Posted on 07/24/2006 10:16:33 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
You wrote something to the effect of "Rudy is a conservative, just not your type of conservative". If I'm mixing you up with someone I sincerely apologize. Do you think that Rudy is not conservative?
You were absolutely positive in what you quoted me as saying. You were specific about pro-abortion and pro-gun.
Link it.
Rudy is anti-gun and pro-abortion and I thought you claimed that he was conservative on that thread. I'm going to go pull it up. You've got me confused now.
That's a gross mischaracterization of what happened.
This is EXACTLY what you said:
She did claim that you can be pro-abortion and anti-gun and still be conservative on a Giuliani thread a few weeks ago.
YOu didn't say "I thought she meant" or "I assumed she meant." You said "She did claim..."
Quite simply put, you are a liar.
How about you stop using this CONSERVATIVE forum to promote a clearly LIBERAL candidate?
How about you not telling the rest of us who don't agree with you what we can and cannot do. And you can also stop slamming people that don't have the same degree of tunnel vision that you have as being "liberal."
I was mistaken. You didn't call Rudy conservative, but "not liberal". My bad.
You have quite a few broad stroke criticisms of some of the people on this thread. Care to pinpoint who you're talking about and offer some evidence/examples?
I know many of these people and some of them have done more over the last ten years to advance conservatism than you could possibly imagine. Most do more in a week than I would guess you do in a year.
You seem to me to be one of those people who feel if someone else doesn't believe exactly as you do on issues that doesn't make them true "conservative". No one individual is the repository of all things conservative and people gravitate toward the issues important to them. Economic conservatives may not be as concerned for social issues and vice versa. Nothing wrong with that, it's just the way things are.
You're "one size fits all conservatism" is debilitating to the overall cause.
No it's not. Cathlicfreeper was going willy-nilly posting every possible mention of the players involved in an attempt to find something and Kristinn's name came up in association with Connie Hair. I pointed out to him who Kristinn is and that's the last we've heard about him.
Anyhow, do you think that my characterization of the majority of freepers on these threads was pretty much accurate?
Link?
I saw the entire exchange. You're now intentionally mischaracterizing it.
Maybe we better have a link to that one, too, considering what's been shown about your posting history on this very thread.
I haven't answered you yet because I'm busy scouring the thread hunting for anything you've said that reaches the level of "pretty much accurate."
You have quite a few broad stroke criticisms of some of the people on this thread. Care to pinpoint who you're talking about and offer some evidence/examples?
I think my post above pretty much sums it up. I'll repost it here...
I don't have a problem with people who genuinely support the Minutemen raising questions. It is healthy. If there is any nonsense going on, I will be the first to call for Simcox to be prosecuted. What I do have a big problem with are the freepers who have opposed the Minutemen from the very beginning acting as if they are part of the border security movement and feigning worry about how this might negativly affect the Minutemen when, in reality, they would love to see the organization crumble.
If you don't find this characterization to be accurate, I'd be happy to do some Googling and show you examples of this crowd trashing the Minutemen and the border-security movement in general long before these latest allegations surfaced. What you are seeing on these threads is a witch hunt. Period. FR is better than this.
What was the purpose for him bringing up Kristinn at all in that post. In the copy he was quoting from, Kristinn's name did not even appear.
Let's go to the tape! Got a link?
Is it really? That could only be true if there is nothing wrong. Yet you have already said that you don't know if there is anything wrong, but that you'll be first to call for their heads (or some such thing). It doesn't fit.
Instead, what I said upthread is the actual truth: you don't really want to ask if there's anything wrong, nor do you want anyone else to ask.
You'd rather spray the whole crowd with petty name-calling, like "Bush sycophants." Attacking the messenger has never worked. The message always gets out. The truth will out.
The Associated Press Tucson, Arizona | Published: 07.05.2006 Connie Hair, a spokeswoman for the group (other media/PR person for the Simcox group is Kristinn Taylor ), which opposes illegal immigration, said Wednesday that construction of vehicle barriers will start soon on the first fence project, headed by contractor Peter Kunz. http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/136644.php
If you look at the AP copy, Kristinn is not mentioned at all. Catholicfreeper added that himself. What was the purpose of bringing Kristinn up at all? I suspect that cathlicfreeper, having only been a freeper for a few months, had no idea who Kristinn was, and dragged his name into this hoping to find some sort of nefarious link with him. That's what he was doing on that thread.
Instead, what I said upthread is the actual truth: you don't really want to ask if there's anything wrong, nor do you want anyone else to ask.
I honestly have zero problem with Michelle Malkin and Jim Gilchrist raising questions about this. I honestly don't. But I'm going to ask you yet again, can you honestly tell me that the majority of the folks on this thread have not been against the Minutemen and the border security movement in general long before this alleged scandal? I contend that these people are hoping for these allegations to be true.
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.