Posted on 04/21/2007 6:42:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
We've got some real challenges facing us. FR was established to fight against government corruption, overstepping, and abuse and to fight for a return to the limited constitutional government as envisioned and set forth by our founding fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and other founding documents.
One of the biggest cases of government corruption, overstepping and abuse that I know of is its disgraceful headlong slide into a socialist hell. Our founders never intended for abortion to be the law of the land. And they never intended the Supreme Court to be a legislative body. They never intended God or religion to be written out of public life. They never intended government to be used to deny God's existence or for government to be used to force sexual perversions onto our society or into our children's education curriculum. They never intend for government to disarm the people. They never intended for government to set up sanctuary cities for illegals. They never intended government to “rule” over the people and or to take their earnings or private property or to deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech, free religion, private property, due process, etc. They never intended government to seize the private property of private citizens through draconian asset forfeiture laws or laws allowing government to take private property from lawful owners to give to developers. Or to seize wealth and redistribute it to others. Or to provide government forced health insurance or government forced retirement systems.
All of the above are examples of ever expanding socialism and tyranny brought to us by liberals/liberalism.
FR fights against the liberals/Democrats in all of these areas and always will. Now if liberalism infiltrates into the Republican party and Republicans start promoting all this socialist garbage, do you think that I or FR will suddenly stop fighting against it? Do you think I'm going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?
Do you really expect me to do that?
We’re looking for religious right members that could...IF HE BECOMES THE NOMINEE...hold their noses and vote for him rather than allow a Clinton to run this nation again.
***Sounds like a talking point to me. Why don’t you just opus and be done with it? Why would you be looking for saltwater fish in a freshwater pond? If I were looking for middle-of-the-road rockefeller republicans I wouldn’t go to a meeting of welfare moms.
IF HE BECOMES THE NOMINEE...
That’s a BIG if. It’s also a false dilemma, especially during the primary season.
Since you’re so focused on this false dilemma, I would expect you to answer this false dilemma.
My contention: If rudy gets the nomination, he splits the base, possibly splits the republican party, and loses the election.
Rudy followers’ contention: If Hunter gets it, he wins the base and loses the election.
Hypothetical to answer the rudy followers’ hypothetical. Both sides losing to Hillary.
Side A: The solib republican splits the base. The MSM turns on him the moment he is nominated. Hillary wins. Republican party is split.
Side B: The socon republican wins the nomination, loses to hildebeast in a tough fight. Republicans are united against the hillary presidency.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?
Win-Win false dilemma:
Side A: Solib wins presidency by ignoring the socon base and permanently splitting the republican party.
Side B: SoCon wins presidency by (obviously) relying on the socon base.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?
Regardless of who wins or loses, Free Republic and the republican party is better off with Duncan Hunter than Rudy as the candidate. This social liberal candidate is simply not healthy for the republican party nor for FR. And rudy followers are proving to be very impolite freepers.
“I believe that anyone who was once a slave in the United States, at the permission of the government, should be entitled to reparations.”
Not bad
I wish I could find his comments on that when he signed the reparations act. This history of the Japanese internment wasn't nearly as cut and dried as so many people think.
: ) If we went by our founding fathers, NONE of us would be paying an “income tax”
Good references on squeegee men that I hadn’t heard before. Keep up the good work.
My eyes, my eyes! Lordy, it’s too late in the evening for reading an entire speech, EV. LOL
I asked a simple question. “Do you or do you not support eliminating federal income tax for inner city blacks as supported by Keyes?” A “yes” or “no” answer would be so much easier, and dare I say, much clearer as well. :)
“Yea, ain’t it a Peach? Oops, did I say that?”
I watched peach go down in flames live...she was so obstinate. Howlin I missed. Pity that. Everybody agrees she deserved her fate just for being the biggest bully on the board for all those years. But Queens also fall...and their minions are lessened.
LOL
LOL!
Keyes support for tax relief pretty much depends on which crowd he’s talking to at the time.
I sincerely think he copied & pasted a talking point from a rudybot campaign missive.
Why won't you share your conservative credentials with some reports about your FReeper/conservative event activities over the past few years? There have been quite a few opportunities to be active beyond keyboard commando positions.
You have spent the past week name-calling, taunting, insulting, attacking and bullying people in this forum. Step up to the plate and tell us how you have been leaders of the conservative movement. Show us the positive conservative influence you provide to the cause. Oh--and check out my tagline.
;)
English class is in session. Jim`s first sentence mentions "descendents". Not black descendents, white descendents, yellow descendents or brown descendents. He meant ALL descendents. That is a generic term usage, which applies to everyone! The rest of the sentence speaks for itself. Serious Constitutional conservatives, want to see the 16th amendment repealed. That would involve following the constitutional amendment process. Diffcult, but not impossible.
Never said you did. I just find it interesting the tone of your debate with EV. I noticed it was similar in tone to other posters who seem to be trying to stir up the pot here. It’s a pretty well known fact that DC is openly discussing things that go on here, which is just fine, however, it isn’t long after they start talking about certain people on FR (EV is their favorite target) the conversation suddenly shows up here. You might not be a part of that, but there are people here who would like to do harm to FR and JR.
“Care to share you interest with me?”
My interest is defending FR and those who work hard here to promote the stated goals of FR.
ROFL!!!!!!
No. I made that clear here in 2004. But, I’ll cut him a ton of slack because he is black, and I’m not, and because I agree with him 99.9% of the time. How many politicians do you know who hit that kind of average?
When Keyes first came out with that asinine proposal my first thought was every American, regardless of race, who had family who fought in the Civil War, should send Keyes a bill for services rendered.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MMMMMMM,,,,bout,,,,mmmmm,,,OK,,,500rnds(rifle balls),,,
Bout 5-10lbs-O-Powder,,,that’s bout what it cost us,,,
Do the “Free Men of Color” that owned slaves and fought for the South get to charge twice ??...;0)
Flame Wars have happened here many times in the past. FR lived on and thrived after those, and it will after this one.
MOgirl
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.