Many permabans are not pro-life.
Posted on 03/05/2008 1:11:46 PM PST by ken5050
Dear Jim..OK, the GOP now has its candidate. McCain isn't the first choice of the majority of us on FR, and even now, there are spirited, yet for the most part, civil exchanges on the threads as to whether or not some will support the GOP nominee. One of the more unfortunate, and unpleasant events on FR was the mass banishment and/or leaving of a great many Freepers who were supporters of Rudy Guliani for the nomination. I'm posting this to see if you'd be open to the idea of inviting them to return, and see how others might feel about this.
I started it, I know.
But in defence, look at my screen name. Meow.
Cheers!
Escapism seems to be a way to deal with this election period.
Paula Abdul was smashed. Ryan Seacrest cut her off while the credits were rolling. Uh oh.
escapism cuz nobody running is running for me.
Howdy stranger.
“’m sorry, but a lot of Freepers brought on the animosity with their childish slanders of Rudy Giuliani, without ever adding anything positive to the election process.”
LOL. If you mean people debating the liberal record of Giuliani and his abortion stance, I’d agree with your characterization. She was part of an attack squad that would ping and attack on anybody who dared to bring up Rudy’s abortion stance.
I had a long time friend in that group too (who will remain nameless)...All one has to do is go back and look at the history on those mega threads and see that most of them were begging to get banned. I don’t remember Peach’s specific banning but I do remember her ping attacks. For the record, I miss many of them. Not because I agreed with them but because I enjoyed the debate and differing opinions. But they begged to get banned and relished their goodbye opus.
I didn’t misrepresent anything. I carried the thought to its logical conclusion.
If your point is that dissent is tolerated as long as it doesn’t offend anyone, I’ll concede the point.
But that’s just the point.
I keep missing T’wit also. I used to look forward to his posts.
” I had not made any decision about a candidate, but some of the supporters of Hunter and Huckabee convinced me that I didn’t want to be one of them.”
Yeah, a few others made similar comments as yours. I quite frankly don’t understand that line of thinking. Just because someone acts like an idiot, I don’t see why I should punish the candidate for their behavior, especially if he’s a solid conservative as Hunter was. That’s like me saying I’m no longer going to be a Christian because there are a bunch of jerks who don’t act like Christians. Why should I throw away my salvation and spend eternity in hell for people like that?
"Nobody running is running for me."
CHAMPS!!!
If McCain picks Crist, I’m joining a convent.
Hi DKNY! Agree with you totally.
I agree. Some of the McCain supporters are getting nasty. A couple have falsely accused me of supporting Hillary, etc.
Many permabans are not pro-life.
#272.
Ummm, no. That wasn't my point.
Look at Radio Astronomer who (apparently) called T'wit a F***ING MORON (all caps and all letters included).
And then he said he didn't give a sh*t if he got banned a post or so later.
That is more than just "your views offend me, boo-hoo, so I'm having you banned."
Many of the banned attacked people loudly even after being warned to tone it down, and being warned that their views were antithetical to the stated purposes of FR.
Cheers!
Maybe they just wanted to bash Conservatives. Some used criticism of Rudy and an excuse to attack Reagan and were overall nasty.
Most of the Hunter supporters included union politics in their criticism of the other candidates. That was enough.
You don’t seem to get it, though. I thought that the people who were supporting Huckabee and Hunter were the jerks. They were JUDGING the candidates and their supporters on the basis of personal, not political attributes or positions. It was nothing short of waging the politics of personal destruction against our own party.
No, you can’t pick out a single case of a poster being banned, and then say it applied to a much greater group of people who were deemed of the same ilk, and got the same treatment.
To do so would ignore that the scientists were banned, some even who had not posted on FR in the previous six months to their banning.
I don’t know if you want to come up with a theory for that or not.
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.