Founder of Free Republic FREAKS OUT on McCain!!!

whoa! Jim Rob freaks out!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1601416/posts

So - he obviously feels threatened by the McCain/Finegold stuff...

How does this affect DU...? Were the Journals added in anticipation of a change in a blogs political status..?

I want to see as many self-professed conservatives pissed off at McCain (or any other Repubs) as possible. Jim Rob (does that name suggest a substandard number of teeth to anybody besides me?) should be shouting this from the rooftops.

but his spiritual name is Rim Job.

He probably spends his dough on pretty decent dental care, because from all reports, he sure ain't spending it on the site itself.

It's like the Petro/Blackwell primary battle here in Ohio...I LOVE to see Rebubs savaging Repubs...

Check out the creature--- He, his site and the clones who post there spew hate, racism, violence and homophobia.

It is a haven for posters who advocate Killing the Ragheads, Hanging Cindy Sheehan and disemboweling anyone who has the temerity to disagree with them.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1601416/posts?page=324#324

To: Vn_survivor_67-68

Kerry was a war hero too until the Vietnam vets “Swift Boated” his ass. At least one of the guys who worked on that is ready to get the truth out about McCain too. Like they did with Kerry the MSM will try to ignore it but the new media will be too powerful for them again.


335 posted on 03/22/2006 10:20:53 PM PST by SUSSA
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies >


And good ol' "To the Supreme Court I Quit! Congressman BillyBob" is on the case too!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1601416/posts?page=324#324

---------------------------------
A freeper Congressman wannabe - I've seen it all, now! Dayum, this is the most 'entertaining' thread I've ever seen there! I need to get out more ... that's just sad!

http://www.google.com/search?num=30&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&q=%22To+the+Supreme+Court%2C+I+Quit%21%22+Congressman+Billybob&btnG=Search

Best one - http://clownposse.org/forum/topic.asp?topic_id=5004
BillyBob smackdown!

Considering the weak attitude most Republicans have had in the last few years towards the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

just other folks'

makes 'em feel special. like Papa Chimpy really does like them the best. Rimjob and co. could never get that kind of special good feeling from their real fathers.

:hug:

Daily Kos and Redstate.org have teamed up to defeat that stupid bill.

I used to support McCain-Feingold, but it's a stupid bill (except for the part that requires candidates to say "I approved this message" in their ads). People here often complain about Democrats not campaigning enough in the South and Mountain West. I agree. But that costs money, and if you limit money in campaigns you are reducing the number of states in which a candidate can campaign.

So I guess I sort of agree with ole' Jimmy Bob.

"And to think he and Rudy may be our only alternatives.

I might stay home from voting for the first time in 20+ years."

(Oh How I Wish They Do) }(
(Still: DieBold Won't?) :banghead:

Use the constitution when it's suits you, but toss it aside when it doesn't

And who is Tojo? I think this fool was trying to say Tito who ruled Yugoslavia for years.

It's customary when bashing Japan to bash Tojo for WWII, instead of Hirohito. Lots of reasons, some even legite.

Funny thing is, Tojo, and the rest of the people on Bozo's list, are known for their nationalist attitudes and their belief that their nation, even their race, should dominate the world and eliminate all threats to the safety of their homeland. Thus, he should have Reagan and Bush on his list of the "Beast," but doesn't seem smart enough to understand that.

:toast:

fuck-- i guess finegold`s off my list..it`s to hard to smash the "presses" so we`ll just tax the shit out of them...

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/03/15/stifling_the_www_online_freedom_of_speech_act_hr_1606.php

He may have legit beef...

I've been out of the loop awhile,
Did it pass?

Smells like VICTORY.

"There are times when, for the sake of America, I almost wish he were still a POW."

What a sick bunch of fucks.

Bastard around here, Jim Bob has the right idea, if the wrong target.

It seems that it's not so much McCain-Feingold, but a court interpretation of it that is causing the trouble, and could cause the Federal Election Commission to start judging which websites are "political" enough to shut down before the election.

So, this new bill is to exempt the Web and blogs from any such regulation-- to keep us all going. Seems like a good idea.

What I don't understand is that most of the support seems to be coming from the right wing, when it's us who have benfitted more. Where are the Left and the Democrats in support of exempting the internet from regulation?

What am I missing?

the 1st Amendment? This is what I found that seems to have gotten him so upset ~

Stifling the www? Online Freedom of Speech Act (H.R. 1606)
Reported by Chrish - March 15, 2006

(Snicker, of course this is not from FOX.)

TOMORROW afternoon, the U.S. House will vote on the Online Freedom of Speech Act (H.R. 1606).

The organization cited below from which I got the alert says: "1606 is needed because federal courts have ordered the Federal Election Commission to regulate "electioneering communications" on the Internet because of the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act (McCain-Feingold). If H.R. 1606 fails to become law, your Web site or blog could be shut down for the 30 days prior to a primary election and the 60 days prior to a general election should you express "electioneering communications." And any political e-mail you send during those times supporting or denouncing a candidate could also be disallowed."

"A new FEC rulemaking to cover the Internet began in March 2005, and the Commission has scheduled a meeting to vote on these new rules on March 16, 2006. Unless Congress acts quickly to prevent it, the FEC will be required to issue a new regulation to cover Internet communications.

Historically, Congress has regulated political speech only where it has the potential to cause corruption or the appearance of the corruption. There has been no demonstration that the growth of the Internet has had a corruptive influence on politics. There is, however, ample evidence that the Internet has had a positive, democratizing effect on our system.

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/03/15/stifling_the_www_online_freedom_of_speech_act_hr_1606.php

I'm wondering what you're wondering. It seems it's mostly Republicans who are for this bill, and that alone makes me suspicious. Also, it has little to do with McCain, but rather the FCC's interpretation (or stretching) of the McCain/Feingold bill. So, Jim Rob's tirade is a little misplaced, imo.

I'm not sure what to think, but on the surface at least, I hate to say it, but I agree with Jim Rob, if for different reasons. This must in some way, adversely affect some of the shenanigans FR has engaged in and he's freaking out over it.

I'd like to know more though. It seems the bill did not pass yet, and has been postponed until next week, if I'm reading correctly.

looked up HR 1606 on thomas and it's from a year ago and just resurfaced. It's NOT an amendment of McCain-Feingold, but an amendment to the 1971 campaign act, which might be enough to nullify the court decision, but I don't know the details.

It's been sent to the full House for a vote some time soon, but if the FEC is due to set regulations this week, it may be too late for the bill to have any effect-- it would have to go to the Senate and maybe a joint committee, then signed by Shrub. All that takes time.

So, I am now more confused than ever. Although Conyers and Flake were sponsors of the latest version, it still looks like it could be a trick.

am learning. McCain/Feingold doesn't deal with this, but does have a '60 day' clause, regarding negative ads, I believe. It didn't seem to do much good in 2004 thought, and I remember wondering about that back then.

Freepers are worried that if this bill doesn't pass, Democrats could go 'gunning' for sites like FR by using the '60 day' clause in court. They did mention that Republicans could go 'gunning for sites like DU also. This would give the courts (they hate courts) the right to judge whether or not FR was violating McC/Feingold's 60 day clause.

It seems that someone has scared them into thinking that is a definite possibility. One of them mentioned that 'Rathergate' could not have happened if McC/Fein. had been used this way in court, back then. I'm not sure why it wasn't if that's the case.

I'm thinking they have been scared and are over-reacting, or, there are activities they intend to get involved in, and have, other than chatting and backing candidates etc (the normal forum activities, that will violate, or maybe already have violated McC/Fein.

They want this bill to pass so that they can do whatever they've been doing, (like Swiftboating Kerry, eg, or backing it up) without fear of reprisal. They had the Swiftboaters on FR. Since the '60 day' clause affects negative ads, I guess that's their concern.

Still, if the bill does not pass, maybe DU and other Dem sites could have to deal with expensive lawsuits, which they might eventually win, but would cost a lot in time and money. Maybe Conyers sees that potential, and that's why he's for it. Better to be sure than sorry iow. I don't know if this is correct, but that's what I gathered so far.

Freepers are definitely not concerned about our rights, that's for sure. But, it might be to our advantage anyway, to support the bill to illiminate the possibility of a crazy freeper from filing lawsuits.

here's Kos' take on it, with lots of links to explore, and it brings up serious questions:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/14/101811/964

I don't know why I haven't heard more about this already. Gotta check out a few more places.

They're too dim to see that this benefits our side more than theirs.

Sounds like the law is trying to defend the internet sites like DU, but is possibly being interpreted so that it actually hurts internet sites like DU by the FCC. Hmmm...

McCain isn't worthy of shining Reagan's boots. I thought they saved that for the house boys...

(rim shot)

Thank you, I will be here most of the week...

And the 1st Amendment in particular?

:wtf:

Seems to me, this bill is designed to help Republicans by limiting this media's influece on elections. RimJob and his happy band of morons and the rest of the RW blogosphere are getting shafted...but it's for the greater good of the Syndicate. Republicans dominate the rest of the media channels, so this would hurt us disproportionately. It amazes me that these people over at FR cannot see what party is most interested in limiting speech. They are so low on the Republican food chain, they don't exist.

in his post he lays into McCain saying:

and what did Bush tale a solemn oath to protect when he was sworn in ? Did Jr. have his fingers crossed behing his back all the time, or doesn't it count because he wasn't elected at all.

McCain is likely to get the republican nomination. He's the only person they have that would have appeal to more then hardcore repugs during this time of division. I would love to have these ignorant, arrogant , lying, slandering idiots working to defeat McCain.

when he DARED to speak out against Prince Pissypants in the 2K election.. They hate him

I read this article last week linked from an Atrios post and it gives some history of FR (it's funny as hell) Drudge and Lucianne leaving, accusations of Bush and CIA drug running...

It's in the archives so I don't think you need to get the free pass

http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/1999/07/13/free/

Free-for-all at Free Republic
"Lucianne Goldberg, Matt Drudge and other friends abandon the Clinton-bashing Web site over its attacks on George W. Bush"
by Jeff Stein

classic line "W2K, gun-nut, jew-baiting crazies"