"BYE BYE!"
Posted on 07/22/2005 5:13:32 PM PDT by sirthomasthemore
A small town in Indiana and a brief filed saying that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided are entirely positive signs on first inspection, but the second reveals only a leaning and not a falling off on one side or the other. This is, of course, by White House design for the public understanding of Judge Roberts. Bush has exhibited his recurrent traits and examining G.W. Bush right now is the only way to know what really is in the heart of Judge Roberts.
Roberts is deliberately without much record. He is deliberately congenial and with friends all around. He is deliberately professionally competent, hard to make controversial – fine. I say "deliberately" on Bush's part – it is unknown if Judge Roberts has achieved his stealth status by his own design or by chance. Seemingly driven, popular success would encourage an individual to remain somewhat vanilla, but great strategists also sometimes hold their tongue and bide their time. We don't know, and that's the point.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
"As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty."
"We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life."
You said "...maybe you've been here to long and are just taking some important things for granted."
I am taking nothing for granted. Perhaps you haven't been here long enough and are seeing FR as you would like it to be rather than what it really is. What you see quoted above has all been taken from the FR mission statements as articulated by Jim Robinson. That this is a conservative site for conservatives could not be any clearer. The point of my earlier posts was that FR should remain a conservative site for conservatives and not be slowly dragged toward the center which is exactly where the GOP Big Tent RINOs/Liberals/Moderates would like to take it.
I have also pinged a couple of others to this post and hope this will shed some further light on my comments and perhaps respond to some of their questions as posted to me earlier. Other Freepers who often share the same views have been pinged so they may be aware of what I have said here and have an opportunity to agree or not as they see fit.
It's a troll.
Correction: "She said he did {NOT] have much of a track record to go on."
I disagree in that Roberts has a long track record as an attorney - and his wife is quite active in pro-life causes.
He's nowhere near the cipher that Souter represented. And for all the talk of Souter, Bush the Elder also nominated another judge with a minimal history. A certain gent named Clarence Thomas who has turned out quite nicely.
Are you implying that the people who still post on this site are not "real" conservatives?
And, btw, you're still here, aren't you? Are you a "real" conservative?
So you're saying there was no bombast. Okay.
I agree as well.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying.
You said Coulter's column was bombastic.
I asked for some examples.
You said you disagreed with her claim that Roberts did not have much of a track record to go on, vis., his conservatism.
You didn't cite any bombast on her part.
But unfortunately, other than that that, we don’t know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever.
Nah, no bombast here.
So we agree.
By the way, you are wrong about Thomas not having a record. If you will recall, when he was nominated to the DC Court of Appeals his nomination was stalled. It only went through after Joe Biden's "document request" got printed in the WSJ. If I recall correctly, it was in very small type and it took up almost a whole page of the WSJ. Because of the outrage over that, Thomas got through.
It is an absolute disgrace that some posters have attacked her for her body shape; and, her marital status; and, her facial features; and, her purported drinking habits; and imputed uninformed pseudo- psychoanalysis in this vicious ad hominem attack. If ANYONE in the conservative movement didn’t deserve such hypocritical treatment from her own, it is Ann Coulter.I have felt obligated to come to the defense of Miss Coulter in this area as well. It should be beneath "our side", is grossly mirepresentational, lacks pertinence, and has no place in disagreement over opinion.
Sure, she punches up her language in her classic way. She gives the lib-Dems apoplectic fits. That's her way. That's not my way. Still, I usually agree with her underlying logic. And occasionally, I say day-um, I wish I could write lack that. LOL.
John / Billybob
Simple explanation:
There is a very high percentage of Republican loyalists here. Republican does NOT mean automatic conservative, contrary to their thinking.
There is a very high percentage of Republican loyalists here who think they are conservative but are not.
There is a very high percentage of Republican loyalists who think they are conservative here and they also think President Bush is a conservative. President Bush proved long ago, early into his administration, that he is not a conservative (although he does fight the war on terror, he is a liberal in domestic agenda).
Since you read a good part of the Coulter/Roberts thread, you can also see that there are some very perceptive members here in the minority that have the ability to be very perceptive and rational. That makes FR a valuable forum and important for the conservative movement. This explains why Ann Coulter is praised (like others) normally, but the second they make astute and accurate comments that run contrary to the RNC loyalists, these same members turn on Ann (and the others--including FR members--in many similar instances).
Most of what is said on FR is unimportant because it comes form blind party loyalists. However, it is what is said by the minority here that makes FR a great forum. The minority here bring forth great source material and make the best posts that cause many in the Bush administration and in conservative media outlets take notice.
Ignore the majority--read what the minority have to say.
;-)
LOL....... F. Lee of course!
I am sure that poster did not call Annie a hooker, that poster said that in a certain set of (3)pictures she looked (was dressed) like a hooker. And that poster was right.
Ann's a very sardonic and witty writer, but she could use a little help with her clothing................. would you like to help?
That is a fact.
LOL!
Words to live by. For us, and for FR.
Thank You.
my error...
LOL. Another troll. How many people who came to his defense lost credibility here?
Oh, none. Those people had no credibility to begin with.
This thread is an excellent example. It was a troll of the stripe I was describing, as confirmed by JimRob himself.
"BYE BYE!"
Good catch!
Given the behavior of Democrats for the past two years and many of them up for re-election in red states in 2006, the Democrats have one hell of a hill to climb in regaining the Senate. At best, they'll probably lose more seats.
Thanks for the ping and reply. I agree with most of the "bedrock issues" in FR's description of conservativism.
IMO, you are correct about the forum changing. In just the three-plus years I've been here, I've noticed a change, too, to a more "moderate" membership. (As a matter of fact, I remember more right-leaning Freepers flaming me in the past - as in, "What do you mean you don't want religion in schools?! Are you a troll?" - whereas now the flames come from a more left-leaning crowd here - as in, "What do you mean you don't think there should be public schools?! Are you crazy?!"). ;-) Another example: there were many more homeschoolers here when I first signed up, and now that's just not the case anymore.
But I can see why the FR tent has widened. First, there are those of us whose views are right-leaning in a more "libertarian" sense (like Boortz and Elder). We tend to take the idea of limited gov't to an extreme, but I think we belong here.
Nowadays, there are newer Freepers who just seem to have "pet conservative issues," while taking a moderate stance in a few other areas. But, I can see why they'd belong here, too. It'd be worse if they strayed to the other side; the more votes cast for conservatives, the better. Anyway, the President himself takes a moderate position is quite a few areas (to the dismay of some of us).
I appreciate your comments. Thanks.
I'm glad I clicked on your account, I see that you've been zotted. I THOUGHT you were a troll, which was why I added "Zot" to the keyword section. At least you responded to the posts aimed at you, and for the most part they were relatively coherent, which is unusual for a troll and it explains why you lasted so long on this forum. But I do not feel the need to answer your post now that I know you were a troll all along. And, of course, I'm kinda lazy and I have trouble figuring out what you're getting at.
The best line I saw from you was, "I am engaging in civil discourse, as to a significant issue to conservatives..." I would advise you to stay that course the next time you sign up and try to troll through FR. Also, try growing a sense of humor. Buh bye.
"The point of my earlier posts was that FR should remain a conservative site for conservatives and not be slowly dragged toward the center which is exactly where the GOP Big Tent RINOs/Liberals/Moderates would like to take it. "
***Well said. Sometimes it does seem like FR is being co-opted, but it still remains healthy for the most part. I wonder if that is kinda inevitable, being dragged into more moderate territory. It's probably just a byproduct of becoming the most popular news site on the web. We need guys like you to stick to the original standard. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for your kind words.
You took the troll's bait, I see.
You also fell for the troll's bait. Good grief.
Think, people, think.
(And the requests for pictures that accompany every thread mention belie the attacks anyway.)
You are correct, AnnaZ, and I join in your defense of Ann Coulter regarding the same.
You don't realize how silly you look for calling that member a troll. Yo might as well call Ann Coulter a troll. And no, I NEVER "fall for bait". I am too perceptive, too intelligent and too well researched in my issues to "fall for bait".
That name calling of yours is childish beyond words. Had Bill Clinton appointed Roberts, there would have been massive teeth gnashing since "we" would have wanted a Luttig, Brown or Rogers appointed.
Like always, Ann Coutler is correct, and your childish name calling makes you look foolish.
Ditto.
"You took the troll's bait, I see."
And I see you drank the Republican party cool aid.
LOL. Keep it up. You only make yourself look more and more foolish.
Very, very stupid. I expected no less.
I look silly? LOL! Read the thread and click on his screen name. He's not a member - he's a zotted troll, and a retread troll that's been here numerous times as confirmed by JimRob. You fell for the troll's little act hook, line, and sinker.
Had Bill Clinton appointed Roberts, there would have been massive teeth gnashing since "we" would have wanted a Luttig, Brown or Rogers appointed.
Bill Clinton would never have appointed Roberts. What a ridiculous thing to say.
Oh, and I never called Coulter any names, so your claims to the contrary are lies (but of course you already knew that).
"Very, very stupid. I expected no less."
You're right. Almost on the level of your troll bait comment. Sorry.
I took no positions on any issues on this thread - other than skepticism as to the motives of this poster - which turned out to be well founded, as confirmed by JimRob.
Dude, go back down to your basement, eat some cheetos and make out with your life-size Coulter cut-out. She's waaaaaiiting for you!
hear, hear. Whether she is "cigarettes and chardonnay" or "Bible study with the Baptists", she is one of ours and we ought to love, love, love her. After all, that isn't hard is it? There's a lot to love about Ann Coulter. And moreover we must remember the Maxim of Ronaldus, "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow republican...." I use the term fellow here in the true sense of fellow-ship. The maxim need not, for example, apply to swenatah Mcwayne.
Anny, Baby, if you're logging in for sustenance, log away. We'll always roll out the red carpet for you, you silky brilliant thing, you.
Well Ann, I for one "love ya!" I really hope that you find this posting on this thread.
I love your rapier-like wit, and the way (a bit like South Park), you like to go right up to the line, then take a step back, and then launch yourself across the line, like the guy that shot himself out of a cannon across the US/Mexico border!
All I can say, and I know that I speak for at least 20 other people, is keep it up, keep your head held high, and know that you've got the support of a lot of people out there.
Sincerely,
Mark
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.