"I do not avoid women, Mandrake... but I do deny them my essence. ..."
Posted on 10/25/2006 11:10:46 AM PDT by Blackirish
As the Republican base fragments and Christian conservatives consider a “fast” from politics, the polling data point to a mid-term Republican thumping. Less than two weeks from now, Republicans will begin their post-mortem soul searching. And as the corpses of their House and Senate majorities grow cold, so should Karl Rove’s 2006 campaign strategy.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
The liberals work Marxism in mysterious ways.
"I do not avoid women, Mandrake... but I do deny them my essence. ..."
I've not been banned even once!"
Neither have I.
I'm not sure how homosexuals have anything to do with what I'm talking about. There are even fewer Log Cabin Republicans than there are libertarians. But I'm not not talking about those people.
The people that I am talking about are these people who voted on an FR poll. By the looks of it, fully one third of us are pro-science. I'm not talking about some fringe minority movement or the one percenters. The Republican party cannot win elections without the support of pro-science people like me.
The notion that evolution is a socialist lie is wrong. There's no crime in being wrong. You have a right to your beliefs, and everyone has their pet theories and such. However, as the website's owner, you are in a position to set policy and set the tone of debates. By calling evolution a marxist lie, you embolden anti-science posters on your site to call people like me a liar and a marxist.
As the site's owner, you have a responsibility to help keep the peace. However, you posts seem to indicate to methat you're in favor of making war on my faction, figuratively speaking. This is impolitic, because it is going to alientate a large number of people and hurt the conservative cause.
Well, I'm not particularly interested in attracting Godless Marxists to FR. And I sincerely doubt they're really interested in helping us in reach our goals.
Some time ago, on one of the Crevo threads (when 4 or 5 of them were running simultaneously every day on FR), a poster by the name of Caesarean_Daoist made an interesting statement in counter point to the vaunted 'protecting conservatism' or 'protecting Republicans' claims--mainly to the effect of: the behavior on display by the cohorts on the Evolution Ping List would most likely backfire.
Let's see:
1. Well, one of your number couldn't show self-restraint and goes about on a prayer thread making fun of those asking for prayers. He was warned, but continued. Then, he gets banned. Then, other members of the cadre show up to complain like little kids.
2. A few (including a liberal arts major), tossing about to any who disagreed that they have no understanding of science--while simultaneously displaying a lack of understanding of science themselves.
3. The conduct of piling on by same said cadre when someone either misspoke, or, in other cases, a poster did display a lack of scientific understanding but was flamed mercilessly.
But, the most galling points:
4. Misrepresentation of intent. While claiming 'science', the fiesta of denigrating the religious beliefs of other posters, i.e., a lack of common courtesy, and, in fact, a display of hostile intent.
5. From what I have gleaned, your cadre now, instead of openly mocking other posters, does it on another site, then sneaks over here in ones and twos to continue the same behavior without deploying the ping list
This list can go on and on, but I've got other things to do.
Whether you realize it or not, you and some of your fellows are making yourselves look foolish.
And, just to add, I suspect the fundraisers aren't having problems because of the one note johnny issue you folks keep harping on (i.e. evolution is the foundation of all science--and, in case you missed it, that is an exaggeration to make a point ), but because of the truly political issues such as immigration and a few other choice items where some folks got out of hand (some of those folks had good points to make).
Don't bother responding. I don't think you'll ever 'get it'.
Given your many misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and false accusations in that post, I don't think I'm the one who might have a problem "getting it", but I do agree with you on the futility of responding to you in detail. Suffice to say that your assessment is based far more on a misunderstanding of what I and others have written, and not on our actual positions -- I didn't want to give anyone the impression that I was endorsing your characterizations or agreeing with your descriptions.
I just reviewed a bunch of your posts on the "crevo" threads. Now I know where you're coming from. Almost all your posts express hostility towards the "'science' types", as you put it, 'scare quotes' and all. I remember folks like that from school, they took out their frustrations by beating up on those they perceived as "nerds".
Social conservatives, the "religious right" OTH, did the hard work of organizing grassroots and turning out the vote. They knocked on doors and cooked the rubber chickens. Libertarians spend most of their time now trying to persuade the GOP to alienate the religious because...because...well, they're just all icky poo and we don't want them sitting at the same table. You know. Not our kind, deah.
Now I read from CATO, once again, that it's all the fault of the d@*#ed Baptists that this election is a nail-biter. We never should have let them in in the first place.
If it weren't for the religious right, you'd have Gore, Kerry, and HRC in perfect sequence for the rest of your life. That's the fact that the 'tarians hate the most.
Your tag line validates all of the criticism directed at you.
Yes, I often get criticized for valuing knowledge over ignorance. My point exactly.
Jim Robinson: By the way, if they are truly conservative or Republican as you claim, how would my action on FR have any bearing whatsoever on whether or not they continue promoting conservative causes or voting Republican? Are you saying that if I don't agree with them they are going to renounce their beliefs in conservative ideals? Wow! Sounds like these scientists are pretty thin skinned and short sighted (or really not conservative at all).
I see nothing reassuring in there that--Get ready! Here comes a breathtaker!--the War on Those Not at War on Science here on FR is not real. Then there's this:
Well, I'm not particularly interested in attracting Godless Marxists to FR. And I sincerely doubt they're really interested in helping us in reach our goals.
On a crevo thread, I'd jump on something like that for a strawman bait-and-switch copout.
We have a disconnect between two claims for what FR even is. One is "FR, the premier website of conservatism." So it seems WE'RE going to roll back decades of gummint largesse and make the country safe for freedom. Seems clear. We're gonna do great stuff. With OUR money, and whose else?
The other is "FR, JR's personal website to do as he damn well pleases therewith including if he so desires spread the news that the theory of evolution is a socialist conspiracy." Got it. "MY freedom of association! MY property! MINE! MINE!"
Yours, yes. No site can be the first thing, the premier website of conservatism, for me if it's the second thing for you. You and your site are fired.
Reason: Tinfoil
OK
My browser has a new homepage today.
How on earth is someone supposed to respond to a post like this? I am not playing "pathetic mind games" nor am I "sleazy." I am not trying to "hold you hostage to my ideology." I am trying to talk directly to you about something I care deeply about, and something that affects the conservative movement as a whole.
Jim, I am thankful that RunningWolf posted to you, because this is a perfect example of what I am talking about.
I think RunningWolf is a retread, who once posted under the name of mordo. He got banned for being a jerk as mordo about a year ago, a week later he was back being a jerk as RunningWolf. How is someone like me who isn't a jerk supposed to respond to this? It is a source of pride for me that I have had very few posts pulled. Faced with people who won't follow the rules, I just get fed up. People like him make it impossible to further conservatism and have fun doing it because they're poisoning the well.
The Michael Moore wing of the Soros party is putting together a movie with exactly your talking points. Why are you using the rhetoric of the "progressives?"
The actual marxists are over on DU, and I agree that they're generally disinterested in rolling back years of governmental largesse.
However, I'm not talking about those people, either.
I'm talking about a large part of your website, about one out of every three of us. These people all want to control government spending, secure the border, support the troops, win in Iraq and Afganistan, and etc. These are bread and butter conservative issues. We are not godless marxists just because we are pro-science. This kind of statement sets a very ugly tone. Already I can forsee your statements being thrown in my face by some jerk.
I always saw 1994 as a libertarian wave. I'm a weak to moderate libertarian, but enough of one to have a horror of Democrats in power.
The GOP leadership has been pushing people like me away, and they need to quit it.
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.