Skip to comments.Opus Time
Posted on 04/17/2012 4:47:30 PM PDT by Williams
Well it's been about 13 years forgot my initial sign in name, so pretty much from the beginning.
Never wanted to write a Free Republic Opus, love reading news stories here and commenting every day.
Would rather not go out in anger seems pointless.
Then today the owner of the site called me a RINO (I'm not), surrender monkey (not) and told me to write my opus and get out.
My sin was fighting with someone who suggested Obama losing in the latest poll is "bad news".
I could list all the insanity of what is going on here. I've tried to approach Jim Robinson in email to gently suggest the problems we are facing. It's clear from that he is not interested in discussing and resolving anything, which is a shame.
But what kind of man, American, conservative will I be if I worry more about losing my 12 year old screen name versus standing up to people who are espousing the advisability of reelecting Barack Hussein Obama, and yes if I fail to stand up to the owner of a site for calling me a liberal when I am a proud conservative?
What Jim Robinson is doing cannot work because first of all he is NOT attacking the posters who say it is best to reelect Obama. He's offended by anyone who says he is thereby supporting Obama. But he doesn't mind calling us names when we attack the pro Obamas.
OK folks, it's not going to work. You can't really oppose Obama's reelection if you may also oppose the republican's election.
Free Republic has become a house divided against itself and it cannot stand.
I'm a conservative I love my country, I have to wish away to the cornfield anyone who would assist in the reelection of Obama, from whatever misguided motivations.
I stand with Dick Cheney. The other day I had to fight with someone disparaging Cheney here. They were not criticized by the owner.
Jim Robinson owes me an apology. Not planning on getting one. The sad fact is I am not writing this because I'm offended. It's because I want to no longer assist here in the destruction of my country by those who will, to varying degrees, assist in Obama's reelection.
Six or seven liberals on the Supreme Court? Maybe atomic destruction down the pike after our disarmament. Israel destroyed. 2nd Amendment neutered. Obamacare used to deny people medical care based on age and political beliefs. Racial strife. A welfare socialist state. US attorneys going after republicans.
My wife is a cancer survivor who reasonably fears that in the future they will deny her care because she is a registered republican. And she's no RINO, she hates Obama and she won't read Free Republic stories anymore because of what is going on here.
We have a real country and real lives out here that go beyond Jim Robinson's ill advised name calling against sincere conservatives who dare to disagree with him.
So F anyone who calls me a RINO for standing with Dick Cheney and against Barack Obama. I hate RINO's and I despise misguided so called conservatives who do anything to reelect Obama.
13 years, but it's nothing when put to the wall on my beliefs against the left wing democrat party. I have too many mirrors to look in. The people here who are every day posting that it will be best to reelect Obama, should be thrown off. Instead, well...
“Six or seven liberals on the Supreme Court”
Oh, but Romney would nominate the same judges that Obama would!/sarcasm.
He or any other conservative deserve no respect for advocating that a liberal become president. Period. That applies to everyone. A person cannot serve two masters. It is not logically possible. If you cease supporting conservative ideals, philosophy and candidates by giving that support to a man who does not share conservative ideals, philosophy ect, please explain in detail who one can logically retain any claim on being ‘Conservative’. You are supporting that which you despise.
By the way, I TOTALLY GET AND UNDERSTAND AND AGREE WITH JimRob’s decision to not ‘fall in line’.
Every now and again, JR gets the Muse upon him. He waxed so eloquent in one particular message, it practically brought tears. I cannot match his wonderful phraseology, but the takeaway point was, “If our conservative and Tea Party leaders fold, then socialism — in the Republican Party form — has won. Better we who are leaders stay true, and let’s let the chips fall where they may.”
Wonderfully stated; very principled; and an utterly embraceable message.
Williams, if you are still reading this, perhaps this will counsel you as to why JR is standing fast. He’s a rare man of true principle, and I for one am delighted he runs the forum with PRINCIPLE and CONVICTION.
Can you co-exist with such a man? Yes, in your eyes, he may be causing an unintended result. But can you still respect the principles of the man, and accord him respect and deference that he is due?
Romney is a liberal, not a moderate.
This is a conservative site.
Best of luck.
No, I think you're mistaken. The seeming majority (or at least the loudest) here would prefer that Obama is re-elected. They don't have the courage to actually -vote- for him, but they'll be happy to have it happen just to poke Mitt in the eye. Bitterness does that to people.
Nossir, I respectfully disagree. Obama will be a quick cancelling of the American concept, and Romney will be a slower one. A cancelling, nonetheless, but a slower one.
The analogy to cancer holds, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the problem was, but refusing to vote for Romney is NOT the same as voting for Obama.
When you have a choice of Hitler or Stalin, you don’t vote for either of them. You hope for a third choice.
I think Romney is a little better than Obama, but not by a whole lot. Romney is the worst candidate the Republicans have ever come up with, and they’ve come up with some incredibly bad ones over the years.
I understand that some people are troubled by this refusal to vote for Romney. But you won’t solve the problem if you accuse people of voting for Obama, when they are simply refusing to vote for Romney. We can no longer afford to have TWO corrupt parties of evil. Obama was only elected in the first place because the Republican establishment came up with McCain. We can still hope and pray that a way out will be found.
I would hope you would stay. Stick around and see what happens.
Look at it like eating with your in-laws. You may not agree with everything, or many things they do, but you can all agree their daughter is wonderful.
Discuss what you like to discuss, avoid what causes contention. Everyone has to do this to some extent. This is an internet forum, it is about the community.
This too will pass.
No, principles are more important than pragmatism. Once you sacrifice your principles for pragmatism, what else will you sacrifice? I recall the history of the Whig Party; hey, they were pragmatic. Would you have been pragmatic in accepting the Fugitive Slave Act in the Compromise of 1850? After all, it avoided civil war between the north and south! Oh, wait...
Oh stuff it. Dick Cheney has done more for this country than you could hope to do if you lived another 500 years. I’ll stick with Cheney. If you can’t understand that too bad for you.
I don’t throw people under the bus just because they don’t agree with me all the time. Especially someone that deserves our respect. You see, I’m an adult.
RE: "The seeming majority (or at least the loudest) here would prefer that Obama is re-elected."
There is no way that is true. They don't want romney, that is true, and the task is to channel that energy into helping Newt, as the Last conservative standing.
They do not want Obama. They are mad and raw and disappointed and let down. How could a majority of people at
Common sense tells me that I will not abandon what I believe in by voting for a liberal. I’ll vote Newt, write in Palin, Jim Thompson or myself. “Utopia” can burn. If that’s what the people want, so be it. But I’m not going to help strike the match.
If people choose to participate in liberal situational ethics, that’s their choice. I won’t. If the country will elect 2 liberals in a row from the big two parties, then America is pretty well over and that’s something a lot of people just refuse to face.
Big difference. Bush was pro-life, pro-family and somewhat conservative in other areas. Even served his country. Same goes for McLame, pro-life, pro-family, somewhat conservative on some issues and served his country. A war hero. Romney is none of the above. But McLame was a RINO loser who could not enthuse the base to turnout, and so it will go down with Liar/Loser McRomney.
Interesting analogy. I've been thinking about Churchill's dilemma in with this very choice. He said: If Hitler invaded hell, I would find cause to compliment Satan in the House of Commons
Now, our problems seem trivial compared to what Churchill faced, we are playing tiddlywinks.
Each person has to decide for themselves who is their personal 'Hitler' or 'Stalin'. It doesn't make Hitler any less Hitler or Stalin any less Stalin, nor does it glorify each, all it is is strategic positioning yourself for the next move.
Now, this is in no way an endorsement of any candidate or voting any way, just a thought.
Romney appoints liberal Democrat judges, that is his proven track record. Not sarcasm.
hat tip to katiedidit;starwise
Rush said this today RE: Romney
Word has leaked out about some of the things that he said to the donors. These are things that hes not said publicly in terms of specifics on policy, and one of the things that he talked about was a tax plan.
He wants to lower rates but eliminate some deductions for the rich. And I have to tell you, folks, Im not comfortable with the Republican nominee talking about special plans for the rich, special plans for Hispanics.
That was part of it, too. He was saying were gonna have to do some special outreach for Hispanics, special outreach for women.
No, we dont. Not as conservatives. We dont have to have special policies for this group and that group or special whatever. One of the tax ideas was to eliminate... Now, get this: Eliminate the mortgage deductibility on second homes. Now, thats populism. Were talking an amount of money thats no different than the Buffett Rule. Its a shame.
His capital gains idea is also a little curious, because it, too, is targeting the rich, anybody making over $200,000 jointly and introduces progressivity into the tax which seems fair or what have you.
These are not the things that a Republican, much less a conservative nominee, needs to be talking about or saying. This is Rockefeller Republicanism. This is identity politics. Its the kind of stuff that the left talks about.
We cannot and should not close our eyes to who Romney really is.
Newt’s still in the game.
I won't call you a Rhino my friend, instead, I'm standing behind you.
A few days ago I posted the question asking specifically who should we vote for if not Romney and the only answer I got was "Minny Mouse, Mickey Mouse or Goofy". In other words, the responder didn't have a f'n clue nor does anyone else who is calling for a third party vote.
That certainly doesn't make any sense whatsoever........
Have faith Williams, the folks in this country calling for a third party vote are pretty much on this site and their numbers aren't as great as they think they are.
Mickey, Minny and Goofy will get their votes from FR but not in any numbers to make a difference.........
We'll likely be stuck with Romney but at least we'll have control of two branches of the govt. with the Senate up for grabs. As much as people hate Romney, I don't see him vetoing any bills coming across his desk from a GOP controlled congress........
Good luck to you old timer, it's been nice knowing you........
How the HELL did we end up here?
I know, of course:
Those are the two offending parties, and if you ever had the chance to vote for me, those are the EXACT two parties I would put my efforts into reforming.
We advocate people vote for conservatives and not advocate the election of liberals, is it really hard to understand that?
You must be quoting someone else. Don’t recall ever referring to myself as a “leader.” Just one man with a key board posting my opinion and standing up for my liberty.
You stuff it. Dick Cheney has indeed done great things. This is not one of them.
Again, tell me how any persons can simultaneously abandon and uphold things they claim to believe in. Whether it’s you, me, Cheney, Levin or Phyllis Diller.
If you choose either one you give your imprimatur to that one. How have you refuted my analogy?
If the length of time 'til death is the issue then make it 'a bullet to the head or slow poison.' The murderer makes you choose one. If you choose either one you have just participated and thus committed the act of suicide.
There are more variables to consider than just which candidate will be “better” for the next 4 years. I can give you a Republican candidate that is an exact clone of Obama, except he’s pro-life. Undeniably that candidate is better than Obama. Does it still make sense to tell to the GOP that you’re willing to support that candidate? Likewise, say you’re negotiating a contract. Do you accept the deal as soon as your contract is “better” than your previous one? Or do you sometimes stand firm and hold out for something better rather than settle?
I can't stand Mitt, but do you folks really think that he is a true believer like Zero? Do you think Mitt wants to take America down a notch like Zero does? Do you think that Mitt hates what this country stands for?
My duty as I see it is to ensure that the least harm comes from this election and taking my ball and going home just because I don't get my way is not the answer. Fight for a conservative in the primary and in all local elections. But, in the general election, staying home and not voting is the mathematical equivalent to voting for Zero and I won't do that.
Here's just one of a million practical examples I can give.The ADA,"Americans For Democratic Action",is a filthy,despicable Marxist group that,along with other things,tries to instruct individual Marxists on who to support and what issues to support by publishing summaries of Congressional voting records and scores each officeholder.The higher the rating the better these Marxists like that particular Rep/Senator.
In 2010 (the last year for which they have a report) ,Scott Brown's ADA rating was 20%.That means that these Marxists believe that he voted "correctly" 20% of the time.By comparison,the ADA rated Ted Kennedy in 2007 (the last year when he had a complete voting record) at 85%.
Which is better,20% or 85%? Even if Romney (assuming he'll be the nominee) is correct only 10% of the time that'll be 10% vs 0%.Granted 10% isn't good...at all...I'll take it over 0% if those are my only choices.And don't even *dare* to mention Third Party/write in.I remember how many electoral votes Ross Perot got in 1992..*nearly one*!
And another quick example...Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe,two Senators that many here consider to be absolutely worthless RINOs,BOTH voted correctly on OsamaObamaCare.If you check the record not a single Rat/Commie Senator from New England came *close* to voting correctly on that bill.
The Republicans in Congress wouldn't argue with Bush over anything! Prescription drug plan? Sure! Bailouts? Of course!
If a Conservative Congress were pushing the agenda, Mitt might go along. But the agenda will come from the White House. The House might push back, but the Senate isn't going to.
Understand that some of my takeaway from your message was colored by my own perception. I view you as a leader of a fiercely and passionately conservative faction -- and a somewhat sizable one at that. Not because you are the forum owner, there are plenty of forum owners... no, it is because you've stayed true to your principles.
And no, I don't recall you calling yourself a leader, but remember, that was my takeaway message only, and not your direct quote.
And ya, you're a leader. You might not necessarily embrace the concept, but sometimes leadership is thrust upon those who don't necessarily seek it. ;)
Obama is the most anti-American president weve had.
Exactly, and if it comes down to Obama or Romney, Romney has my vote because of this. Say what you will about Romney (and I'd tend to agree with you), but he's not anti-American. Try to find one speech, just one, with Obama praising this great country without adding some sort of snide remark. Veiled talk of imperialism, racism [insert ism of choice here] is peppered throughout everything the man says.
On the other hand, Romney's speeches, for the most part, have been downright inspiring regarding the greatness of this country. And he's throwing out plenty of red meat for conservatives. Granted, I don't believe he's a true conservative as most of us here would classify it, but he is better than Obama. And as I've said many times before, getting Obama out of the White House trumps ALL this election.
Liberal Romney will have the White House.... you think liberals will have the US House too? With the Senate up for grabs by liberals?
Romney is not "we"
I'm not saying either is 'better'. Hitler and Stalin were equally evil, one just happened to be a more direct strategic threat and allying with the other put Churchill in a better strategic position.
As I said, this isn't an endorsement of anyone. Hell, I probably will vote for our own Tom Hoefling over what appears to be these two jokers. Those are just my thoughts about the battle we face.
He opus’d out. It’s been my experience that most who opus, but stay end up as trouble making antifreepers. If he wants to waste the rest of his days bitching about FR 24/7 like so many other sore losers, he can do it elsewhere.
Dick Cheney doesn’t have to explain anything to you. I bet you voted for that horrible McCain. Talk about abandoning principles. In my opinion he is worse that Romney. He’s crazy.
Dick Cheney, like you, believes he is doing what’s right. If FR starts turning on people like Cheney than I don’t want to be here anyway.
There are exactly two living people that I greatly admire. One of them is Cheney, the other is Rumsfeld. I will stand by them.
No need to vote for either one of them. The only reason we keep getting mushy RINOs pushed upon us as the Republican candidate is because the party leaders and the candidates know we'll vote for them as the lesser of two evils. Let them learn to work for our votes.
In the mean time, work hard, very hard, to elect conservative House and Senate members and keep their feet to the fire on every issue. If we can really control the House and the Senate there isn't much that the President can do, even appointing justices requires getting the Senate to confirm them. A solid conservative House and Senate is more important than anything else.
The fear of being saddled with liberal judges is real, but Romney has already shown us that he'll appoint liberal judges during his term as governor in Massachusetts so we've got that problem regardless of who wins.
Bottom line for me - there's no conservative candidate running for President, so we've got to focus 100% on the down ticket races.
Now THAT is a better analogy.
Remember, some of us have the luxury of voting our conscious, because our state will go Republican no matter what we do.
However, to those who don't have that luxury, they are faced with this very dilemma: Slow poison or the bullet. I cannot necessarily fault those who would choose the slow poison.
There are those who would choose an unoffered option: Attacking the murderer who made you make that choice. The attack, in this case, would be a write-in vote. In that event -- sadly and realistically -- they are still overpowered, and the choice to take the poison or the bullet is given to them by others.
I agree with you about Cheney. If hes considered a RINO than so am I.
What Williams wrote about Cheney was a made-up strawman argument to win him sympathy. He's referring to the discussion I had with him on a thread about Cheney endorsing Mitt Romney. I most certainly did not insult Dick Cheney. Disagreeing with Cheney and wondering why he might have endorsed him now is not an insult. I also pointed out how Cheney was also against the federal marriage amendment, and his daughter is a lesbian. So I speculated he might be falling in line with the GOP now to help his daughter Liz rise to prominence in the party or at least avoid a targetted tax audit under Obama. No "disparaging" of Dick Cheney took place, who I consider to be a conservative hero up there with Rumsfeld, Gingrich, Palin, Kemp, West, etc.
Count on Laz to ‘hit it’ ;)
I am reminded of the quote about when you keep your head when all around are losing theirs... That’s leadership. Heavy burden and all that, but true regardless.
And for those others gearing up the ‘brown nose’ comments, save them. If you spent more time thinking about what it is you truly believe in, you would be better served.
RINO offends you? - Why?
I haven’t been a republican since Dick Nixon. I’ve been on FR for 17 years, been zotted for a whole year once for . . . can’t remember why now. .
Buck up, soldier.
That’s pretty much how I’ve regarded you all these years. One man, his website, and he sometimes jumps in with his opinions.
I suppose it is just natural for people to seek out some kind of shepherd to lead them. Seems lazy to me though.
We are faced with an awkward scenario. On the one hand, we want Obama defeated to stop the socialist takeover of our country. On the other hand, we want to stop the gradual social decay of our country facilitated by people such as Romney.
Not voting for Romney advances the socialist takeover by Obama. Voting for Romney advances the insidious social decay, the gradual but constant slippery slope, the secular domination, the more subtle but equally inexorable attacks on people of faith.
It is a difficult choice. Given that choice, I opt to make a stand and not lend my support to the insidious social decay, and choose to vote for neither Obama nor Romney. I opt to no longer ride in the handbasket sliding more and more rapidly down the slippery slope. I choose not to willingly wade into the cesspool at the bottom.
I know the arguments. If Obama is reelected, we supposedly no longer will have a nation. I personally regard that as hyperbole. But even if it is not, there are some things more important than life itself.
We also need to understand, however, that, with regard to the cultural decay of our nation, that the course upon which we are heading—voting for more and more liberal and secular Republicans, tolerating and acceptable more and more amoral and immoral underpinnings of our society—is every bit as sure of a bad ending culturally as a vote for Obama has a bad ending politically.
The debate is complicated, and obscured, and falsified, and muddled, by the fact that many secular Republicans are in favor of the positions of social liberals. They therefore see Romney not as the lesser of two evils, but as a beloved trojan horse advancing their cause both economically and socially.
They, every bit as much as Obama, are my enemy.
I will not wade willingly into the cesspool. I will not trade even the most precious things of this earth, even our country, for my soul.
“But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.”
I don't believe that is an option.
Even better analogy. What if an evil mastermind gives you the choice of killing your own child with either a gun or a sword? Do you acquiesce and pick one? Or do you flat out refuse to participate in an act of evil and let the chips fall where they may?
Please know there are so many others who have been banished lately, and there are sure to be more. Many here are treading lightly because they have seen their FReeper friends get booted.
Best of luck to you, and take comfort in the fact that you wrote a beautiful farewell, and that you still have FRiends here.
Yea, I just noticed it was permanent, not just a casual goodbye.
I totally agree. DC does not have to explain squat to me. He’s still abandoning his conservative ideals and you still haven’t answered the question. Why is that? Because it blowe your excuses to hell if you answer honestly?
and in Romney’s case there is no “except”. ugh
Yeah. I feel JR and I are way past the stage of me bothering with brown nose stuff. I calls em like I sees em, and JR's earned my respect, especially with this principled stand on Romney. If JR suddenly went all liberal on me, I'd cuss him out and opus, myself. :)
I’ve been here for 13 years & it ain’t what it used to be. I took eight weeks off in 2010 in order to knock off King RINO Mike Castle in Delaware, and I also was recently labeled a RINO here? I think the “gag rule” was ultimately a bad thing for this site. And for the record, I’m supporting Newt for now.
This is really a shame. I hope you’ll come back after the pandemonium has ebbed. Your perspective, at the end of all this, will be very interesting.
I’m with Mr. Robinson, though. He’s been clear as a bell about supporting Mittens here. Mitt is a lying, elitist RINO and this site shouldn’t ever degrade itself to allow support for him. There’s no other place like this one - you know that or else you wouldn’t have spent all those years posting here.
We all make mistakes and post things we wish we hadn’t. Hell, I’m surprised I haven’t been booted just to raise the overall IQ of the place. I wish I could make comments half as intelligent as the rest of the people here.
Take a break. Think about what this place really is. Think about how there must be one place like this one. If there isn’t, we’re all screwed.