Posted on 12/01/2007 10:59:30 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Don’t call it Arkancide
bookmark as I know some involved.
Were you opposed to DuMond’s release? Oh wait, you weren’t here back then.
Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of folks on this forum supported the release of Wayne DuMond at the time. It’s all in the archives here. It’s going to be a major embarrassment for a lot of us old-timers if you decide to use the forum to attack Huckabee on the DuMond issue. It makes us look like the biggest bunch of damn hypocrites on the planet to demand DuMond’s release, then to condemn Huckabee’s minimal role after the release.
As for Murray Waas, he is a toilet-licking hard-left troll. His garbage ought to be banned on this forum.
Wow! I didn’t know of this.
Let’s see:
1. Apparently like Huckabee those here who supported the Dumond release were wrong.
2. Unlike Huckabee those here who supported the Dumond release are not running for GOP presidential nomination.
3. While I agree with you this one decision while which clearly did not work out well is not the single basis for picking a presidential candidate, the smell of the Arkansas way of political back dealing gives me pause.
And it is especially crazy to be posting garbage by Murray Waas, who is now busy peddling conspiracies about "Iraqgate", "Plamegate", etc. He is Bill Clinton's biggest defender. Now he's supposed to be the credible source of information here?
“For anyone who knows the history of this subject on the forum, the DuMond issue is clearly an absolute loser for Free Republic. It is bat-shit crazy to be posting this stuff here.”
How does it hurt us? And how do we shut off a portion of the current Huckabee campaign news, as though it isn’t being read about and discussed by the rest of the world?
So what part of the story are you disputing?
1. Was Dumond not paroled?
2. Did Huckabee not influence the parole board?
3. Did Huckabee not benefit by a the decision being made just be for he had to decide on his clemency petition?
4. Do you believe Dumond did not kill the woman in Missouri?
I would prefer another source if this one is tainted by association with the loons of BDS, but unless you are will to argue this article is incorrect, I don’t see your point.
As for this being a loser for FR. When we are wrong, we have to move on. We have to deal with this issue as it is an issue associated with a current candidate. It could in fact be that this guy was sentenced too harshly due to the woman being a distant relation to Clinton. But it equally could be that he was sentence so harshly because the public in that area knew he was abusing women frequently and getting away with it until this time. That is how the jury system is suppose to work.
And again, what I found most interesting in relationship to Huckabee’s candidacy is the going around the AR FOIA, the presuring an independent board, the attempt to deflect blame for the release of Dumond after taking credit for it earlier. Is there something in the water in Hope?
Those are fair questions, but they’re difficult to answer. Conceivably, I could explain the situation better by posting embarassing old quotes from numerous prominent FReepers who were demanding DuMond’s release at the time - but I’m NOT going to do that!!!!!
If this were my forum, I’d be going back and deleting all of those old DuMond threads for the sake of my friends and long-time members who were misinformed on this issue at the time. If Huckabee wins the nomination, the Dems could have a field day with those old comments - to Hillary’s benefit and our regret.
I realize that the supporters of Huckabee’s opponents are concerned and a little panicky about at his rise in the polls. Their natural instinct is to throw anything and everything they can find at Huckabee, without a though of how it could backfire. But the newcomers don’t realize the role that Free Republic and Steve Dunleavy played in winning Wayne DuMond’s release, so they post this stuff without understanding the consequences. (The same article posted above was also posted yesterday by another recently-joined member - and pulled voluntarily after the history of the situation was explained. It’s interesting how this exact same old article seems to be popping up so frequently now.)
In my opinion, the best course of action is to keep this stuff off of the forum for now. We don’t need to be posting two-year-old propaganda from Murray Waas and the left-wing Arkansas Times. If Huckabee wins the nomination, a strategy will be available for dealing with the inevitable attacks from Hillary’s camp.
If Huckabee’s opponents on this forum believe that they absolutely must post this garbage, they could at least see to it that those old threads are deleted first so that they won’t be used against Free Republic in the future.
I really don’t like talking about damage control on the public forum. It’s like an open line to Hell, and our enemies could easily pick up on it. But at the same time, I don’t know how to explain this stuff to the noobs. They weren’t here when it was going on, so they don’t fully appreciate the situation. I’ve been doing opposition research on the Clintons for 27 years, so I can see the trainwreck we’re heading into if the present course of action continues.
Thanks for the response I don’t want you to expend much energy on my questions, save that for the bigger discussion some of you guys are going to have.
My curiosity right now is light and shallow, but I do hope to read some more in depth discussions on this tomorrow or the next day.
Personally I don’t see the big deal yet, I thought that the very nature of this passionate, activist, insider forum, meant that we would sometimes be on the wrong side of history, or would have reached a bloody hard fought consensus, that a few years down the road would prove to be wrong and sometimes humiliatingly wrong.
My take on this forum is that we live in real time, and we have to let it all hang out and go balls to the wall on our ideas and causes, that means that looking back to old threads, even dominant ideas may look pretty bad at a future time.
Trying to conceal something so public, available and permanent seems a destructive effort in possibly a fatal cover up for a reason that I still don’t understand.
Google this on google news and you will see that everybody out there is covering this, including Rush.
I may be embarrassed by my lack of insight tomorrow, but I don’t see the big deal.
Like I said don’t put a lot of effort into my curiosity tonight but if you can freepmail me a few short hints of what disturbs you about this I would appreciate it, I’ll let the details play out as I read you and the other old timers discuss it.
You’ve got mail.
i know my explanation is inadequate, but thanks for your consideration.
“i know my explanation is inadequate, but thanks for your consideration”
It isn’t that, I simply don’t have any background knowledge of the situation, so that means it would take a lot to bring me up to speed, that’s why I didn’t want to drag you into a big session of long drawn out answers.
I am curious now, so I do look forward to reading the thread as it progresses.
I’ve given my view on it, probably to no avail. We’ll see what happens.
The DNA in the Missouri woman was pretty convincing.
It is also interesting that it was the Dem governor that started the parole process, and then went to jail himself.
I’m with you!
I’m reasonably certain that Dumond did rape the woman in Arkansas, and he had an extensive history of violent crime prior to that. He was properly convicted of rape by the jury. Then he got drunk and castrated himself, and concocted the story of the break-in to avoid going to jail.
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.