapid dissemination of pizzas to Bosnia, thanks to Clinton."
We are in standby mode at all times, ready to crush the liberal rhetoric such as that made by Tom Daschole last week about active conservatives. Last week we even had a FReeper spearhead the solving of a cop shooting.
We aren't even close to shutting down.
You hardly snivelled at all...well, okay, you snivelled, but you made up for it by not knowing the owner and founder's screen name.
Go back to DU and whimper.
IOW Bush is not to blame for the problem.
LOL!
Which band did he get.....
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.