Replies

LOL! Hey Uriah_lost was very civil compared to the attack I got for a post I made on Fred Thompson the other week. I was discussing the debate and said I was looking forward to finally seeing his performance and that all he had to do was consistently promote conservative principles. Then I said if he couldn't do that much then I might be compelled to reconsider support.

I got jumped on by 3 or 4 FReepers who questioned things ranging from my intelligence and species.

And I've donated to Fred Thompson twice - LOL!

On the bright side, one FReeper said it was a well spoken and thoughtful statement.

I think we're getting into the thick of the primary process. Suffice to say we should archive some of these threads. The flame wars are going to be something. Perhaps we can keep a ping thread by the name of "When FReepers Attack (other FReepers!)"

I just wish that those other FReepers who launch the more savage verbal assault would keep in mind we need to unite together once this process is over. We're suppose to be setting the example for a Democratic nomination process since we're the only party that really practices one. Not like the democrat party that has a coronation followed by numerous human sacrifices to their dark queen.

Anyways, I know you support a different candidate and I support your freedom to do so. This is all part of the process and we should celebrate it. Even while taking snipes at each other's candidates. That's half the fun for me and I do it regularly. The best part is that I can't come up with anything truthful that is as remotely as bad as I could easily come up with for a democrat party candidate. We have some tough choices ahead but afterwards we'll all be in the same boat.

Cheers!

You may have been just itching to get this out, which is certainly fair enough, but did you read the post that CheyennePress posted? If that's not a backhanded compliment, I've never read one.

Are you also aware that CheyennePress has been lying about Fred Thompson's record? He's been posting little drive-by shots anywhere he can, saying that Fred's soft on the border and wants amnesty.

An example of CheyennePress' lies can be found in the post just above yours, where he said that Fred Thompson voted for amnesty for Cubans and Nicaraguans.

What he's referring to is the Mack Amendment.

Thompson did not vote to grant amnesty for illegals from Nicaragua and Cuba. The Mack Amendment amended the touch 1996 illegal immigration enforcement bill, which Thompson supported. Specifically, the Mack amendment addressed some illegal immigrants who had fled our wars against communism AND who had their deportation cases in the pipeline before the tough 1996 bill passed — it said that these immigrants would have their deportation cases considered under the pre-1996 laws, rather than under the new laws. This was in line with agreements that the Reagan and Bush administrations had made as part of the American Baptist Churches et al. v. Thornburgh case. It did *not* grant anyone amnesty — it simply defined the criteria by which certain deportation cases that had already been in motion would be evaluated.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00269

This has been detailed here on FR many times for anyone who interested in it.

You may have been treated unfairly, but the unfair treatment that your received does not apply in this case. CheyennePress is a Mitt Romney supporter who has been utterly shameless in doing anything he can to deride Fred Thompson in a futile attempt to convince others to buy the bill of goods that Mitt Romney has sold him.

We all need to do everything we can to combat misinformation by dishonest posters here on FR.