Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Free Republic's Leader Mentioned in Wall Street Journal
Wall Street Journal On Line ^ | October 30, 2003 | Hal Friedman

Posted on 10/30/2003 7:15:08 AM PST by aculeus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-142 next last
To: Hal 2004
This moment, as I post a thank you for your direct and civil response, a news show panel is discussing Ted Kennedy's neanderthal remark and the double standard that applies to liberal remarks that lower the standard of communication.

All sides see the faults and blunders of the cadre of the opposite side more clearly than they see the foibles of their own.

There is a lot of civil and thoughtful discussion that goes on through this forum, but it isn't always the most visible element and it hardly is noticed in few weeks of visiting.

Like virtually all internet forums and bulletin boards, civility is not considered essential for particpation by many. In person, these same posters are much more cordial, generous and freindly. I would hope the the denizens of Democratic Underground, Move-on dot org, Smirking Chimp and the like are as well, although I can't speak to that first hand.

The rhetoric of both sides has escalated, that's true. The left sees its global grip on their vision for the future slipping away. The conservative side sees the damage done to the culture making needed reform a herculean task and is throwing all their effort into exposing the sickness.

My solution for a toned down exchange would be for the political left to take the position that conservatives did from the 20s through the late 80s...keep a low profile and hope you don't get singled out too often. Perhaps in another sixty years rationalism will begin to be stylish again.

121 posted on 11/14/2003 10:15:41 PM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Hal 2004
whose leader recently swore hatred for the Democrats who are "destroying the Constitution" and "setting up a totalitarian state,"

They are, Hal. At least where I'm at.

It's the Dems, and their leaders in academia(The RICH dems) particulary that set up speech codes and censorship. I'm a part-time student, and recently there was a big fight here over "Campus truth" advertisement in the paper did the unthinkable 'crime' by putting the Palestinians(sp) in a bad light and Israel in a good light. The dems(particulary the Arab groups) wanted to censor that. One dem wanted to shut down a speech as well by Dan Flynn. She threatened to call the cops. It was union dem thugs that wanted to stop a protest I was at. They backed off after I got right back in their face.

It's mostly the dems that want to take away my 2nd Amendment rights. Kennedy, Schumer, Levin, Conyers. Those types are untrustworthy. If a politician can't trust me with a firearm, they are power hungry and not trustworthy holding office.

It's both parties that are after the 4th Amendment. I'll call out Ashcroft as well as Reno when they are problems.

My solution to polarization is to tone down the rhetoric, something which you folks need to do.

I can't do that. I work in this field. Politics is about one thing. Power. That is what is key. When I see politicians like Ted Kennedy, John Conyers, and Carl Levin out to take away my freedoms, I'm not a very nice person, and I'll admit that I go right to the gutter to defeat them or their plans. It WORKS. Hillary Clinton drives up the base vote in my county, just like the dems Confederate flag and Bush gutter tactics drives up the votes in Detroit and Bed-Sty in Brooklyn.

For the rest of you, are you so unsure of your beliefs that you can respond to criticism only by indulging in puerile, ad hominem attacks?

Nope. I'm sure of my Conservative-libertarian beliefs. I will engage in rational debate when it is best, and also engage in ad hominems when it works as well. I fight to win, just as the libs in the media do.

I have nothing but respect for our Constitution (I've spent years studying it)and our way of life.

Well, then please tell the rest of your liberal democrat friends like Mr. Soros and Mr. Kennedy to stop trying to take away my 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 10th amendment rights away from me here out in flyover country. George Soros in particular is evil and was convicted of Inside Trading. He's now funding almost all the left wing programs and the democrats.

Those like Mr. Soros who are out to take away my freedoms are my enemy. Not my opponents, but an enemy. That is why I do not like today's democrats, which are not the same democrats as 40 years ago. My ancestors are old style democrats from Detroit. That party left my family and left me. The Democrats are no longer the party of the working man. They are the party of the richest .5% like Warren Buffett, Hollywood, and George Soros. They are the party of gun grabbers. They are the party of pro-aborts, even those that were in the womb longer than the 6 months I was when I was born.

That's not my party anymore.

122 posted on 11/14/2003 10:31:49 PM PST by Dan from Michigan ("Today's music ain't got the same soul. I like that old time Rock N Roll" - Bob Seger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Hal 2004
My solution to polarization is to tone down the rhetoric, something which you folks need to do.

Something "we" folks need to do. Right...

I didn't question Jim's sanity or loyalty etc. I did not attack him personally. I only pointed out the damage I believe his intemperate comments cause to political discourse in this country.

As if more people hung on the words of Jim Robinson than those of Bill Clinton, or his godawful wife, or Chuck Schumer, or Tom Daschle, or Jesse Jackson.

How concerned were you for the political discourse of the nation ten years ago, when Clinton blamed the Oklahoma City bombing on "right-wing" talk radio? How about in 1996, did "Vote for a Republican and more black churches will burn" make you worry enough to write a letter-to-the-editor to anyone? How about the constant accusations the the Republican congress was causing children to starve and old people to die? That we were poisoning the air and water?

How did James Byrd's daughter's ad make you feel during campaign 2000?-- as though George Bush had killed her father all over again? I am reasonably certain you voted for Gore in 2000. Did he make you proud on the Sunday before the election, when he stood at the pulpit in a black church and told the congregation they had a choice between good and evil that coming Tuesday?

You people haven't been polite or respectful for thirty years, and yet *we* are the ones poisoning the discourse. You don't see how guilty you are yourself of the very charges you make:

After viewing your comments, I do have to wonder:Do any of you really care about this country or do you just have nothing to do with your time but take out your frustration at your boss, spouse, etc. on those with whom you disagree politically?

Oh yeah, your hands are clean, Hal. LOL

We couldn't possibly have a legitimate beef with you guys. We're either uncaring about the country (because we're not liberal Democrats like you), or we're guilty of neurotic transference.

I acknowledge that I don't have all the answers to all political questions and that liberals aren't always right or have perfect virtue. We liberals don't have a monopoly on Truth (an oligopoly, perhaps). Are any of you honest enough to make the same admission about yourselves and your views?

About myself, yes. About my views, no. They are right.

If you readily admit that you don't have all the answers and liberals aren't always right or truthful, how can you in good conscience continue to vote to inflict the same wrong solutions and untruths on the rest of us? IF you're not sure of the rightness of it all, how dare you?

Only one of you noticed that I read conservative sources.

Duh. You wrote to the Wall Street Journal.

Only one other, the one who talked about liberal rationalism and the Enlightenment, tried to give me a sensible response to my comment. For the rest of you, are you so unsure of your beliefs that you can respond to criticism only by indulging in puerile, ad hominem attacks?

Yawn. We weren't talking to you before now. But in this case, you are what you write.

For the record: I am NOT an atheist, Marxist, Communist, fascist,traitor,crook saboteur, a practicing thespian or vegetarian. I AM a liberal Democrat and proud of it!

If you are a liberal Democrat, you are regularly voting for the policies of Marxists, Communists, fascists, traitors, and crooks.

I do NOT regard George W. Bush as the latest incarnation of Adolph Hitler who personally planned the 9/11 attacks nor do I regard the GOP's purpose as instituting a crypto-fascist Christian theocracy.

Good for you-- but by your votes as a liberal Democrat, you give power and legitimacy to those who DO believe those things.

I do not believe Bush invaded Iraq solely to give a boost to Halliburton stock. I do not believe Bush to be a greater enemy to the US than Bin Laden.

Good for you-- but by your votes as a liberal Democrat, you give power and legitimacy to those who DO believe those things.

I love this country just as much as you folks say you do and I have nothing but respect for our Constitution (I've spent years studying it)and our way of life.

If so, I don't know how you can vote for liberal democrats, their unconstitutional laws, and their extraconstitutional goals. I don't know how you can vote for people who believe the UN is a higher authority than the US constitution. I don't know how you can support people who can gleefully invent a right to abortion out of thin air as gleefully as they overlook our clear right to bear arms.

I was only a mile from the Trade Centers on 9/11 and witnessed the second plane hit the South Tower.I then saw both Towers go down. It was a truly horrifying experience. None of you should have to see something like that.

I was about four miles north when it happened. If I had seen them fall before my eyes, would I ever use my vote to strengthen those who would appease the attackers or, God forbid, leave the safety of our country at the mercy of the thugs, terrorists, and Communists at the UN? That's what you're doing as a liberal democrat.

I regard Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda as the enemies of humanity and that Islamism is the greatest threat to our way of life since Soviet Communism.

Do you think the way to deal with that threat is to "attack the root cause of terrorism (poverty)" by showering the other hemisphere with our tax dollars, as Clinton and Carter have endlessly suggested? You voted for them, not me.

I am writing this response in an attempt, hopefully not futile, to make you folks see that liberal Democrats like me are not your enemy.

I really believed that, for a few months after 9/11. I believed that, as in World War II, we'd put aside the petty things in order to focus on the big picture for a few years. I believed it even though anti-retaliation rhetoric had begun even before the dust settled at Ground Zero, and even though there were three or four rallies against action in Afghanistan before the fires were even put out. Nutso commie-anarchist fringe, I thought. I believed we were basically on the same side until I began to see elected liberal democrats speaking at COmmunist-sponsored antiwar rallies, and giving aid and comfort to Saddam by questioning Bush's motives, on television, on Iraqi soil. I believed it until our wonderful LIBERAL DEMOCRAT city council passed an antiwar resolution for the purely political purposes of opposing the Bush administration, setting the scene for yet another Communist-sponsored anti-war rally, and satisfying their LIBERAL DEMOCRAT constituencies.

Now you liberal democrats have been kind enough to show us the blueprint for next year's October Surprise, and--SURPRISE--you're going to use the war on terror to do it.

You are my enemy, and you'd better believe I am yours. I am done with tolerating people like you.

We may disagree, and, to be sure, we may phrase our disagreements sharply, but, for God's sake, let's NOT treat each other like garbage.

You're worse than garbage. You're nuclear waste. You sicken and weaken everything you touch. You are a hazard to human beings, let alone free people.

Was that phrased sharply enough for you?

123 posted on 11/15/2003 3:46:18 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
Oh, get over here. Some Brooklynite needs a new one.
124 posted on 11/15/2003 4:00:43 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: hellinahandcart
This metrosexual wannabe needs *what*? These?


Canine
NeuticlesORIGINAL® (Polyprophylene - Rigid)
Item # Description Length Each Pair
0-Large 65-90+ lbs 1.79" $39 $67
0-Medium 30-60 lbs 1.50" $38 $65
0-Small 11-30 lbs 1.04" $37 $64
0-XSmall 3-10 lbs .63 $35 $60
0-Petite 1- 3 lbs .44 $33 $53

Feline
NeuticlesORIGINAL® (Polyprophylene - Rigid)
Item # Description Length Each Pair
F0-Small 9-30 lbs + .63 $35 $60
F0-XSmall 3-8 lbs .44 $33 $53

Canine
NeuticlesNATURAL® (Solid Silicone - Natural Soft)
Item # Description Length Each Pair
NN-XLarge 110-190 lbs+ 2.20" $119 $179
NN-Large 65-110 lbs 1.79" $109 $169
NN-Medium 40-65 lbs 1.50" $ 99 $159
NN-Smed 30-50 lbs 1.27" $ 94 $154
NN-Small 20-30 lbs 1.04" $ 89 $149
NN-XSmall 10-20lbs .75" $ 84 $139
NN-XXSmall 3-10 lbs .63" $ 79 $134
NN-Petite 1- 3 lbs .44" $ 74 $129
Custom sizing $499/pr or ea.

Feline
NeuticlesNATURAL® (Solid Silicone - Natural Soft)
Item # Description Length Each Pair
F0-Small 10-30 lbs + .63" $79 $129
F0-XSmall 3-10 lbs .44" $74 $119
Custom sizing $399/pr or ea.

Equine & Bulls
NeuticlesNATURAL® (Solid Silicone - Natural Soft)
Item # Length Each Pair
NN-EBS 2.75" $199 $299
NN-EBM 3.50" $299 $399
NN-EBL 5.75" $399 $549
Custom sizing $699/pr or ea.

125 posted on 11/15/2003 7:01:08 AM PST by NYC GOP Chick (Dick Gephardt, Before He Can Do It To You!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Hal 2004
My solution to polarization is to tone down the rhetoric, something which you folks need to do.

Tell that to your comrades on the left -- you know, the ones on DUmpster who wish death and devastation on this country all because elections don't go their way.

Tell it to your comrades who are praying for more American casualties in Iraq, because they believe that more dead Americans will hurt Bush's chances for re-election next year.

Tell it to your fellow leftists who actually defended Saddam Hussein because of their hatred of President Bush.

I was only a mile from the Trade Centers on 9/11 and witnessed the second plane hit the South Tower.I then saw both Towers go down. It was a truly horrifying experience. None of you should have to see something like that.

Oh wow! A whole frigging MILE! BFD, you aspiring metrosexual -- I was 4 short blocks away when the north tower was hit and I missed watching the south tower going down because I was running for my life you pathetic wuss.

Now, when you start hectoring the leftists who wish death upon those of us who disagree with them and who are praying for more troop casualties in the desperate hope that it will give them an electoral edge, we *might* consider taking you seriously.

When we see you posting on the DUmpster and lecturing them in the same manner, you might stop being looked upon as a hypocritical whiner.

126 posted on 11/15/2003 7:10:58 AM PST by NYC GOP Chick (Dick Gephardt, Before He Can Do It To You!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Hal 2004
Was your letter addressing a specific article of Henninger's? If so, why not post it here?
127 posted on 11/15/2003 7:15:08 AM PST by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Hal 2004
I am writing this response in an attempt, hopefully not futile, to make you folks see that liberal Democrats like me are not your enemy. We may disagree, and, to be sure, we may phrase our disagreements sharply, but, for God's sake, let's NOT treat each other like garbage.

Glad to see you hear. Thank you so much for giving us a little publicity. We've been ignored too long.

128 posted on 11/15/2003 7:46:23 AM PST by NeoCaveman (yadda, yadda, yadda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson


We love ya, Jim!!!!
129 posted on 11/15/2003 7:58:29 AM PST by RandallFlagg ("There are worse things than crucifixion...There are teeth.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
I don't know of anyone, who agrees with anybody all the time. What's the big deal?
130 posted on 11/15/2003 9:45:43 AM PST by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Hey, doug, clinton is no ordinary criminal. His crime against the USA is systemic. His victim is no less than the very soul and values of the USA. The values which make America great and unique in the history of mankind.
131 posted on 11/15/2003 9:57:46 AM PST by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: everyone
Thanks to those many of you who replied in a rational manner to my comment and to those of you who didn't, grow up! You don't do your cause any good by acting like pre-teens!

Just a few comments:

It seems that many of you don't know what Marxism or Communism is. Rather, you lump all those with whom you disagree in one bunch and apply a label to them. FYI, a Marxist, in a nutshell, is a philosophical materialist who regards class struggle as the motive force of history and who believes that collective ownership of the means of production, socialism,is the next stage of human progress. I don't recall any mainstream Democrat calling for the collectivization or nationalization of America's industries, land, banks, etc. I don't recall any mainstream Democrat denouncing belief in God and calling for the abolition of our 1st Amendment right to worship.

Marx believed that socialism would occur inevitably through the mechanism of history. It was Lenin who believed that socialism required a secretive vanguard to lead the masses and who, in fact, was the father of Soviet totalitarianism. I don't recall any mainstream Democrat who called for or attempted to pass legislation that would abolish the entire Constitution, abolish all our freedoms, provide complete gov't control over all media, set up the Dems as the only lawful political party,provide labor camps and execution for political enemies with a secret police force established to enforce one-party rule etc. THIS is totalitarianism, and it is an absurd stretch to see Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, and even Al Sharpton as advocating these policies.

Why do you have to exaggerate your disagreements with liberals? Abortion is a good example. The Roe decision was authored by Harry Blackmun, a Republican, like Earl Warren, Governor of California before he came on the Court; appointed to the Court by Richard Nixon, another Republican, like Ike who appointed Warren. Yet some of you folks see Roe as some sort of Communist, atheist, traitorous plot to destroy America, just, as I presume, you see the decisions of the Warren court. Have you folks overdosed on John Birch Society propaganda?(Is that Society still around?) Certainly, one could argue these decisions were wrong, but treasonous? Really?

Some of you said that your extreme rhetoric was ony a response to extreme left-wing rhetoric. So, let's see if I got it right: Some liberals and Dems have said stupid, vile lying things, so you are also going to say stupid, vile and lying things. And this makes you better that liberals...how?

I am against stupid, vile, lying political rhetoric no matter who says it. I don't know about the DU (Democratic Undeground?). If that's a website where people compare Bush to Hitler etc. then I don't want to have anything to do with them. Stupidity and acting like a pre-teen is just as bad on the left as on the right.

We do disagree about the 2nd Amendment. I believe its purpose was to grant states the right to have their own militias (remember the part about a "well-regulated militia"?)so that it would not just be the federal gov't that would have an armed force. I believe, therefore, that individual citizens have, at best, a circumscribed right to own their own guns. Now I'm sure that nearly all of you don't agree with my opinon, but, guess what? I really believe that to be the correct understanding of that Amendment as do nearly all the other liberals I know. We don't advocate this to set up a one-world dictatorship!

Finally, some of you need to examine just how you are different from Osama Bin-Laden. He believed that his views are RIGHT, just as right as believing 2+2=4. So if you disagree with Osama, you disagree with TRUTH, you are a liar, an infidel, evil and you must be destroyed. Some of you say the exact same thing; that liberals are "nuclear waste", etc. Tell me, how does that differ from the Al-Qaeda mindset, or the Communist, fascist or Nazi? If you really believe that, then you're no better and you present no viable alternative.

That's all for now. Peace and Love!

From Hal 2004 in Brooklyn
132 posted on 11/17/2003 10:38:37 AM PST by Hal 2004 (The liberal replies:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Frustrate 1 liberal a day
133 posted on 11/17/2003 10:40:15 AM PST by ChadGore (Kakkate Koi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick; hellinahandcart
Hal won't go away.
134 posted on 11/17/2003 11:34:06 AM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
How can I miss him if he won't?

135 posted on 11/17/2003 11:41:32 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Very sure of the virtues of uncertainty, ain't he?

We be jus like Osama, uh-huh, uh-huh...
136 posted on 11/17/2003 11:45:22 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: hellinahandcart
Finally, some of you need to examine just how you are different from Osama Bin-Laden.

Yes indeed. I will now go on a retreat to contemplate the countless ways I am similar to OBL.

137 posted on 11/17/2003 11:55:06 AM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Yes, and as soon as you're feeling properly chastened, just please don't forget to remember how desperately we right-wingers need to tone down the rhetoric.

What's a girl to do with all these barrels of unused bombast, anyway?
138 posted on 11/17/2003 12:05:44 PM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: aculeus; hellinahandcart; Hal 2004
Hal won't go away.

So? I see him sticking around as us having something of a chew toy. Pissed off at a leftist on TV? Take it out on Hal! Teddy "The Killer" Kennedy say something that makes you want to punch a hole in the wall? Take it out on Hal!

Shoot, I just might *ping* him to every post I make. :) And if I'm feeling extra sadistic, I just might *ping* him to a gallery of photos of Hildebeast, Janet Reno, Madeleine Halfbright, Donna Shalala, Eleanor Rodham Clift, etc.

139 posted on 11/17/2003 12:21:44 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick (Dick Gephardt, Before He Can Do It To You!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Hal 2004
I have nothing but respect for our Constitution

Therefore, ipso facto, you must not be in agreement with the judicial obstructionism by Democrats and their subversion of constitutional processes.

140 posted on 11/17/2003 12:23:43 PM PST by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-142 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson