posted on June 11, 2001 07:33:51 AM new
and the dark side of the American dream.
This is a letter I've received from Jerry Politex, or William Pitt, who operates the website "bushwatch.com". I'd imagine that he's posted it by now, but haven't looked. In any case I think it's worth a look and am posting it's entirety because so many people dismiss links to things that they don't agree with out of hand and without a click. Whatever he may be, he is a serious person, and if you've concluded that he's just some democratic demogogue you haven't paid attention.
"There was a striking moment during the interregnum last November/December that has stayed with me ever since. 'Inside
Politics' was running 24 hours a day on CNN, you will recall. I was watching one evening, several days into the theft, and there was
Judy Woodruff interviewing conservative columnist Bob Novak. The question of the hour was whether Al Gore should just quit and go
home. On this night, Novak was pointing to a public poll that had been running on CNN.com. You know these polls. Log on to a news
site and you can vote your opinion on whatever happens to be the headline of the day. The poll Novak referred to asked the question:
"Should Al Gore concede?" The results showed that some 89% of the American population who found their way onto CNN.com voted
"Yes" to this question. The count of those who voted numbered in the tens of thousands. Novak flapped this poll all around the studio as
indisputable proof that a large majority of the American people saw Gore as a thief and a usurper and a sore loser who should just go
away. Soon enough, Gore did. I never forgot that night, and never lost the sneaking suspicion that something shady had occurred.
Somehow, someone had flooded that poll with "Yes" votes to skew the results. I had no proof, and the theme song to 'X-Files' was
sounding in my head, but I was mortally sure that something was rotten in Denmark. Now, after all these months, I have figured out
what happened that night. That CNN.com poll was 'Freeped'.
What does it mean when something gets 'Freeped'? Aim your browser to http://www.FreeRepublic.com, join the conversations in
the forums, and you will find out. FreeRepublic.com is a website which describes its cause thusly: "We're working to roll back decades
of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America."
This seems innocent enough. I am a particular fan of governmental largesse, but respect coherent arguments against it. I believe my
work against the illegitimacy of Bush proves my dedication to rooting out political fraud and corruption. And while I am no conservative,
I have met many conservatives whom I admire for their intellect, ability to articulate a message, and integrity in the truest definition of
that word: "Steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code." My grandfather was a conservative of great integrity from the old
school, and I never once found cause to look down on him, even when we disagreed on a principle. My grandfather was the ideal
conservative, in my opinion. A part of me is glad he died before I could tell him about the Freepers.
A Freeper is a member of FreeRepublic.com. Freepers speak to each other on the forums of this website, discussing all
varieties of topic. Purportedly, they support the ideals espoused above. In actuality, there is a yawning moral chasm
between word and deed. Take the CNN.com poll I discussed above, for example. A common Freeper tactic is to post on the
FreeRepublic forums a notice that a poll exists somewhere which asks a question dear to the conservative heart: "Should the Congress
pass more gun control legislation?" or "Is Bill Clinton the illegitimate spawn of Satan and Baal?" The URL to this poll is provided, and the
Freeper legions swarm to vote.say, "no" on the first and "yes" on the second. There are a lot of Freepers, and many of them will vote
multiple times. This, obviously skews the result. This is how a poll is 'Freeped.' Novak and CNN used the 'Freeped' CNN.com poll to
convince the public that 89% of them wanted Al Gore to quit before the votes were counted. This helped to push the rising tidewater
that allowed the Supreme Court to get away with stealing the election. Is this not political corruption? Does such a disruption skew
information that is provided to the public via the media? Does this not pervert the truth?
Of course, there are liberals out there who organize the same kind of coordinated mugging of public internet polls. It can be
argued that such things are no more than political gamesmanship. Dig a little deeper into the Freeper phenomenon, however, and you will
find a darkness where true morality dares not show its face. As we all know, Jenna Bush was recently busted for attempting to
purchase booze at a restaurant named Chuy's in Austin, Texas. The manager of the establishment, named Mia Lawrence, called 911
when she saw what was happening. The Freepers took this personally, believing the Jenna fiasco to be part of some liberal conspiracy to
humiliate Bush and the daughters. They called for a 'Freeping' of Chuy's restaurant. Salon.com recently wrote a story about the Freeper
reaction to the Chuy's situation. ("The jihad against Chuy's" by Anthony York) I quote it in part below: 'The attacks against Mia
Lawrence, the bar manager, are being orchestrated on the Internet. Her address, date of birth, drivers license and registration
information, physical description, and even birth information about her infant child have been posted on Freerepublic.com, along with
calls for punitive actions. Freerepublic.com Web site's sysop pulled some of the information as it was called to his attention -- to his
credit -- but the info has circulated and been posted to other Internet forums to spread the "Get Lawrence" frenzy.' I felt a chill in my
spine when I first read these words. The manager, Mia Lawrence, was in all likelihood seeking to save her restaurant from breaking
Texas' punitive underage drinking laws, signed by Governor Bush, which would have cost Chuy's its liquor license. She earned for her
trouble a legion of stalkers who speak openly of loving guns. Her personal information, along with maps providing driving directions to
her home, were posted on FreeRepublic. I am confident in my prediction that she has not slept since dialing 911.
I did some research regarding this topic on FreeRepublic. Entering the word "Chuy" into the search engine provided, I found the
following Freeper commentary: "The manager, (aka 'Mia the Liberal DemonRat'), tried to cause as much trouble for the Bush twins and
their dad as possible and now might get it returned back on her own head in spades!!! This is sweet!" - Truth_Eagle "Hell! Surround
Chuy's with tanks and set the place on fire while fully occupied." - olustee "Let's turn that TEXMEX joint into a BARBECUE!" -
makoman I read comments, since removed by the moderators of FreeRepublic, which suggested that someone should go into Chuy's and
smear acid on the tables. To be fair, a fellow Freeper posted the following dissent: "Every thread that had Mia's addy posted on it got
pulled. Every one. It's NOT OK. Printing a map to the house, and having the addy on the map, is arguably worse." - CyberLiberty
CyberLiberty is proof positive that not all Freepers are violent psychopaths. Still, there were far more posts in the vein of olustee's than
of CyberEagle's. By all means, seek out the site and investigate for yourself.
I am forced to wonder how posting the name, address and physical description of a restaurant manager from Austin, as well
as the description of her infant child, furthers the conservative cause in America. I am reminded of the words of art critic and
author, Harold Rosenberg: "The values to which the conservative appeals are inevitably caricatured by the individuals designated to put
them into practice." Clearly, the purported targeting of the daughter of the President is mortally offensive to the average Freeper. I
decided to do a search using the words "Chelsea Clinton." I found the following: (question asked) "I really do wonder what perversions
Chelsea participates in." (response) "THAT is something I would rather NOT wonder about. Animals, plants, the elderly...echh. The girl
is a walking STD." - AntiChris "If people didnt know that hillary was an ugly assed dyke - they must have been blind - she just put up
with old dumb ass so she could run the white house - just look at the bizarre bunch she put in office - the female version of frankenstein
- which is janet reno - and this could go on and on - halfbright looks just like broomhilda - weirdest looking bunch ever to defile any
government - and all courtesy of mr hillary - and then she supported all the fags in hollywood and along with her fat assed dyke buddy
rosie - they all look like something from a sideshow at a circus - everyone of them has the coyote rating." - candyman34 In these two
short entries, the daughter of a President is accused of carnal knowledge of animals and plants. She is accused of being a spreader of
STDs. Senator Hillary Clinton is called a "dyke." The very notion of balance or fair play is conspicuously absent here. The hatred is
palpable.
Which brings me to yet another favorite Freeper topic. A singular characteristic of the average Freeper is an abiding love
and respect for Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Many Freepers use Christ as the shield with which they defend their views. Sometimes,
they use him as their sword. If I remember my Sunday School classes, Jesus said in the Book of John, chapter 15 verse 12, " This is my
commandment, that ye love one another." I entered the word "homosexual" into the FreeRepublic search engine, and found the
following. Keep the Bible quote I provided in mind as you read: "The spread of infectious diseases... oral and anal cancer... death from
HIV infections...Just some of the ways GOD gets even with the queers and faggots." - upchuck "In another time, and in another place,
they burned people like this." - East Bay Patriot "I will tell you that the Lord God has at least 7000 righteous in the USA that have not
bowed their knee to baal = and these flames of fire are going to rise up soon and speak the Living Word of a Holy God to these
frog-demon-freaks and ban them from our land. I will NOT let this country be over-run by
Communist/Socialist/Globalist/Abortionist/Feminist Sodomites." - jdhmichigan "DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT shake hands with any
homosexuals." - Mr. K. I have been a Christian all my life. My understanding of the teachings of Jesus directs me to love my enemies,
and accept everyone - Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist - as a child of God. Jesus was the son of God, but was also a revolutionary
seeking freedom from Roman persecution. Therefore, as a Christian and a freedom-loving American, I respect and love those who do
not bend a knee to any religion. Jesus died so all of us could live, and the American Revolution was fought so that all people in this nation
could live as they wish. These two events are connected intimately. I do not pretend, as a card-carrying heterosexual, to understand how
one man can look with lust upon another man. But after being friends with, and after sharing apartment space with, a number of
homosexual men and women, I know in my heart that such things exist for a reason and are not wrong. God loves everyone equally, as
He sees the smallest sparrow fall. I love everyone, too. Perhaps, like gay men and women, I was born that way. I have never espoused
the burning at the stake of any human being, be they gay or conservative. I know of no 'liberal' who has espoused such action. How
such a statement falls within the yardsticks of Christianity or true conservatism is a mystery which I may never solve. I do know this,
however: were Jesus to log on to FreeRepublic and read the perversion His message has undergone in 2,000 years, He would beg to be
crucified again, so as to be spared exposure to such hatred.
I suppose it is easy for the average Freeper to post such virulent messages on a public forum. After all, they dare not use
their real names. Names like Truth_Eagle, upchuck and AntiChris are shields behind which cowards hide. It is easy to speak when no
one can see your face. A veteran of many email flame wars, I know well how brave a person can be when shielded by the anonymity of
a computer keyboard. Those who sexually stalk teenage girls in internet chat rooms use similar tactics. It is very effective. My screen
name, on each and every board I post to, is WilliamPitt. I am easy to find. I do not hide, and I never will. The glaring fact of the
cowardice of the average Freeper should not in any way diminish the effectiveness of their actions. They pervert public polls. They call
and email congressional representatives en masse, thus creating the illusion of massive public pressure that twists the actions of elected
officials who seek only respond to the legitimate concerns of constituents. They bombard media outlets with prurient stories to discredit
respectable Democratic officeholders. They are the bedrock base of the entity we know as the GOP. They are very, very powerful.
Keep these things in mind when you find yourself shocked by the results of a poll on MSNBC, or when a Senator refuses
to support reasonable gun control laws, or when the press decides to spend two years covering a consensual sex act
between adults. Robert Kennedy described Richard Nixon as being a symbol of "the dark side of the American Dream." Were he alive
today, he would described FreeRepublic in the same terms. The Freepers are out there. --William Rivers Pitt, 6/11/01
posted on June 11, 2001 12:12:10 PM new
The man (politex) seldom rants, but he's outraged that they would go to such lengths as do what was done to the woman who manages that bar.
The site www.freerepublic.com is real, viewable by anyone. I've posted links to articles in there from time to time.
I don't find him to be on a rant. It is a very well written piece, and I, as a registered Republican, agree with his points. It is outrageous what lengths some folks will stoop, supposedly in name of their party, and make the party I support look like buffoons. You find losers in all walks of life, and I hope that those who read this will realize that all Conservatives do not support/agree with the writings you'll find on that website.
posted on June 12, 2001 05:02:01 AM new Disgusting!
Cruel!
Frightening!
They may be anonymous on the internet, but their words are their own. And that makes me ill.
And I cannot abide hypocrites who hide behind the Bible. Damn churches are full of them. (Yes, my button has been pushed.)
I have to have confidence that the majority of conservatives are not this radical. I like to think there are more Mr. K's in this world. The blowhard radicals are just noiser. Otherwise, I would lose total faith in my fellow man.
Thank you, Ken, for bringing this to us in its entirety.
