Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unified Theory of Conservatism: Constitutional Ethics for a Small Government
WingRight.org ^ | January 9, 2012 | Beverly Nuckols, MD (hocndoc)

Posted on 01/09/2012 8:29:48 PM PST by hocndoc

There's no conflict between the three legs of Conservatism, in spite of the confusion surrounding contraception and homosexual “rights” we witnessed during the New Hampshire debates. Social issues such as the right to life and traditional marriage are equally compatible with small government and States' rights as National security and fiscal responsibility, just as the Declaration of Independence is compatible with the10th Amendment to the US Constitution. Conservatives agree that the best government governs least, but we don't forget that there is a proper role for even the Federal government.

After all, the Constitution is based on the existence of inalienable rights endowed by our Creator as outlined in the Declaration of Independence: the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Preamble to the Bill of Rights explains the States' desire to ensure Constitutional limits on the Federal Government, using the least force and intervention possible to prevent or punish the infringement of our inalienable rights.

Liberals and Libertarians accuse Conservatives who advocate for social issues and national security of abandoning both the Constitution and the ideal of a small Federal government that is as “inconsequential in our lives as possible.” There are even some in the Tea Party willing to sacrifice these issues in order to form a coalition with the Libertarians to cut spending and lower taxes.

Unfortunately, the Left, Right and middle all manage to stir up not only the divide between Libertarians and Conservatives. They would also exaggerate conflict between socially conservative Catholics and Evangelicals who agree on the definition of marriage and that life begins at conception, but disagree on whether or not true contraception is ethical.

Abortion, medicine and research which result in the destruction of embryos or fetuses infringe on the right to life by causing the death of a human being. (See “Why Ethics.”) In contrast, true contraception prevents conception without endangering any human life. Therefore, unlike abortion, it does not infringe the right to life.

Marriage as a public institution is not merely a means to insurance and legal benefits. The definition of marriage predates the Constitution and goes far beyond culture, religion or National boundaries. Marriage affects the stability of the family and the well-being of both children and the husband and wife. (There’s strong research supporting the latter.) We define and defend traditional marriage in order to secure liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

These same inalienable rights are the justification for establishing National borders, protecting National security, and punishing those who break the law, while opposing high taxes and big Government bureaucracy and regulation that serves to not only redistribute wealth, but creates a dependency on more and bigger Government intervention.

Conservatives like Governor Rick Perry have been just as vocal in opposing the attacks on religious freedom and conscience by the Obama Administration as we have been in opposing increased taxes and regulations and the EPA’s over-reaching. We can stand secure in our understanding that the Conservative, Constitutional and proper use of government is to prevent and punish infringement of inalienable rights.


TOPICS: Government; Military/Veterans; Politics; Religion; Society
KEYWORDS: conservative; election2012; perry2012; rickperry
Here's an attempt to clarify conservative philosophy and to explain some of the distractions from the media and even Republicans.
1 posted on 01/09/2012 8:29:56 PM PST by hocndoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Cincinatus' Wife; smoothsailing; casinva; altura; shield

In light of the divisions on this Board, food for thought.


2 posted on 01/09/2012 8:32:02 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

Did I do right?


3 posted on 01/09/2012 8:32:55 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc
There's no conflict between the three legs of Conservatism.....

There is a distinct lack of stones between two of those legs in the Conservative branch (whithered and sickly as it is) of the Republican party.

4 posted on 01/09/2012 8:37:33 PM PST by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc
As long as we're reconciling these various aspects of conservatvism, can we nail down apparent cognitive dissonance over the abuse of the Commerce Clause?

Either Wickard v Filburn is a constitutional atrocity and everything based on it is an usurpation and abuse of power, or the drug war is a legitimate exercise of the the Commerce power.

I don't see any other alternative. You can't have a national government that opertates within the scope of it's enumerated powers according to the original intent of the Constitution and also have agencies like the DEA operating on nothing more than a claim of "finding a substantial effect on interstate commerce". Clarence Thomas gets it. How do we get everyone reading off of that page?

5 posted on 01/09/2012 8:44:12 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Since the recreational use of drugs tends toward the “pursuit of happiness,” what business does the federal government have in regulating the same?

Oops! Just knocked that ol’ lid off the can of worms again. Sorry. Hey. Maybe I’m not happy unless I can wield power over other people.

I smell trouble.


6 posted on 01/09/2012 8:46:22 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew (let establishment heads explode)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc
"In America, the people are not subjects of government. The government is subject to the people. And it is up to us, to this present generation of Americans, to take a stand for freedom, to send a message to Washington that we’re taking our future back from the grips of central planners who would control our healthcare, who would spend our treasure, who downgrade our future and micro-manage our lives."

Source: Gov. Rick Perry: America Needs New Leadership (Full Text of Announcement Speech)

7 posted on 01/09/2012 8:48:36 PM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
In America, the people are not subjects of government . . .

How true. We're subjects of entertainment, food, and wealth who count on government to keep it all rolling in. The purpose and limits of government could stand a good overhaul these days.

8 posted on 01/09/2012 8:57:06 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew (let establishment heads explode)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

That’s a State issue, in both my opinion and in Governor Perry’s. From “Fed Up!”:

“The statists believe in a powerful, activist central government that advances a radical secular agenda in the name of compassion. They hide behind misguided notions of empathy and push token talking points about fighting for the little guy, all the while empowering the federal government to coercively and blatantly undermine state-, local-, and self-governance.” p.13

“So, do states matter? The Founders clearly thought so. The Constitution guaranteed a federal government of enumerated powers while leaving states with governments of residual and plenary power. States have the prerogative to legislate on any topic – public health, morals and so forth – while the new federal government was designed to be of limited functions.” p. 22

Perry, Rick. Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington. Little, Brown and Company. Kindle Edition.


9 posted on 01/09/2012 9:05:40 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

If a drug is processed and transported across National borders and/or State lines there might be a Federal issue. Otherwise, see post 9, above.


10 posted on 01/09/2012 9:08:34 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Understood. But it’s going to be hard to say that’s a “unified theory” if half the people you encounter that call themselves “conservative” disagree with it.


11 posted on 01/09/2012 9:09:45 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

If there was a bill in the US Congress to ban same sex marriage, what would be the conservative position?

One outcome satisfies the social aspect. One satisfies the limited government aspect.


12 posted on 01/09/2012 9:26:38 PM PST by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raider Sam

My position is that you can’t ban something that doesn’t exist.

There is no such thing as “gay marriage”. Any law purporting to create it is a bogus law (and an attempt to create something in law that doesn’t exist in fact).

Banning something that doesn’t exist is pointless. Trying to force people to recognize something that doesn’t exist using the law is an abuse of power.


13 posted on 01/09/2012 9:41:20 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

This is a great thread! Thanks you so much for helping us focus on our main goals.

For example, the MSM wants to divert our attention by asking Conservatives what their position is on every topic on Earth.

What does the topic of Global Warming have to do with anything but junk science? The MSM loves the distraction, because is has nothing to do with Conserving what little is left of our Constitution.

Threads such as this help us to focus on the most important aspects of being a Conservative.


14 posted on 01/09/2012 9:43:35 PM PST by Graewoulf (( obama"care" violates the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND is illegal by the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

I’m trying to explain to those who disagree.


15 posted on 01/09/2012 10:11:53 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc; Cincinatus' Wife; casinva; altura; shield
His boots are made for walkin'
16 posted on 01/09/2012 10:19:27 PM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raider Sam

Talk about a true Statist position: forcing Texas to accept what we don’t recognize as “marriage” would be real big government, especially when we see how “consequential” the recognition has become in some States. Churches, charities, private businesses have all been forced to act based on laws that redefine marriage.

If the States were required to recognize “same sex marriage” ok’d by another State, then it would be a Federal issue, right?

Unfortunately, the Federal courts may make it necessary for us to pass the DOMA as an Amendment.

If an Amendment passes under the Constitutional guidelines, then it’s Constitutional (even if it’s not moral or ethical).


17 posted on 01/09/2012 10:19:50 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

Thank you!

The MSM wants to embarrass us and make us go away like we’ve done it in the past.


18 posted on 01/09/2012 10:21:52 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Cute!


19 posted on 01/09/2012 10:23:04 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic; Raider Sam; Graewoulf; SERKIT; Fester Chugabrew; smoothsailing; marron

I guess I didn’t emphasize enough that I’m drawing on the the Reagan coalition definition that Conservatives built on social issues, national security and fiscal responsibility.


20 posted on 01/09/2012 10:36:04 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

That should be “embarrass and divide us.”


21 posted on 01/09/2012 10:37:06 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Gov. Rick Perry has lived and governed with conservatism and he has the will and the drive (in spades as we are witnessing) to keep working for conservative principles. And he understands the urgency of this election.

Rick Perry wouldn’t be a placeholder, a nibble around the edges — work with “my friends” in the “loyal opposition” president, at the expense of the country. He is the outsider. He isn’t K Street or Washington D.C. But Perry knows what they’ve done to our freedoms.

And he is the only candidate who has a record the Left will find difficult using against him (not that they won’t try but better than getting knocked out in the third round like the others). Thus the MSM (and sad to say conservatives) attempt to portray him as dumb (haven’t we seen this before?) drunk, racist, Islamofascist sympathizer or anti-Muslim bigot, spoiler, etc. etc. etc. They have to attack his character and ridicule him to marginalize him and his record. The record Obama and the Left don’t want to face in an election contest.

Texas is where 1000 people a day are moving to find work. And I really am annoyed that I have to clarify this for the reader, they’re coming from other U.S. states (where their governors aren’t working so hard to fight the Obama recession) and not from Mexico. But since that is the MSM “talking point,” I must.

Thank you hocndoc.


22 posted on 01/10/2012 2:37:01 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Yes, if he “reaches out,” much less “crosses over,” to the other side of the aisle, it’ll be in a leap over the brass rail. Just ask Senator Lucio.

I still say the Press just doesn’t want to spend weekends in Paint Creek.


23 posted on 01/10/2012 3:42:51 AM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Beautiful.


24 posted on 01/10/2012 4:24:47 AM PST by humblegunner (The kinder, gentler version...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc
I guess I didn’t emphasize enough that I’m drawing on the the Reagan coalition definition that Conservatives built on social issues, national security and fiscal responsibility.

Okay. I'm drawing on a more "classical" definition, a conservative being someone who wants to "conserve" or leave a politcal system unchanged. You can be socially conservative, fiscally responsible, and for a strong national defense, and still think the Commerce Clause is an open ended grant of power to control anything you do that could conceivably result in your buying or selling something that could possibly have crossed a state line some time during it's existence.

When asked what they had given us, Ben Frankline said "A republic, if you can keep it!". That kind of power in DC is incompatible with a having a republic. As Rush likes to say "Words mean things." I don't see how we can be "conservative" if we can't even conserve the republic.

25 posted on 01/10/2012 4:40:41 AM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

IMO you are caught in the trap of ethno-centrism. i.e. you refuse /or seem incapable of understanding the term used (pursuit of happiness) in the profane and modern sense and ignore its original meaning—oops— just knocked the old lid off that can of worms again—Sorry.


26 posted on 01/10/2012 5:26:49 AM PST by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: StonyBurk
I don't think it adds to the conversation to assume that the framers equated “pursuit of happiness” with being high on methamphetamines or heroin. In the TV series “Adams” there is a great piece of dialog on what the intent was regarding this little phrase.
27 posted on 01/10/2012 6:07:58 AM PST by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT

Isn’t it easily explained by stating that ‘the pursuit of happiness’s was tied with virtue?


28 posted on 01/10/2012 6:16:30 AM PST by Pan_Yans Wife ("Real solidarity means coming together for the common good."-Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: StonyBurk

O thou seer of man’s understanding and intent, at least do us the favor of expounding on original intent as it applies to the words, “pursuit of happiness.” Obviously it means more than the shallow pursuit of self-gratification. On the other hand, I would not go so far as to suggest it completely rules out the right for an individual to use substances that lighten the burdens of every day life, or increase industry.


29 posted on 01/10/2012 6:17:19 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew (let establishment heads explode)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: StonyBurk; hocndoc; SERKIT; Pan_Yans Wife
Here is a decent explication on the phrase "pursuit of happiness." There tends to be a wide interpretation otherwise.
30 posted on 01/10/2012 6:40:47 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew (let establishment heads explode)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

Thank you.


31 posted on 01/10/2012 6:51:57 AM PST by Pan_Yans Wife ("Real solidarity means coming together for the common good."-Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

Bear in mind that the term “the pursuit of happiness” does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Finding the original intent and meaning of the phrase as used in the DoI may be instructive, but it’s not part of the Constitution.


32 posted on 01/10/2012 6:52:42 AM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew; tacticalogic; Pan_Yans Wife

Or how about this explanation from the Governor’S “Fed Up!” (he made similar statements in “On My Honor,” personal appearances and at least one radio interview that I heard, so I’m convinced that he understands what he is saying):

pp 19-20 “This is the essence of liberty in America. Through freedom and mutual respect, each of us is free to pursue our dreams and to become the best versions of our selves, together creating a community of people reaching their highest God-given potential.
Page 20 “And the idea that government exist to serve the will of the people – further individual freedom rather than the appetites of rulers – is what made the American System unique and attractive to people around the globe. “
“Now, some claim that there can be too much liberty or that people cannot be trusted if they have too much freedom. I do not believe that is true. The kind of liberty we construe as harmful is not really liberty but rather license. And license serves only the selfish appetite at the expense of others. Liberty is a God-given virtue; license is a destructive vice fomented by the forces of evil. If liberty were to include the freedom to harm others, then of course that would be too much of it. But with liberty’s essence is recognition of the inherent value of other human beings. This “rightful” liberty is the blessing that our federal system of government was established to preserve and protect. Liberty is our birthright as Americans. It exists within moral boundaries that protect the rights of others.”


33 posted on 01/10/2012 8:51:35 AM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Thank you.


34 posted on 01/10/2012 9:00:20 AM PST by Pan_Yans Wife ("Real solidarity means coming together for the common good."-Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Let us examine Ronald Reagan a bit:

1.) He was a Democrat who changed over to the Republican Party. He once said: “I didn’t leave the Democrat Party, it left me!”

2.) As Governor of California, he raised the State income taxes.

3.) As President, he was a BIG spender, and added significantly to our National Debt. He once said: “Deficits don’t matter.” This quote was later repeated by another BIG spender, GWB.

4.) “The Big Tent” Republican Party idea grew under Reagan’s tenure, winning elections at the cost of causing the Ship of State to drift with the strongest PC wind of the Court of Public Opinion, from then to now.

5.) Reagan trusted the Democrats in Congress to do what they promised to do with alien illegal entry on our southern border.

____________________

It is all well and good to carve out new ideas for past deeds, but let us be honest about the source of flaws that will doom our efforts to repeating the same mistakes that were made in the past. Reality knows no loyalty to anyone.

Reagan was one of our greatest Presidents, but we now have to correct the errors made by him and all the other Presidents. We cannot do that by being everything to everybody. We must clearly define our limited goals, and not be distracted.

BTW, it pains me to say it, but President Harry Truman said it best: “Those who cannot learn from the lessons of History are doomed to repeat them.”


35 posted on 01/10/2012 9:09:01 AM PST by Graewoulf (( obama"care" violates the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND is illegal by the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT

I think we can agree. but I admit I have not seen the TV series.”Adams” It is my understanding that pursuit of happiness was originally relative to obeying Gods’ will.Much was tied to the principles Religion, Morality,and Knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind,schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged. Article III Northwest Ordinance. I seem to recall John Eidsmoe speaking of how Jefferson changed “life, Liberty, and Property, from a European Enlightenment source to the much maligned Life Liberty and pursuit of happiness.
but need to revisit Eidsmoe.


36 posted on 01/10/2012 9:10:00 AM PST by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

People need to re-discover Calvin Coolidge and what resulted with true small government, massive reductions in govt and spending...to the tune of 80% cuts in government, taxes...etc...

What resulted? The roaring 20’s along with many major inventions that changed our country.


37 posted on 01/10/2012 9:11:06 AM PST by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: surfer

President Calvin Coolidge once said: “The business of America is Business.”

To our peril, we have strayed far from Calvin’s quote.


38 posted on 01/10/2012 9:17:37 AM PST by Graewoulf (( obama"care" violates the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND is illegal by the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]




We wish it grew there
Please Donate Monthly
Sponsors will donate $10 for each new monthly sign-up

39 posted on 01/10/2012 10:28:22 AM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Graewoulf

The man is not the focus, the idea is.

Our conservative coalition was formed under the guidance of Ronald Reagan, and became known as “Reagan conservatism” with those three factions coming together in recognition of the common goal to oppose socialism and its infringement of our rights.


40 posted on 01/10/2012 1:01:12 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: surfer

Cutting government spending results in cuts in government power and influence that infringe on our rights - and vice versa. That’s why Governor Perry has promised to cut the bureaucracies under the Executive Branch.


41 posted on 01/10/2012 1:03:31 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; tacticalogic; Raider Sam; Graewoulf; SERKIT; Fester Chugabrew; smoothsailing; ...

For another read on my idea of conservatism, read the first few pages of Mark Levin’s “Liberty and Tyranny” available on Amazon
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1416562877/ref=rdr_ext_tmb


42 posted on 01/10/2012 1:31:56 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

I love the 45 days every other year. Btw I love gridlock in dc it protects our freedom.


43 posted on 01/10/2012 1:36:26 PM PST by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: surfer

It’s only 140 days every 2 years - that’s enough, for sure. Except when the Dems run away or filibuster the budget - required by Constitution.


44 posted on 01/10/2012 3:42:26 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

And I blush . . .


45 posted on 01/10/2012 3:43:42 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Thank You for a correct outlining of conservatism.

We have lost the ability to actually study and understand what we really stand for in elections. People are drug around like a goat with a leash on by the media. AND the establishment.

Good job Dr.


46 posted on 01/10/2012 6:21:06 PM PST by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marty60

Thank you for your kind words!


47 posted on 01/10/2012 8:44:26 PM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

A bump to to the top - especially in light of last night’s speeches and yesterday’s “vultures.”


48 posted on 01/11/2012 8:37:38 AM PST by hocndoc (WingRight.org: Have mustard seed, not afraid to use it. Cut spending, now,now,now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson