Who reads FR? How many accounts on FR? What does FR stand for? Where is FR going?

01/19/11 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

I'm placing this in breaking news, because there have been several breaking news complaint threads recently. Guess there are a lot of people not understanding the facts about FR, or what we stand for, where we're going, etc.

First of all, who reads FR and how many accounts do we have? I honestly have no idea and the exact number does not concern me. We currently have over 369,000 registered accounts on FR, but as someone pointed out yesterday, not all of them are active and I have no idea how many are active.

Many years ago we had less than 30,000 accounts registered. Then we hit a hundred thousand, a hundred fifty thousand, then two hundred thousand and three or four years ago we approached and went over 300,000. Every few years as we hit a major milestone in registered accounts, I updated our home page with the current number of accounts on FR. I'll probably do it again after we go over 400,000, then 500,000, etc, and maybe I won't. The number of registered accounts doesn't really mean much. And our growth in the last few years has tapered off anyway for various reasons.

Who actually reads FR? Again, we have no idea, but there are hundreds of thousands maybe even millions of readers. All kinds of people read FR. News hounds, liberals, conservatives, politicians, talk show hosts, religious types, atheists, you and me brother and everyone in between. We serve over 1,000,000 pageviews per day.

So why has our growth tapered off? Well, probably the primary reason is we've narrowed our point of view lately as we've moved away from just talking about the issues and have actually started becoming constitutional activists.

The time for talking is over. Now we need to walk the walk. Our focus has become closer to working on our primary goal which is a return to constitutionally limited government and a full restoration of our God-given unalienable rights.

We can't do that by being big tent, all things to all people, non-principled, two-talking politicians. If we are truly interested in advancing our traditional conservative pro-God, pro-family, pro-life, pro-country, pro-liberty principles and positions then we must reject the politicians and people supporting the other way.

As an organization, we cannot be both for and against homosexuality, abortion, big government, border and national security, etc. I don't know about others, but if we must choose, I choose to be on the right side of each and every issue. Why should FR use its limited resources to allow liberals, homosexualists, abortionists, big spenders, big taxers, big government solutions advocates, gun grabbers, pacifists, isolationists, environmentalists, open-borders lobbyists, etc, ply their trade on FR? Well, more and more lately, we don't. And, apparently, that has pissed off a lot of big tent, true blue RINO types and the herd is stampeding. Let them go.

We who share our common traditional conservative principles, values and goals will be better off in the long run. We need to build on our strengths and attract more traditional conservatives to our viewpoints than to water down and weaken our own. It just doesn't make sense to me to support politicians like Giuliani, Romney, Gingrich, et al, who have RINO/liberal track records. It doesn't make sense to allow abortionists, homosexualists, gun-grabbers, big-government solutionists, etc, to have free rein on FR to target and lambast us daily with their repugnant bile. Let them go.

FR will continue on the traditional God, family, country, life and liberty path. If it means fewer accounts or less growth, so be it. If it means we receive fewer in donations, so be it. We will adapt, improvise and overcome and I believe prosper (God willing) in the long run. And, hopefully, someday we can say that we helped restore our beloved republic and our Liberty!

[caww]

Frankly, I could do without the religion threads.

And just where do you think our moral compass comes from? I happen to have learned a great deal from the religious threads. Especially in the town square.... This has also encouraged and increased my understandings of politics...as the two, contrary to some opinions, are not seperated. Rather the last I looked we are still a nation "Under God".

Yes the passions go wild and rough...but in standing for ones religious convictions, which is primary, one learns also the deceptive ways of men in the politcal arena and how to identify. The same tactics used by liberals/progressive are those used when introducing false or misleading doctrines. And the turf gets equally as combative.

When I first came here I ducked going into those threads. I couldn't understand then....Now I stand not only for my faith "unafraid" but for my country. If any think Christianity is simply a walk in the park among those without today... your head is in the sand.

We fight on two fronts...not just one..both hold the line. Just a hint...the scroll button works wonders.

[caww]

Oh how adorable is that!

[gonzo]

We’re still here, Jim ....................... FRegards

[caww]

Thanks for that Onyx...am saving Jim’s speech to my file...outstanding!

[onyx]

Certainly worth saving! You’re most welcome.

[caww]

that stuff takes over unrelated or tenuously-related threads in News/Activism from time to time.

Be careful there. Mr. Robinson himself moved one to News?Activism just recently.

[Bishop_Malachi]

I agree. Let the lukewarm conservatives go register (and post) over at Huffington. They’ll be in for a real shock when they get abused from libs and so-called “moderates” over there.

[Yet_Again]

The time for talking is over. Now we need to walk the walk. Our focus has become closer to working on our primary goal which is a return to constitutionally limited government and a full restoration of our God-given unalienable rights. We can't do that by being big tent, all things to all people, non-principled, two-talking politicians. If we are truly interested in advancing our traditional conservative pro-God, pro-family, pro-life, pro-country, pro-liberty principles and positions then we must reject the politicians and people supporting the other way. As an organization, we cannot be both for and against homosexuality, abortion, big government, border and national security, etc. I don't know about others, but if we must choose, I choose to be on the right side of each and every issue. Why should FR use its limited resources to allow liberals, homosexualists, abortionists, big spenders, big taxers, big government solutions advocates, gun grabbers, pacifists, isolationists, environmentalists, open-borders lobbyists, etc, ply their trade on FR? Well, more and more lately, we don't. And, apparently, that has pissed off a lot of big tent, true blue RINO types and the herd is stampeding. Let them go. We who share our common traditional conservative principles, values and goals will be better off in the long run. We need to build on our strengths and attract more traditional conservatives to our viewpoints than to water down and weaken our own. It just doesn't make sense to me to support politicians like Giuliani, Romney, Gingrich, et al, who have RINO/liberal track records. It doesn't make sense to allow abortionists, homosexualists, gun-grabbers, big-government solutionists, etc, to have free rein on FR to target and lambast us daily with their repugnant bile. Let them go.

Yay!

[Yet_Again]

The other camp may agree with what she says, but find her disaggreable as a candidate. They criticize anything and everything they can about her and find her a weak presidential candidate. Charles Krauthammer is in that camp along with several others that have commented on the thread that is a few print feet below this one.

You may find that Republicans like Krauthammer agree with you a good deal less that you think if you sat down and had dinner with them. They are essentially progressives. I like Sarah Palin. I am concerned about her ability to do battle with one nearly as slick as Clinton on a national stage. However, I'm completely unwilling to compromise on the issues to field a "slicker" candidate. Compromising on the issues for decades is what has brought conservatism in America - if not the nation itself - to death's door.

[BuckeyeTexan]

LJ has a problem with my anti-birther stance and likes to harass me when he can. He seriously thinks I am a paid Obama troll.

[FlyingEagle]

Confirmed, I am in for the conservative agenda.

[Art in Idaho]

Roger that Jim. As you said, "The time for talking is over. Now we need to walk the walk." We are at war with the Obama administration and are fighting to preserve our Sacred Republic. Thank you for providing the FR Forum. We shall fight on!

[foundedonpurpose]

And with this, it’s time to read to my kids,say our prayers and go to bed.

God Bless and thank you!

Glen

[The Comedian]

There's only Jim and I.

We each have about 150,000 alternate IDs.

The rest of you are an illusion, or statistical noise.

Except for Laz. He's a glitch in the Matrix.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[little jeremiah]

I s’pose you might be a volunteer, I’ll go that far.

[southernsunshine]

As an organization, we cannot be both for and against homosexuality, abortion, big government, border and national security, etc. I don't know about others, but if we must choose, I choose to be on the right side of each and every issue. Why should FR use its limited resources to allow liberals, homosexualists, abortionists, big spenders, big taxers, big government solutions advocates, gun grabbers, pacifists, isolationists, environmentalists, open-borders lobbyists, etc, ply their trade on FR? Well, more and more lately, we don't. And, apparently, that has pissed off a lot of big tent, true blue RINO types and the herd is stampeding. Let them go.

Say it again, Jim! This site is a haven of sanity for conservatives. Many thanks for having us.

Ping for a great read to the rest of you:)

[caww]

Once again...LOLROTF!

[sweetiepiezer]

Thank you, kind Sir.

[editor-surveyor]

Some people are born followers, and have not the slightest idea what they believe. They’re known as “useful idiots.”

[editor-surveyor]

>> “Information is the ultimate weapon. Informed people can take action; uninformed people cannot.” <<

.
That is the essence of the usefulness of FR.