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

Skip to comments.

Perry and the Profs - He picked the right fight
Weekly Standard ^ | 9-19-2011 | Andrew Ferguson - Commentary

Posted on 09/10/2011 9:08:18 AM PDT by smoothsailing

Perry and the Profs

He picked the right fight.

Andrew Ferguson

September 19, 2011, Vol. 17, No. 01

If you want a glimpse of the way Rick Perry operates as an executive and a politician, consider the issue of higher education reform in Texas, which no one in Texas knew was an issue until Perry decided to make it one.

In his 30-year public career, Perry​—​how to put this delicately?​—​has shown no sign of being tortured by a gnawing intellectual curiosity. “He’s not the sort of person you’ll find reading The Wealth of Nations for the seventh time,” said Brooke Rollins, formerly Perry’s policy director and now president of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a free-market research group closely allied with Perry. At Texas A&M he majored in animal science and escaped with a grade point average a bit over 2.0. (Perry’s A&M transcript was leaked last month to the left-wing blog Huffington Post by “a source in Texas,” presumably not his mom. How his GPA compares with Barack Obama’s is unknown, since no one in higher education has thought to leak Obama’s transcript to a right-wing blog.)

Perry expends his considerable intelligence instead on using political power and, what amounts to the same thing, picking fights with his political adversaries. When Rollins came to Perry in 2007 with a radical and comprehensive proposal to overhaul higher education in the state, Rollins says the governor quickly understood the potential of the issue, not only politically but on its merits. The state operates more than 100 colleges, universities, technical schools, and two-year community colleges, organized into six separate systems. As in other states, public higher education in Texas is scattered, expensive, poorly monitored, and top heavy with administrators, even as it subjects students to often large annual tuition increases without a compensatory increase in educational quality.

Perry’s first poke at this sclerotic establishment came early in his first term. He suggested converting the money that the state gives to public colleges and universities into individual grants handed straight to students. Money is power, and Perry’s idea was to place the power in the hands of “consumers,” as he put it, rather than the administrators, to increase competition among schools and thereby lower costs and increase quality. “Young fertile minds [should be] empowered,” he said at the time, “to pursue their dreams regardless of family income, the color of their skin, or the sound of their last name.”

The higher ed establishment, led by regents of the University of Texas system, rebelled, and the legislature, well-wired with the system’s allies, agreed, and the proposal died. But Perry continued to poke. College graduation rates in Texas are unusually low, and the gaps among whites, blacks, and Hispanics are unusually high. Nationwide 38 percent of American adults (age 25-64) have a post-secondary degree; in Texas the figure is 31 percent. So Perry proposed “Outcomes-based Funding,” tying the amount of aid a school receives to the number of students it graduates. To keep a school from lowering its standards to increase its graduation rates, he suggested giving an exit exam to all students receiving a B.A. Students wouldn’t have to pass the exam to get their degree, but the information yielded by such a test​—​how much learning is going on around here?​—​would be useful, mostly to reformers. The proposal was seen, correctly, as a threat to the status quo, which has so far successfully fought it off.

The proposals Rollins brought to Perry in 2007 turned on the same themes of​—​apologizing in advance for the buzzwords​—​accountability and transparency: collecting information about how much students learn and how well schools function, and holding the schools responsible for the results. “His priority has been putting students back into the driver’s seat,” Rollins said. Perry said he hoped to apply the cost-benefit logic of business to public higher education. He incorporated Rollins’s ideas into a package of reforms and called a “higher education summit” to build support.

The reforms attacked the establishment from multiple angles. They would require schools to expand their websites to make vast amounts of new information available to students. For the first time, professors would be required to post course syllabi online. To suss out slackers among the faculty, schools would post every teacher’s salary and benefits along with the average number of students and course hours they taught every year. A summary of student evaluations would be posted too, and the average number of As and Bs professors handed out, to guard against grade inflation. Before choosing a particular school or enrolling in a major, students would be given a list of the specific skills or knowledge that they could expect to learn, as well as the average starting salaries of students who had graduated from a similar course of study. 

Perry also suggested separating teaching budgets from research budgets, as a way of encouraging teachers to teach and researchers to do research. Tenure would be granted only to teachers who spent a large majority of their time teaching; a defined percentage of tenure jobs would go to researchers, who would concentrate on pure research. A system of cash awards and other incentives would compensate professors who successfully taught a large number of students.

Any businessman in a profit-seeking enterprise would see ideas like “pay for performance” as unremarkable, but they overwhelm the delicate sensibilities of people who have spent their professional lives on campus, where the word “nonprofit” is meant to act as a firewall against the unpleasantness of commercial life. “Texas Governor Treats Colleges Like Businesses,” headlined the Chronicle of Higher Education​—​a sentence sure to induce aneurysms in faculty lounges from El Paso to Galveston. The outrage was deafening, especially when university regents began acting on the recommendations. The Texas A&M system, for example, which includes a dozen schools, posted a spreadsheet on its website evaluating teacher performance on a cost-benefit basis. 

“Very simplistic and potentially very dangerous,” an official of the American Association of University Professors said. “This is .  .  . simplistic,” said the dean of faculties at A&M. “Simplistic,” said the Houston Chronicle. A group of former regents and wealthy school boosters organized a pressure group to oppose -Perry’s reforms. The group hired Karen Hughes, a close aide to the second President Bush, as press spokesman. The rage at Perry from within the establishment has taken many forms: You think it’s easy stealing someone’s college transcript?

The protests might have been more effective except that Perry, for the last decade, has been seeding Texas higher education with like-minded reformers (cronies too). By 2009 he had appointed every regent in the state. The chancellor of A&M who issued the cost-benefit report, for example, was a former chief of staff of the governor. At least three campus presidents have been pressured to resign in recent years, to make way for Perry appointees​—​all Republican businessmen. A particularly popular (and vocal) vice president of student affairs at the University of Texas was removed and replaced by .  .  . a retired Marine Corps general.

The appointees weren’t as pliant as Perry might have wished. The implementation of the reforms has been difficult and at times dilatory. Perry barrels on. In his state of the state address this spring, he urged administrators to develop a four-year bachelor’s degree that would cost less than $10,000 “including textbooks.” The discount degree, he said, would be a “bold, Texas-style solution” to the problem of rapidly rising tuition. (The average in-state cost of a four-year degree in Texas, including books, is roughly $30,000.) After the goal was declared impossible by Perry’s critics, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board published a plan to lower costs dramatically: greater use of online classes and “open-source” course materials, accelerated or staggered student schedules, fuller integration of four- and two-year colleges, and more. 

 

Perry’s admirers praise his sure-footedness​—​his ability to sense cultural trends before others do and turn them to his political advantage. He was the first national politician to ally himself to the Tea Party movement in 2009, a move that’s just now paying off. He caught the mounting anxiety among middle-income parents about college costs early on. Most American parents now say that a college degree will be essential for their children’s future success; at the same time, according to a new Pew Foundation poll, only 22 percent of Americans believe that most people can afford to send their kids to college. And 57 percent describe the quality of American higher education as “only fair” or “poor.” To address this anxiety Perry’s opponents offer more government subsidies, which in turn provide an incentive for schools to raise their prices​—​an attempt to douse the fire with gasoline. Perry’s ideas are cheaper, more comprehensive, more imaginative, and more likely to work.

And they have a good chance of being put into action. In late August, Perry scored another significant, if partial, victory. The University of Texas regents approved an “action plan” proposed by the system’s chancellor, who isn’t a Perry appointee. The plan is a compromise, but it incorporates many of Perry’s ideas, including some of the most radical, such as “pay for performance” and “learning contracts” between schools and their students. Amazingly, the plan has won support from both the right (Brooke Rollins’s Texas Public Policy Foundation) and left (Karen Hughes’s group). 

Reforms like these would have been unthinkable 10 years ago, before Perry picked up his stick and started poking the system until it had to respond. It’s been a remarkable display of political entrepreneurship: Create an issue, define it on your terms, cultivate public support, and your opponents, who never saw it coming, will have to go along, even if only partway​—​at first.

Andrew Ferguson is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard and the author, most recently, of Crazy U: One Dad’s Crash Course in Getting His Kid Into College.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: perry; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-128 next last
To: Cincinatus' Wife
And you’re arrogant to boot!

Really? No, you just don't like your crap handed back to you for what it is. When is smells bad you blame the delivery boy.

51 posted on 09/10/2011 1:34:53 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
You PICK on one bone and never look at the total of the skeleton. Have you ever read anything else on this? Gotten a feel for the topic? Or are you just stuck gnawing on that bone?

Will Rick Perry Unravel the Strange Consensus on Public Education?

In Texas Schools, Perry Shuns Federal Influence

52 posted on 09/10/2011 1:36:36 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
You PICK on one bone and never look at the total of the skeleton.

Lol, I've been making serious, systemic, and innovative proposals on educational reform since long before Rick Perry came on the national political scene.

Education Policy Components

  1. Enforce the U.S. Supreme Court decision re Communications Workers v. Beck (487 US 735, 1988).
  2. Assist formation of corporate service associations. Offer State funding for local school districts to divest into smaller, more personalized institutions.
  3. Use the private and home education market to develop and test learning tools and services. Private validation services could assess product performance against product claims. School boards would be free to select guaranteed products for use in public schools.
  4. Insurance on the guarantee would cover the cost of remedial education if the product fails to meet warranted performance.
  5. Veto any bill requiring home and private educators to conform to State teacher certification standards.
  6. Veto any bill requiring State supervision of home schools.
  7. Analyze any Federal program for insufficient funds and unintended consequences suspecting unfunded mandates. Cite New York v. United States (505 US 144, 1992).
Here is a speech on the topic I wrote for Bill Simon:

Education

Education is the most critical issue in California, more serious than even the budget crisis. When Gray Davis first ran for Governor, he promised that Education was to be his highest three priorities, but instead Mr. Davis has shown us what they really were all along: Re-Election, Re-Election, and Re-Election. What were the results? Education spending per student has increased nearly 30%, while classroom performance remains relatively unimproved and at the bottom of a nation producing a third rate primary and secondary education product. The system is broken and the State is nearly bankrupt. So what can we do?

One answer is to free California’s teachers from the overwhelming power of national unions. Teachers should have a choice whether or not to support an often radical political agenda. Unlike Gray Davis, if you elect me Governor of California, I will enforce the law that prohibits unions from requiring campaign contributions in dues payments without teacher’s permission (Beck (487 US 735), 1988).

Second, we must reverse the trend toward large unified school districts that has effectively excluded parents from affecting public school decisions. The purpose of consolidation was supposedly to reduce the cost of overhead through economies of scale and to strengthen the districts’ collective bargaining power, but that isn’t how it has turned out. Instead, district bureaucracies have become enormous and the resulting issues are so complex that parents are pushed aside by an organizational machine controlled by union lawyers.

I plan to assist formation of corporate service associations for school districts so that they can divest operations into smaller, more personalized institutions while retaining the organizational muscle to deal with the unions. Smaller school districts will give parents a stronger voice on district boards over the issues that matter to them. The principle need to make this possible is to develop programs for children with special needs. Here is where can turn to parents for solutions.

Some would argue that parents on local School Boards aren’t qualified to make administrative decisions about public education, especially over programs for children with developmental challenges. So, I’d like to talk about an education success-story that not only proves that argument wrong, it points toward a total transformation in public education.

Home education is enjoying a renaissance in America, and religious freedom isn’t the principle reason. Parents are choosing to home school to assure educational excellence for their children, whose learning habits they know best. A family bond of patience and discipline is a critical factor in student success, especially in a challenging situation. What many people don't know about home-schools is that they have a high percentage of students with genetic, behavioral, and developmental disabilities that had often been poorly served by public institutions. Even with that statistical disadvantage, SAT, ACT, and STAR test scores strongly indicate that home education is producing superior results across the entire spectrum of individual ability.

So parents ARE competent to make choices about their children’s education, and home schools successfully manage nearly every type of specialized educational problem. So what are they doing right that we can apply to public institutions?

As home-educators have grown in number, they have been organizing into loosely knit education cooperatives that point to a new form of public education: a decentralized, customer-oriented network for lifelong learning, using products customized to meet individual interests and abilities. That promises what 21st Century public education could really become: a multi-disciplinary market of customized learning products and services.

We are already starting to see the effects of this change. Software and curriculum companies are finding a growing market of customers committed to gaining competitive advantage. Colleges and universities are offering online degrees because they need superior students to assure productive alumnae. Superior teachers could get rich transmitting their ideas and methods to a mass-market. Where better to develop those products and sell them to the world than California?

We can use private and home education as if they were R&D laboratories developing and testing proven learning tools and services. Public school parents on school boards could then select those products that the State would fund for use in public schools. It is a gradual transformation, from experimenting on our children with untested academic theories, to contracting for innovative tools and methods that have been proven in the marketplace.

All we have to do is let it happen and keep government from regulating new educational methods out of existence. If you elect me Governor, that is what I will do. Federal education dollars aren’t worth the price of Federal control and bureaucratic requirements. Private and home education both leave the State with more money to spend per-child and provide a competitive incentive for public schools to keep their customers.

Together, let’s help California rise from the ashes of a broken system and lead the way once again, into a world of exciting possibilities for our children.

Now, that program would bring real change.

15 posted on Saturday, April 19, 2003 9:34:27 PM by Carry_Okie (California - See how low WE can go!)

This whole harangue of yours reminds me of SOME of the reaction I got when I shot down Dick Pombo's "reform" of the ESA, yet for the most part it was positive because FR was a different place in those days, sigh. Just because the guy is "on our side" does not mean that what he is proposing is a good thing. Like I said on that thread, "If it's broke, don't fix it." They should devolve the powers that got us into the hole in the first place.

53 posted on 09/10/2011 1:55:54 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
You can't know how much this reminds me of the educational hoo-haw when George W. Bush ran for President. He instituted TESTING. He IMPROVED Texas education... so much so that ol' Rick Perry had to fix it too and what do you know, but he's doing the same things!

Look what happened: George W. got into office and who'da thunk it but he did a deal with TEDDY KENNEDY for No Child Left Alone, er "Behind." Yes indeed, now the DOE has the power to test children to see if their "tolerance education" is up to snuff, nationwide!! Great idea.

So don't get all huffy when I see Perry doing the same things and don't exactly get enamored with the underlying principle: centralized command and control. Somehow, it's been a bad thing for securing the blessings of liberty every time it's been tried, regardless of how pleasing the pitch may have sounded.

So now that you've tried to push the same thing and had it handed back to you, well, thanks for the opportunity to make things clearer. Over time, the far cheaper and far more effective alternatives to increasing state control will become more obvious.

54 posted on 09/10/2011 2:09:15 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

From Austin and now Madison, what will the poor commie profs do? Next thing it’ll be BERKLEY (Not).

Perry did this discreetly, so as not to empower the screamers. Hope it works for Scott.

College reform, Tort reform, nobamacare reform, good ol common sense “get it done” reform is what Perry will bring to FedGov. He’s been good for Texas, but I guess we shouldn’t begrudge our loss for the good of America.

My next question, what will Dewhurst be like as Governor?


55 posted on 09/10/2011 2:11:10 PM PDT by dusttoyou ("Progressives" and ronpaulnutz are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; Cincinatus' Wife
you have to attack me by painting me as unreasonable, shallow, and flippant

That didn't happen, those are your words.

So even though Governor Perry is making some headway, but it's not good enough for you, we should just cast him aside and wait for some perfect savior who has yet to arrive?

Those words, my words, were in the form of a question, not an insult or even an accusation. They required an answer or they required being ignored, throwing a fit about them was uncalled for. Like I said, you're far too sensitive.

56 posted on 09/10/2011 2:17:07 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The more people learn of this the more his poll numbers will grow.


57 posted on 09/10/2011 2:29:21 PM PDT by samtheman (Palin. In your heart you know she's right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Well, smooth, I spoke too soon about the PDS coyotes.

Looks like this caryokie is some important biggie, he clams to write speeches and looks likes he’s written a few here for Mutt or RON. Maybe is just an audition and we are just practice.


58 posted on 09/10/2011 2:33:38 PM PDT by dusttoyou ("Progressives" and ronpaulnutz are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

I asked you once before if you have all these theories and ideas, why don’t you get where you have more clout.

Run for office. Perhaps work with people.


59 posted on 09/10/2011 2:54:42 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Let’s just cut to the chase.

Who is your preferred candidate right now?


60 posted on 09/10/2011 2:56:09 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou
Looks like this caryokie is some important biggie

LOL! Important to someone I hope. Hopefully we all are! :)

61 posted on 09/10/2011 3:10:50 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou; Carry_Okie

It is FR etiquette to ping someone when you’re talking about them.


62 posted on 09/10/2011 3:15:36 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Disclosure: I disagree with Perry on some issues, but I am skeptical about all the GOP characters, including Palin.

It’s ironic that that the media caricatures Perry as an ignorant yahoo (as in Gulliver’s Travel’s). The transition from paper books to electronic books is as natural and inevitable as the transition from books hand written by teams of scribes to the printing press. And if academics try to protect their paper textbook business, so much for their image as “enlightened.”


63 posted on 09/10/2011 4:02:14 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Budget sins can be fixed. Amnesty is irreversible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

I’d agree with that.


64 posted on 09/10/2011 4:15:18 PM PDT by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

I think I am in love.


65 posted on 09/10/2011 4:28:18 PM PDT by BAW (I'm right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

Rubio is a good choice.I also saw Perry/Martinez 2012
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/perry-martinez_591498.html

He is doing good in NH.
http://www.wbur.org/2011/08/15/perry-nh


66 posted on 09/10/2011 4:33:47 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: gogogodzilla

Rick Perry’s fans like his straight-talking style
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/09/MN0A1L2G7G.DTL


67 posted on 09/10/2011 4:53:43 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Good article. Certainly give lie to the charge that Perry is just and establishment pol who won’t make wavw.


68 posted on 09/10/2011 5:14:48 PM PDT by Hugin ("A man'll usually tell you his bad intentions if you listen and let yourself hear it"--- Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

69 posted on 09/10/2011 5:29:09 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou; Cincinatus' Wife; smoothsailing; DoughtyOne
Looks like this caryokie is some important biggie, he clams to write speeches and looks likes he’s written a few here for Mutt or RON.

The post says I wrote it for Bill Simon. I'm not claiming to be some big time player, I merely sent it to him as a suggestion. I'd met the guy a couple of times early on and attended one party function just before he won the GOP nomination for governor of California. That's it. Simon is a SOCON, and a far cry from either Romney or Ron Paul. So if that's your standard for paranoid projections masquerading as conclusions, it says a lot more about the reasoning ability of Perry's backers or, more accurately, the lack thereof. Nor was I "stalking" Perry threads. I saw an interesting title on the sidebar and read it, and what did I find but the usual Perry cheerleaders. Sadly, I had to teach them that good criticism too often masks bad remedial policy. It wouldn't be the first time that was true.

Maybe is just an audition and we are just practice.

Please, I have a lot more to do than to seek work in political activism. This crew is hardly worth the effort. When the full-time on-the-party-payroll drum beaters like FairOpinion (since banned) get here, it looks to be quite the battle a brewing. As to spamming and shilling, I haven't even picked a candidate yet. OTOH, having a record of the bogus character assassination, characteristic of Perry's backers, of a long time FReeper who actually posts original material is rather handy for future reference should I choose to become a committed opponent. Nor did one of you ever show how the policy Perry proposes is superior to what I offered with which to contrast Perry's ideas with a less centralized and more free-enterprise and customer-oriented approach.

But hear this and hear it thoroughly: If a candidate proposes a bad idea I will call it as much, and I don't care who it is. As far as I am concerned, State testing in universities is moving in the wrong direction compared to removing the barriers to free-enterprise validation services and its analogy to No Child Left Behind is hardly vague. So, if you choose to back a candidate who later shows to be far less than he or she appeared or claimed to be, I will hold you accountable for your support until you repudiate it as there are a number of FReepers who will tell you.

This is a primary in an election against a destructive Marxist for whom there is little possibility of winning against any conservative in the race (with the possible exception of Palin who, AFAIAC, has poisoned her own well with her unwillingness to make substantive proposals instead of mindless cheer-leading). Best we select the person who most firmly represents conservative principles, "he can win" be damned. That's how we got Reagan. The compromise "he can win" principle got us Nixon, Schwarzenegger, and both Bushes. Yet it has been the disastrous consequences of electing "moderates" that got us Zero in the first place.

Perry talks a good game, but it is obvious that there is less to what he says than there first appears to be. It is in the details that we learn how the man plans to govern. In that regard I am not totally discouraged with him, but neither am I pleased (particularly as regards illegal aliens). There are others in the race who better exemplify conservative free-enterprise principles.

The behavior of a candidates backers also reveals much. In that regard, you have all done much to damage your cause.

70 posted on 09/10/2011 8:46:42 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

“The behavior of a candidates backers also reveals much. In that regard, you have all done much to damage your cause. “

That could be their intentions too. Look at what campaign manager Ed Rollins has “done for” the candidates he’s been hired by or, rather, assigned to.

There are many avenues for the Statists to travel to guarantee they remain in control of who is running, and the assigning of asswipes to troll sites such as this is quite in keeping with their goals. Heck, the early Libertarian Party was almost immediately assigned nuts from both the Dems and the Pubbies that pretty much guaranteed they be the great powerhouse they are today /s


71 posted on 09/10/2011 9:09:16 PM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla (How humanitarian are "leaders" who back Malthusian, Utilitarian & Green nutcases?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: trisham

Why the heck would I need to ping you, trish? All that talking about trish is only in your head.

After all the Perry Derangement trash from you guys all the etiquette has been aborted.


72 posted on 09/10/2011 9:16:52 PM PDT by dusttoyou ("Progressives" and ronpaulnutz are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
The behavior of a candidates backers also reveals much. In that regard, you have all done much to damage your cause.

Well, I guess I've been around here as long as you have and I've seen alot of this foodfighting over candidates.

You're right, it does give insight into the type of person a particular supporter may be.

For that reason I apologize if I offended you.

I'm not involved in any cause, Perry is a candidate I'm interested in, and one I believe may be able to garner the funds necessary to take on Obama and appeal to a broad base.

Personally, I don't much like or trust politicians. I'm a basic kind of person. I want a President who loves my country and will defend it, will promote it here and around the world, will get and keep government off our backs, and make sure the military is properly manned and funded. I think Perry can handle that.

That's about it.

73 posted on 09/10/2011 9:19:15 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou; Carry_Okie
Apparently Carry_Okie intimidates you so much that you choose to talk behind her back.

That's the kind of thing that cowards do.

74 posted on 09/11/2011 7:55:40 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: trisham
Intimidated?? You are a busybody to the max. Hell, carryOkie was actively on the thread. Had carryokie had a good defense she should have spoken up.

Last time I was intimidated I was 150 yards up a rockslide armed with camera and met Mother Blackbear a second after meeting Baby Blackbear.

Only way any human is going to intimidate me is to roll up in a Bradley.

I hope you are a very nice person, meaning well. Now go on and find somebody stupid who thinks you are important or relevant.

75 posted on 09/11/2011 11:37:32 AM PDT by dusttoyou ("Progressives" and ronpaulnutz are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou

76 posted on 09/11/2011 11:51:06 AM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!; dusttoyou; Jim Robinson
Hell, carryOkie was actively on the thread. Had carryokie had a good defense she should have spoken up.

"She" is a he but you were characteristically too lazy to check.

The posting "etiquette" on this forum are the preferences of its OWNER. You are either ignorant or undeserving of Constitutional respect for yours. Take your pick; the evidence indicates the former.

77 posted on 09/11/2011 11:55:51 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: All; Polybius; Carry_Okie

If behavior of candidates backers reveals much. I’d say the rabid Palin backers that claim they will write in her name no matter what and if it means more Obama, so be it. And the utter nonsense that they are rightfully vetting=bashing Perry because Palin was vetted is utter nonsense. Why was Bachmann trashed and called a RINO by Palin Bots? Do they want every formidable candidate destroyed and alinskyized because Palin was?As far as the argument that all other candidates supporters are bots.Name one formidable candidate that’s supporters say if they’re candidate does not make it they are writing in their name even if it means an Obama win.Only Palin Bots do this. Do they want every formidable candidate destroyed and alinskyized because Palin was?Palin has humility and a servants heart they have: attack all competition with vengeful hearts.

I don’t think carrieokie is anyone’s bot LOL I don’t think carrieokie likes anyone not even Santa Clause LOL ( I am only kidding carrieokie) that is why I applauded the busy body comment.

I am pinging polybius to reference the ‘will write in Palin’s name even if it means Obama wins,’comment as he witnessed it first hand.

DISCLAIMER:I am a tea party supporter.Perry,Bachmann,Palin,West,Cain.There is a difference in being a Palin supporter (of which I am) and a Palin bot.The bots here outnumber all with bully mob rule,quite sadly... The Palin bots play self appointed campaign manager guessing dates acting all cliquey and bully like children;that I have seen even try to get Perry supporters banned by pinging JimRob.(In which they were told by Mister Robinson to get thicker skin) are sometimes confused with those wanting earnest questions answered about a candidate.I think carrieokie is one but it is a rarity.

I have one goal,to get Obama unelected.


78 posted on 09/11/2011 12:34:34 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

??? dust was just saying you could do well and did not need a busy body piping in the middle of the argument of which I don’t even know what the original argument was.


79 posted on 09/11/2011 12:43:02 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou
I find your assertions of bravery difficult to imagine, given your propensity to overreact to my posts.

If this is the way you respond to someone who is no threat to you, I can't imagine how hysterical you would be if you met up with a bear.

80 posted on 09/11/2011 2:01:00 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!

“I have one goal,to get Obama unelected.” That’s a good goal, but it should not be the only one. Take a hint from the cynical George W Bush billboard “Missed me yet?” W was socialist light and he was followed by the Marxist bum. If all you are interested in is getting rid of the bum, who will you turn to if his replacement simply marks time for the next 4 years — which is what a light socialist would do.

(Look at the NZ PM John Key for an even worse example of that. Kiwis wanted to be rid of Labour’s Helen Klark so badly that they put the National Party in power, and Key’s done nothing more than lie about his conservatism and pander to every cretinous Leftist entity in and out of NZ.)

We are suffering from Statist influences in BOTH parties. A thinking man knows it is a strategic error to focus on one man (Obama) alone and not the forces that made the oaf’s rise to power possible.


81 posted on 09/11/2011 2:13:50 PM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla (How humanitarian are "leaders" who back Malthusian, Utilitarian & Green nutcases?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Quoting your cohort trish, who obviously KNOWS, “Apparently Carry_Okie intimidates you so much that you choose to talk behind her back”. Heck maybe neither of you or your Mom trish know if its a boy or a girl. I mean “kalifornia” what more can be said???!!!.

Hey you two seemed to be EXPERTS (X = unknown and spert is a drip under pressure)in everything INCLUDING tattletelling, WAAAAAAAA, Daddy, DADDY!!! Bobby pulled my hair.

Now go write another SPEECH and let us peon rednecks carry-on savagely without a smidgen of edikit.

82 posted on 09/11/2011 3:58:34 PM PDT by dusttoyou ("Progressives" and ronpaulnutz are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou
Try to calm down. You appear to be hysterical.

Please get back to me when you're under control.

83 posted on 09/11/2011 4:02:02 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: trisham
Difficult to imagine??? Heck you obviously imagine wrong ever now and then and imagined your pore buddie caryokie saying he was a she. AND trustin trish as my expert, it got me in deep doo for sayin he was a she.

Now while I am trying to maintain my last bit of chivalry, please understand I do not suffer fools well, so adios.

84 posted on 09/11/2011 4:13:11 PM PDT by dusttoyou ("Progressives" and ronpaulnutz are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: dusttoyou
May I suggest a course in rudimentary English before your next post to me?

It's just a gentle suggestion.

85 posted on 09/11/2011 4:19:47 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; All
Too many people around these parts unwittingly help the Democrats every four years.  I changed my tagline about a month ago.  It says, "McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?"  The point is, we hate John McCain and what he does within the Republican party to defeat the Conservative cause.  None the less, many of us pull a routine quite similar to the one he does, by turning Left just before the General Elections to vote in RINOs.

Hey folks, if it's rotten of John McCain to feign being Conservative for one year out of six to get re-elected, isn't it wrong for us to actually turn into a Leftist to back RINOs every General Election?  Another way of putting it would be, "Isn't it wrong for us to act like Conservatives for three years, then vote in RINOs?"  Why are we not voting for people who have expressed the same desires we have, so they will implement the policies we say we support?  The only obvious answer is that some folks don't actually support, or long for the things they say they do.

It's rather sad to see what passes for reason in the season that leads up to the general election primaries and caucuses around here.

We watch it play out over and over again.  At some point folks have to take a look at the basic scenario, recognize the fact that they have seen it before, and stop perpetuating the persuit of failure.

Every time we jump on board the Good Ship Lollipop RINOflop, we deprive an honest to goodness Conservative the position.  How is that working out for us?

Carry_Okie comes here trying to talk some sense into people, and a swarm develops.  Why?

Some of the folks here are flat out lying to themselves.  We have candidates who betray Conservatism for four, eight, twenty-five years, and yet they are touted as solid Conservatives, some even saying they are just what Reagan was prior to becoming President.

I watch as folks whoop it up because a RINO is not leading the pack, and laugh at other candidates who aren't doing so well, that agree with us about 100% of the time.

If this is folks idea of how to achieve victory, then we'll never see victory.

It is not two weeks before the general election, us having to coalesce behind a candidate even if we don't like them best.  It's months before the primaries even begin, when we should be phoning the candidates who agree with us asking what we can do to help.

Instead it's all giggles and levity around here, because the most solid people are lagging in the polls, and the folks who will never support what we want them to, to the degree they must to lead us out of this mess, are championed with vigor.

Either we have some of the stupidest people I've ever seen around here, or we have sleepers here who are doing their best to make sure Conservatism never prevails.

86 posted on 09/12/2011 2:01:55 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!; DoughtyOne; shield; Cincinatus' Wife; smoothsailing; ..
The reason I have been pinging JR is that I want to elaborate on something that I think is very destructive to his forum, in fact, it is a symptom of the success of the FReepers' efforts in influencing the conservative base. Unfortunately, that success has obviously attracted the attentions of campaign consulting firms and the surrounding cloud of GOP organizational wannabes.

The latter more than likely get training in how to influence the forum into supporting a particular candidate. The reason I say this is that the methods employed by the various supporters are nearly identical and have been for about seven or eight years now (more for Palin and Perry than anyone else in this go-around). These are exactly the techniques first employed here by FairOpinion and the cloud of Schwarzenegger backers s/he commanded in the recall election of 2003 (all thankfully banned, especially (expletive omitted) 68grunt... ). I don't think anyone here now would dispute today the damage they did to California conservatism by convincing the CAGOP leadership that FReepers could be browbeaten into accepting "Arnold can win." He did, but conservatism in California, which had sponsored the recall in the first place, was mortally wounded once Arnold's people (see RINO Pete Wilson) took over the party machinery. They never let a conservative nominee get a dime from the Party ever again. In fact, they openly derided conservative nominees for Statewide office.

So, given the "success" of that gambit, I thought I would lay out how the formula works. It goes like this:

  1. Post an MSM story favorable to said candidate or unfavorable in a manner supposedly attractive to conservatives.

    This thread is a prime example in that Perry, while cheering conservatives with his derision of a Marxist university professorate, is proposing a testing system that HE KNOWS will be administered by State educational bureaucrats as a "remedy"! Guess who writes the questions for these tests. Guess who grades them. He either KNOWS that the result of more centralized control is a continued drift to the left, or he's an idiot. Take your pick.

    So, when he makes this pitch for a "solution," he is either fundamentally dishonest or delusional. It's your choice as to which, but in either case he is not a desirable candidate for President of the United States.

    So, knowing this, our team of Perrywinkles has to get conservatives to cheer without thinking things through. This calls for a snow job! Which brings us to step 2.

  2. Immediately put up a blizzard of preconstructed posts containing related links, talking points, and excerpts about all sorts of candidate related schtuffe. These posts are to be of sufficient length that they encompass as much as most people would ever want to read. The purpose is not to get them to read it but to use up space so that by the time anyone with a contrary opinion might post, it is too far down the page for most people to bother. This technique turns a discussion forum into an advertising page.
  3. Offer warning posts to one's cohorts that the (insert candidate initial here)DS "bots" or some other epithet will soon be there. Gasp!
  4. If someone does show up and post the obvious, stand ready with one of two responses: either a canned set of factoids similar to item 2, or outright insults, obliquely condescending slaps, and other niceties. You and shield are real pros with these CW.
  5. If said "opponent" provides significant fact or content, ignore it completely. Instead ping said cohorts, especially those with lists of backers.
  6. By this time, the thread is populated either with only diehards or somebody with a point to make for future reference (as I did here). Little did they know that I was also doing this to expose the pattern with this post. The thread descends into what might otherwise appear to be a flame war.
  7. Repeat the process with similar postings with which to fill up the sidebar or make good an escape should they take too much of a beating on facts.

Here is the problem: FreeRepublic was set up by its owner to be a grass roots forum. When this method becomes the pattern the grass roots get sucked into dealing with this constant barrage from people with little else to do. Thus, the conservative base loses its home for exchanging and developing ideas. There are lurking consequences to this that need be considered seriously.

First, FR is so influential that to consume a large portion of the sidebar constitutes the equivalent of valuable commercial advertising space. If in fact some of these posters are paid professionals (of which I have little doubt) their presence here shows that FR is effectively making an in-kind campaign contribution that as of now goes unreported. I see every likelihood that some zealous enforcer would be delighted to bring such a case. The amount of effort it would take to police such would be a big drain on the site's resources in a campaign year. All of that is bad.

Second, grass roots candidates get less exposure, indeed they get systematically marginalized by these propensities, which is counter to the entire purpose of the forum and immensely disrespectful of the private property rights of its owner.

Third, some very good posters and contributors to FR get tired of the crap and leave. FR then becomes less attractive to those who might otherwise come here to develop and discuss original ideas. It degrades FR's reputation as a center for thoughtful conservative discussion. That leaves the conservative movement less equipped with well developed and distilled ideas with which to attract support for true conservative candidates and legislation. It also inhibits distribution of said ideas.

Fourth, because everybody in these battles knows each other, the discussion becomes confusing and intimidating to newbies in that shorthand communication often lacks infill information, while reference to insults without apparent basis appears unpleasantly vitriolic. This harms forum growth.

Fifth, said confusion, and lack of exposure on the sidebar cuts support for grass roots conservative candidates which makes it more likely that RINOS get nominated. Just look at how the Fred Thompson fan dance consumed conservative energies, defocused support, kept other conservatives from developing sufficient momentum to take on the media/Party machinery as time grew shorter. The process precluded conservative support from coalescing behind one person such that McCain could gather momentum despite the fact that he is so terribly despised among the conservative base. How else could he have won in South Carolina? This has happened often enough to become a cliche.

Sixth, once said RINO gains the nomination, conservative support dries up, said RINO doeth the now famous Bob Dole Swan Dive, and the Democrat gets elected. I call all that bad.

I have no problem with professional representatives of candidates or the candidates themselves showing up here to discuss their strengths and answer challenges but ONLY so long as they identify themselves as such. This ongoing battle among consulting firms and Party apparatchiks portraying themselves as grass roots activists has to stop. It is a fraud upon the people of this forum for which, in my opinion, they should be banned.

There is only one counter to such posting volume, and that is to answer every one, for which people with a life outside the forum only have so much time. I can only say that I admire immensely calcowgirl immensely for the heroic and thorough job she did in the face of FareOpinion et al. when they highjacked this forum for Arnold and then his fraudulent ballot propositions. There is a place in heaven for that kind of persistence.

87 posted on 09/13/2011 9:36:05 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; shield
.........I have no problem with professional representatives of candidates or the candidates themselves showing up here to discuss their strengths and answer challenges but ONLY so long as they identify themselves as such. This ongoing battle among consulting firms and Party apparatchiks portraying themselves as grass roots activists has to stop. It is a fraud upon the people of this forum for which, in my opinion, they should be banned.....

I am NOT part of any group that supports any candidate. This is a disgraceful post.

88 posted on 09/14/2011 1:09:40 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The reason I have been pinging JR is that I want to elaborate on something that I think is very destructive to his forum, in fact, it is a symptom of the success of the FReepers' efforts in influencing the conservative base. Unfortunately, that success has obviously attracted the attentions of campaign consulting firms and the surrounding cloud of GOP organizational wannabes.

This thread is a case study in such nonsense.  One guy posts a wet-kiss article for the candidate.  Then within a short time, people just happen by with a well developed article on the same topic, telling just how good Perry really was.  It's so tighly structured that it's clear it wasn't your normal poster giving their two cents worth.  It's an organized campaign effort.  A good portion of the thread is merely a campaign drive by.  The only question is, where do they meet for dinner when they're done gaming the forum.

The latter more than likely get training in how to influence the forum into supporting a particular candidate. The reason I say this is that the methods employed by the various supporters are nearly identical and have been for about seven or eight years now (more for Palin and Perry than anyone else in this go-around). These are exactly the techniques first employed here by FairOpinion and the cloud of Schwarzenegger backers s/he commanded in the recall election of 2003 (all thankfully banned, especially (expletive omitted) 68grunt... ). I don't think anyone here now would dispute today the damage they did to California conservatism by convincing the CAGOP leadership that FReepers could be browbeaten into accepting "Arnold can win." He did, but conservatism in California, which had sponsored the recall in the first place, was mortally wounded once Arnold's people (see RINO Pete Wilson) took over the party machinery. They never let a conservative nominee get a dime from the Party ever again. In fact, they openly derided conservative nominees for Statewide office.

Even though I was a person who supported Schwarzenegger when I thought McClintock couldn't pull it out, I agree with your take on various campaigns here.  The Bush II team pulled the same nonsense in 2000.  It set back Conservatism for at least twelve years.  Bush had a Republican House and Senate.  Did he turn things around?  No.  And here we go again with what amounts to a proposed Bush III.  Will he turn things around?  Not a chance.

So, given the "success" of that gambit, I thought I would lay out how the formula works. It goes like this:

  1. Post an MSM story favorable to said candidate or unfavorable in a manner supposedly attractive to conservatives.

    This thread is a prime example in that Perry, while cheering conservatives with his derision of a Marxist university professorate, is proposing a testing system that HE KNOWS will be administered by State educational bureaucrats as a "remedy"! Guess who writes the questions for these tests. Guess who grades them. He either KNOWS that the result of more centralized control is a continued drift to the left, or he's an idiot. Take your pick.

    So, when he makes this pitch for a "solution," he is either fundamentally dishonest or delusional. It's your choice as to which, but in either case he is not a desirable candidate for President of the United States.

    So, knowing this, our team of Perrywinkles has to get conservatives to cheer without thinking things through. This calls for a snow job! Which brings us to step 2.  01

  2. Immediately put up a blizzard of preconstructed posts containing related links, talking points, and excerpts about all sorts of candidate related schtuffe. These posts are to be of sufficient length that they encompass as much as most people would ever want to read. The purpose is not to get them to read it but to use up space so that by the time anyone with a contrary opinion might post, it is too far down the page for most people to bother. This technique turns a discussion forum into an advertising page.  02
  3. Offer warning posts to one's cohorts that the (insert candidate initial here)DS "bots" or some other epithet will soon be there. Gasp!  03
  4. If someone does show up and post the obvious, stand ready with one of two responses: either a canned set of factoids similar to item 2, or outright insults, obliquely condescending slaps, and other niceties. You and shield are real pros with these CW.  04
  5. If said "opponent" provides significant fact or content, ignore it completely. Instead ping said cohorts, especially those with lists of backers.  05
  6. By this time, the thread is populated either with only diehards or somebody with a point to make for future reference (as I did here). Little did they know that I was also doing this to expose the pattern with this post. The thread descends into what might otherwise appear to be a flame war.  06
  7. Repeat the process with similar postings with which to fill up the sidebar or make good an escape should they take too much of a beating on facts. 07
    Actually, I think you've left off serveral other obvious ploys/tactics.

    8. If someone knows their stuff, tie them up for literally days, as your pals march off to other threads to continue their subterfuge without that person objecting
    9. While you're wasting the person's time, it doesn't matter if they are pounding you on each and every post.  Just so long as you tie them up, everything is good.  (Note that the primal urge for
           self-preseervation, doesn't hold true in these tactics.  These people don't care if they're being made into mince-meat with each and every resposne.  Winning the discussion is not the goal.)
  10. If someone beats one of these people to a pulp, they'll start off on a new thread acting as if they hadn't been deconstructed for 48 solid hours on the other thread.  Either that or they will
           act as if they were really the winner on that other thread.
  11. As you are dismantling these people, others just happen to come along and make stupid petty criticisms out of the blue.  It's obvious as can be, they've been called in.  It's pure harassment.

    We could both go on.  This disgusting behavior is planned, rehearsed, systematic, and focused.  It's disinformation 101.

Addressing your comments just above 1 through 7.

01. This is exactly what I observed on this thread.  The lead in article went up, and the other players soon swooped in.
            Your testing comments were also dead on target.  The Leftist university staff devises the testing.  Nothing stops the universtiy professors from giving the actual tests to the students to study either.
            This has taken place in Southern California.  The Perry team swoops in.  Perry is described in glowing terms.  He is said to grasp exactly what Conservatives see as wrong with the education system.
            Nevermind that that the guy uses catch phrases that sound as if given by Al Gore.  Ooops...  maybe they were.  Read this comment reportedly from years ago.

Perry’s first poke at this sclerotic (oh spare me) establishment came early in his first term. He suggested converting the money that the state gives to public colleges and universities into individual grants handed straight to students. Money is power, and Perry’s idea was to place the power in the hands of “consumers,” as he put it, rather than the administrators, to increase competition among schools and thereby lower costs and increase quality. “Young fertile minds [should be] empowered,” he said at the time, “to pursue their dreams regardless of family income, the color of their skin, or the sound of their last name.”
           
             There he was, using Leftist wedge ethnic talking points, to garner support.  Was that support supposed to come from his entire state's populace.  No, it was directed right at illegals.  Who amoung us
             gives a damn what someone's last name is?  I certainly don't.  I don't think my fellow FReepers are racists either.  None the less, Perry had to address Hispanics as if he was their champion.  Why
             would he think he had to do that, if he were just talking to Hispanic citizens?  Well, he wouldn't.  He tried to slander others, to make himself look better.  What a jackass.

02. Exactly right.  The secondary pages are so well researched with links, that it's preposterous to claim that someone just happened along, had this related material, and just innocently dumped it on the forum.
             As for length, I hadn't given that as much thought as you have, but I think you're on to something there.  I do believe that it's quite accurate to describe the effort with the emphasis you have.
             I also get a kick out of the people who show up to make one line contributions, so as to buttress the idea that this stuff really was new enlightening material.  Yes, if you're a dunce...

03. Yes, pre-announcing the soon to arrive 'demon of the day', is an attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees with the propaganda.  And small wonder, since most of this stuff is so weak and transparent.

04. What I enjoy about tactic four, is that the obligatory factoids are almost always weaker than the flawed main topic, which alone can't stand on it's own mertits.  As you stated earlier, these articles are
              configuresd in a manner to discourage open discussion.  The articles don't have to make much sense.  They're essentially books being sold by the pound to fill up the library.

05. Yes, I always enjoy the folks who show up out of the blue, pinging six people who hadn't contributed on the thread yet.  Of course those other people aren't really involved in the effort, they're just
               being called in to hold the persons hand who was too afraid to take on someone without a crew in tow.

06.  Actually, they do decend into a flame war.  The funny thing is, you can pound these people on point, and they don't care.  They just change the subject and bob and weave.  It's as if you're talking
               to a zombie.

07. They do try to fill up the sidebar, but I'll have to differ with you on one point.  I've spent literally days beating individuals to an absolute pulp here, with them getting in the flimsiest of shots only to be
               absolutely eviscerated in return, and yet they continue to proceed as if they were on a time-clock, and had so many more mintues to kill.  And that brings up another point.  I've seen a number of
               times where I'll be conducting a give and take with three or four people, and all of a sudden, they all disappear as if they had just had to check out for the day.  Either they were in contact behind
               the scenes and decided they were taking too many salvos, or they were working out of the same office.

Here is the problem: FreeRepublic was set up by its owner to be a grass roots forum. When this method becomes the pattern the grass roots get sucked into dealing with this constant barrage from people with little else to do. Thus, the conservative base loses its home for exchanging and developing ideas. There are lurking consequences to this that need be considered seriously.

First, FR is so influential that to consume a large portion of the sidebar constitutes the equivalent of valuable commercial advertising space. If in fact some of these posters are paid professionals (of which I have little doubt) their presence here shows that FR is effectively making an in-kind campaign contribution that as of now goes unreported. I see every likelihood that some zealous enforcer would be delighted to bring such a case. The amount of effort it would take to police such would be a big drain on the site's resources in a campaign year. All of that is bad.

Second, grass roots candidates get less exposure, indeed they get systematically marginalized by these propensities, which is counter to the entire purpose of the forum and immensely disrespectful of the private property rights of its owner.

This is the crux of the problem in my opinion.  All the oxygen is sucked out of the room by those working for the RINOs.  This forum's true calling is subverted every four years.  This year it's Perry.  Despite his despicable past, he's the RINO flavor of the week, and there's no rational argument that can be made that Perry supporters will agree is problematic.  And isn't that revealing...

What we're supposed to believe, is that all of a sudden this group of people fell for Perry, they have no questions about him, and if others have questions, they are instantly evil.  They won't contenance any challenge whatsoever.  Is that the actions of a group of people who simply learned about Perry, and then fell in love with him?  No.  It's the actions of a group of people who are gaming the forum.

Normal people start liking someone and over time they grow to like them.  The day of the Ames Straw Poll, Perry was instantly fifty or one hundred FReeper's absolute hero.  There was no growing curve here.  Someone flipped a switch, and suddenly Perry essentially owned the forum.  Is that how Conservatives conduct themselves?  Do they have to go out and subvert Conservative forums, if they truly are a Conservative.  NO!

If you're a Conservative, you tell folks what you're about.  They listen and look at your record.  Pretty soon, you've won them over.

Look at the difference between Cain and Perry.  Did Cain come here, invade the forum with his crew, and hijack the place?  No.  None the less, folks here think quite highly of him.  On the other hand, Perry did come here, invade the forum with his crew, hijack the place, and insult as many people as possible.  The crew started deconstructing Reagan ad-nausium.  And they absolutely had to, because he is not a Conservative.  He's a pretender.
<> Third, some very good posters and contributors to FR get tired of the crap and leave. FR then becomes less attractive to those who might otherwise come here to develop and discuss original ideas. It degrades FR's reputation as a center for thoughtful conservative discussion. That leaves the conservative movement less equipped with well developed and distilled ideas with which to attract support for true conservative candidates and legislation. It also inhibits distribution of said ideas.  I agree.

Fourth, because everybody in these battles knows each other, the discussion becomes confusing and intimidating to newbies in that shorthand communication often lacks infill information, while reference to insults without apparent basis appears unpleasantly vitriolic. This harms forum growth.  I agree.

Fifth, said confusion, and lack of exposure on the sidebar cuts support for grass roots conservative candidates which makes it more likely that RINOS get nominated. Just look at how the Fred Thompson fan dance consumed conservative energies, defocused support, kept other conservatives from developing sufficient momentum to take on the media/Party machinery as time grew shorter. The process precluded conservative support from coalescing behind one person such that McCain could gather momentum despite the fact that he is so terribly despised among the conservative base. How else could he have won in South Carolina? This has happened often enough to become a cliche.  I agree.  I will say that I backed Thompson, but that did play out as you said, and I can't argue with your description of it.

Sixth, once said RINO gains the nomination, conservative support dries up, said RINO doeth the now famous Bob Dole Swan Dive, and the Democrat gets elected. I call all that bad.  It is bad, until three years later, and then all of a sudden it's good again.  We're well on our way to niminating someone I won't vote for again.

I have no problem with professional representatives of candidates or the candidates themselves showing up here to discuss their strengths and answer challenges but ONLY so long as they identify themselves as such. This ongoing battle among consulting firms and Party apparatchiks portraying themselves as grass roots activists has to stop. It is a fraud upon the people of this forum for which, in my opinion, they should be banned.  Couldn't agree more.

There is only one counter to such posting volume, and that is to answer every one, for which people with a life outside the forum only have so much time. I can only say that I admire immensely calcowgirl immensely for the heroic and thorough job she did in the face of FareOpinion et al. when they highjacked this forum for Arnold and then his fraudulent ballot propositions. There is a place in heaven for that kind of persistence.  CalCowGirl is one of our best contributors.  I agree with you.

89 posted on 09/14/2011 2:10:17 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Hmmm, seems some folks get a might touchy when you nail them.


90 posted on 09/14/2011 2:16:43 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; Carry_Okie

I did not mean to post that long post to you Cincinatus’ Wife.

It was intended for Carry_Okie. After developing the reply in a stand alone html text developer, I brought it back, and accidentally clicked on your post, and sent it to you instead of Carry_Okie.

He had posted just above you.

Sorry about that.


91 posted on 09/14/2011 2:25:56 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"Some of the folks here are flat out lying to themselves. We have candidates who betray Conservatism for four, eight, twenty-five years, and yet they are touted as solid Conservatives, some even saying they are just what Reagan was prior to becoming President."

A Democrat?

92 posted on 09/14/2011 4:38:48 AM PDT by StAnDeliver (/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I’ve been posting on education - the awfulness - basically the crime of public education — the wasted potential and ruination of lives for years. Go to my account. Check it out.

I was thrilled when I found out that Gov. Perry has such an understanding and knowledge about this mess and has some ideas to tackle it and that other people were finally noticing.

That’s why I’ve been trying to get others to see it.

That is causing harm? To whom?

There is no coordination with me. NONE.


93 posted on 09/14/2011 5:18:06 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Ping


94 posted on 09/14/2011 5:41:05 AM PDT by ishmac (Lady Thatcher:"There are no permanent defeats in politics because there are no permanent victories.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Yes, he makes these kinds of post...so I just ignore him and his post. Reading his post for me is a waste of my time.


95 posted on 09/14/2011 5:57:33 AM PDT by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; Just A Nobody

I also, am not a part of any group or ping list.Nor am I a candidate rep.What is the asked outcome of Carry-Okie’s post I have not a clue? I am guessing;calling JimRobinson to ban people? JimRob has already told Palin bots pinging him that wanted Perry/Bachmann/ whoever else bots ‘zotted’-banned that it was not going to happen get tougher skin.

The only candidate ping list I was ever on was for LTC Allen West to RUN for President. In which ‘just a nobody’ (screen name) ran-and I would help out- when they were not able)many months ago.I support all tea party candidates as I said in my post above. Just A Nobody was ran off this forum because they were so disgusted.Go see Just a Nobody’s last post.West was called a magic *egro and they were ordered off a thread by a Palin ping list- bot.

I don’t see vicious Perry/Cain bots I see people that made a decision to get behind them to BEAT OBAMA.If they argue back it is because they have grown tired of the Palin bots games and date guessing. CarryOkie’s post is ironic because the Palin bots are more of ‘the group’ as they are seemingly self appointed campaign managers for Palin who are mostly all hell bent on getting Perry/Bachmann bots banned.

They’re RINO, PerryCare name calling; sounds just like the names they called Bachmann.They post threads saying ‘Perry is jealous’ of Palin <———utterly RIDICULOUS and I posted THE VIDEO that clearly shows Palin backed away from the podium and Perry is the Gov. association Chairmen and they had to rush things along to get to the next meeting/agenda of the conference.(I do realize Palin just recently criticized Perry but not in the past as jealous of Palin threads have indicated) As Palin endorsed Perry.

These bots do not have servants hearts of humility like Palin they have get everyone but themselves banned-hearts while playing self appointed managers and date guessers.(TIN FOIL HAT- but I even wonder how many are sleeper DUer’s)And I am not the only one that has thought this.I watched Palin’s movie.I get it but I see no reason to call all other candidates RINO’s and bully pulpit. (accept for Romney he is a RINO)

There are some normal Palin supporters that don’t say, ‘even if it means Obama; they will write in Palin’s name.’They don’t guess dates and play campaign manager bully rule ping list like children.


96 posted on 09/14/2011 6:08:33 AM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!; shield

Bumps!!


97 posted on 09/14/2011 6:12:35 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: StAnDeliver

If you don’t know the difference between a 1932 to the early 1960s Democrat from a 1972 to 1988 Democrat, why are you even here?


98 posted on 09/14/2011 11:20:26 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Take a look at the first few pages of this thread yourself, and tell me what it looks like to you.

I don’t think Carry_Okie’s description is out of line at all.

None of us can tell what is really going on, but we can say what it looks like to us. To me, it looks just like Carry_Okie said it did.

Perry wasn’t a guy that was being talked up here much. All of a sudden he declared and the Texans came out of the wood-work to promote him just like they did Bush. It wasn’t limited to Texas either. People from across the nation were suddenly an expert on Perry. That’s simply not possible.

Cincinatus’ Wife, I have no interest whatsoever in another warm bucket of horse sweat from Texas.

This guy sets off warning bells across the board for us, but absolutely none of it worries you folks at all.

I’m not going to hash every little detail out with you, because frankly, that has been met with a brick wall before this, and I have very little hope you’ll be any different.

If you were different, you wouldn’t be here hawking this individual to be our nominee in 2012. Why in Sam Hell would you want this walking time-bomb to be our president?

He is NOT a Conservative at his core.


99 posted on 09/14/2011 11:41:49 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!

I am really, really sad to read that Justanobody was driven from this forum. I personally met Justa who drove virtually every single week for years, more than 100 miles each way, to participate in the Friday night Walter Reed FReeps. A better, less self-serving FReeper has never posted on these boards. Driving Justa from this forum is disgraceful.


100 posted on 09/14/2011 2:16:27 PM PDT by EDINVA ( Jimmy McMillan '12: because RENT'S TOO DAMN HIGH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-128 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