Steadfast is GLAD to see Richard Perry!
 

So what is Bro. Perry's screen name?

I realize AFF is open to all, but it seems there has been a membership drive underway of late. The target audience seems to be ultraconservatives.

Am I wrong Steadfast?

Were we leaning too liberal?

BTW, welcome Brother Perry. I have enjoyed your posts so far.

I hear he's a great guy.

Steadfast,

Is this Pastor Perry more conservative than I am? If so I guess he really is hardcore.

He's so hardcore that he won't even let you polish your shoes. The only thing that should outshine the sun is Jesus.

:D

Definitely orchestrated if you ask me ... an edict from Mount CAF ... perhaps.

Ludicrous assumption.

How would you know ... you're not in the loop anymore .. you've been banished to Liberaldom.

I would say you are in danger of losing your title as the most ultra of the ultracons. Sorry, CC1.

I realize you were addressing Daniel, but I want you to know that I only asked a question of Steadfast. He seems to know all of the new posters.

I don't think THE QUESTION itself was ludicrous.

LOL! Only form CAF. I actually spoke with Steadfast on the phone yesterday.

We spent about an hour listing all of the UC's we could get to register here. Than I spent half of today emailing all of them and inviting them to join. Hold on to your hats. The fresh wave is coming. :hypercoffee



NOT!

Congrats Friend!

I enjoyed Bro Perry's post from today.

The "conservative but not caustic" will be a welcome change.

I'm sure there's some truth in your post. :popcorn2

Personally, I think it is ludicrous to think members of Admin would actively go out and try to recruit a particular flavor of poster in order to balance the scales. Just don't see that happening.

Did you notice awhile back that none of the cons made the same assertion when new more liberal minded poster showed up? Forums are dynamic and the dynamic shifts from time to time. Seems to me, from my experience, the con will always think the slant is to the lib, and the lib will always think the slant is to the con. JMO.

Only the part about me speaking with Steadfast on the phone. I don't recall that we mentioned this Forum one time.

I noticed a lot of them are from Texas.

Hmmmm

Well, welcome, Bro. Perry. If you're a friend of Steadfast, then you must be an okay guy!!

And?

If it helps any, I haven't invited anyone to join this Forum. :coffee2

I wonder if they have ties to the Houston meeting prior the '06 GC???

You are a great guy, but you have a horrible habit of calling everything you disagree with ludicrous, stupid and the like.

You really need to work on your choice of words Bro.

I know for a fact that a couple of the forums we post on have purposefully pushed the posting in certain ways in the past.

I think we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black here, Bro. But I don't expect you to see that. :hypercoffee

Further, why don't you do a search and see how many times I have used the word "stupid?" I tend to avoid direct inferences to that word. (And do not use it in referring to people.) Also, try not to take it personal when someone disagrees with your position or post. It is not the same as calling you ludicrous. I said the question was ludicrousl I still think it is. And I still love and appreciate you.

If you folks seriously think that rrford and myself can get on the telephone and our world is so small that we have nothing but this forum to talk about the only obvious retort I can find would be this; you SERIOUSLY need to expand your borders and get a life!

I like AFF but this is just a pleasant (usually) diversion for my hectic mind. I have a pretty full life... even when I go a long time without posting on this forum! Hence, the low post number compared to some.

As a matter of fact, I'm sitting in a hospital room right now with my grandbuddy watching the miracle of life wiggle and grin. Life just don't get much better than this! :hypercoffee

I agree Steadfast.

Are you saying we need to get a life? LOL

So true.

I love you man!

Now don't go confusing them with facts...

Well I feel better now.

I don't take it personal most of the time. Just when I am gang tackled with the intent being to discredit and marginalize my very presence.

Somewhat revisionist if you ask me ... considering some folks at HQ were not happy .... with the meeting ... nor did the Supt. like the fact that it was advertised as it was ...

Now, don't go confusing them with facts.

I ain't seen that happen. Except for that one time you were having a bad day and were being hyper-sensitive. :hypercoffee

and I have that in DB's own words ... [and yes I know he attended ... but not for the reasons some would like to espouse]

SInce when does that make any difference whatsoever? Who said they had to be happy with every meeting someone has? I don't remember the men who hosted the meeting asking for organizational endorsement.

I gotta be honest with ya. I think the organization should have been having those kinds of meetings years ago. It would need to have a more balanced approach, IMO. But we have long needed a venue to discuss issues without rhetoric or attitudes.

I know things about the players and intent of that meeting that I cannot post. Needless to say the "higher powers" were more than a little miffed over that whole thing.

Belive it or not I do know why he attended. I know the concerns he had as we spoke a few days prior to the meeting. I agreed with his concerns then and I still agree with them now. That being said, those guys still had a right to hold a meeting and to discuss what they did. And it did indeed cover much more than the television issue.

So it wasn't as balanced as Stead said it was??

Cmon ... I know what went down there ... A WITCH HUNT.

Did they hand out sign up sheets for AFF?