Skip to comments.Unlike Romney's "National Council for a New America," Free Republic is a conservative site!
Posted on 05/03/2009 12:32:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
I'm going to try one more time to explain what FR is all about.
Free Republic is a conservative site. That does not necessarily mean it is a Republican site. In fact there may be many Republicans we don't support and some Republican issues we cannot agree with.
I'll throw in Arlen Specter as a prime example of a Republican we cannot support. Should be obvious to all why not. Should also be just as obvious to all that we cannot support Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain and his lap dog Lindsay Graham, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, et al.
Some of the issues we cannot support as conservatives even though sometimes initiated by so-called Republicans include TARP, or any kind of government bailout of private enterprise, federal intrusion into free markets, federalized education systems, government provided or controlled health care systems, abortion, gay marriage, amnesty, global warming, gun control, etc.
I guess there is more than one definition of conservatism floating around out there, and this won't be text book, but the one we use involves defending, preserving and protecting our constitution, our unalienable rights, our traditional family values, our American heritage, our nation, our borders and our sovereignty.
We aggressively defend our rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness!
We aggressively defend our rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to keep and bear arms, right to due process, right to equality under the law, right to be governed under the rule of law, right to constitutionally limited government, right to corruption free government, right to self-government and our private property rights, etc.
We also aggressively defend our right to state and local government for all issues not expressly delegated to the central government by the constitution.
We aggressively defend our rights to free markets and our rights to live our lives free of government intrusion, interference, coercion, force, or abuse of any kind.
We aggressively defend our rights to national sovereignty, state sovereignty and individual sovereignty!
And this definition also includes aggressively fighting against all enemies foreign and domestic who may try to deprive us of our rights or sovereignty. This would obviously include all foreign enemies, but also we defend against RINOS, Democrats, liberals, socialists, Marxists, communists, militant feminists or homosexualists, radical environmentalists, etc, etc, etc.
And we expect our elected representatives to also aggressively defend our rights and fight against all enemies foreign and domestic. We do not elect people and send them to DC or our state capitals, etc, to reach across the aisles or to be bipartisan or to negotiate or compromise away our rights. If you're not going to aggressively fight for us, and for our rights, STAY OUT!!
We bow to no king but God!
Our God-given unalienable rights are NOT negotiable!
Do NOT Tread on US!
Thank you very much!
Here's to the day we get GOP "leaders" to voice something remotely similar.
I will raise my glass in a toast to this and to JimRob!
Thank you Jim!!!
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Outstanding post sir!
Jim Robinson for President 2012!!!
GOP Lady isn't going to like hearing this one bit lol.
Sniff, sniff. Ozone?
“Hunter is consistent and does not waver.”
Here’s THE MAN himself during the REAGAN REVOLUTION:
PURGE the Kennedy wing from the GOP!
The above is a false statement. Arlen Specter is a Democrat.
We spend so much time trying to find a GOP candidate that can beat the Dem, that we lose sight of what is truly important, even critical: the principles of our Founding Fathers.
We must not accept the premises that start the debates the Left puts forward. We must crush the premises fast and furiously.
We do NOT need the government to run healthcare.
We do NOT need them to bail out businesses.
And we do NOT need a slick packaging of socialism-lite to ensure a GOP win in order to stop the march toward Statism. It does not stop that march, it merely slows it down to a dangerously comfortable gait.
Reread what Protest said. Protest was referring to a place where he/she (Protest) could sometimes make sense.
No, because, thankfully it still IS a free Republic.
Amen! And might I add “Political Correctness” to the list.
Hell yeah! Let's have some Roast RINO for supper.
“Team Mitt Inc.” bloggers are paid to “pretend” to be one of us and spread the Romney “Myth”...
They will not go anymore willingly than anyone else who loves their job...
Lindsay Graham? I guess I will agree with you just on the basis of his membership in the “Gang of 14” and support of Bank Nationalization(socialism) but he is redeemable he did support Clinton’s impeachment and put his blood and sweat into it, right?
Anyway we will never have the level of conservative policies we desire until we have a larger change in the media. Isn’t obvious they were the larges factor in Obomanations election? Could also use some party discipline where party members could vote to kick people out of the party so as to maintain the purity of our brand and image, no?
Then they need to be shown the door.
FR is like good single malt Scots Whisky
-It’s strong...often too strong for some!
-It’s misunderstood and feared by the easily-swayed
-It’s absolutely hated by some...and those individuals are determined to force others to share their opinion via large and small attacks on free speech and freedom of choice.
You’re right...it’s not for everyone!
... The governor had nothing to do with these thing? Really!? People just don't seem to get it about Mitt. I don't know why.
Ronaldus Maximus. He went his own way, which happened to be the way my parents raised me.
Romney is a slick opportunist. He is better than, say, McCain, who is driven by a genuine commitment to liberalism in many areas. Romney will be conservative if it is in his advantage to be conservative - a semi-reliable opportunist, if you will.
That, however, does not make him worthy of active FR support. Someone has to guard the non-RINO core values, after all...
Sadly, you have to explain this at least once every year it seems.
Keep up the great work, and thank you for this conservative bastion in an increasingly leftist liberal world!
I hate arguing with those morons.
Thanks for the ping Wagglebee. This should be in breaking news.
JimRob’s got the cutlass in his teeth!
That was a good breakdown. It’s an alpha site with some darn good fightin’!
Until he decided to run for President in 2007, Romney presented himself in public as a lifetime supporter of Roe v Wade; he consistently spoke out that women had a Constitutional right to kill their unborn children in the womb; he supported special rights for homosexuals and pandered for the gay/lesbian vote; he remains a supporter of gun control and limiting the rights of law abiding Americans to purchase and own firearms; he helped design and promote and later signed into law, government mandated and taxpayer subsidized universal healthcare coverage, the first step towards socialized medicine; he supported the $700-billion Bush-Paulson/Obama-Geithner September 2008 TARP bailout of Wall St. robber barons; and lately Romney has been caught praising Obama and even expressing his desire to see Obama succeed with his leftwing agenda of hope and change.
Romney also opposed the two most successful conservative policy endeavors of the last 30 years -— the Reagan conservative policy agenda of the 1980`s and the fiscally conservative policy agenda advanced through Newt Gingrich`s Contract With America in the 1990`s.
Romney's pandering conservative rhetoric for the last few years, shouldn't confuse anyone. Romney is not someone conservatives should be supporting for any elected position. Especially not for President of the USA.
Thank you, Jim, and I’m sorry that you have to keep explaining the difference between a conservative and a Republican.
While Romney is not necessarily at the top of my list for 2012 (especially since we have no idea who the other viable candidates will be at that point), he is ON the list, and my chief reason for that is that he has far more extensive and impressive private sector experience than any other remotely viable candidate I see on the horizon. As someone who would like to see the federal government shrunk to a tiny fraction of its current size, it concerns me greatly that the Republican party seems to consistently offer us candidates who are for all practical purposes lifelong creatures of government. Every problem they see appears to them to have “needs government solution” written all over it, because that’s the only sort of problem-solving they’ve ever been involved with.
Hopefully, highlighting positive aspects like this, of candidates like Romney who are overall far too socialist-leaning to qualify as truly conservative candidates, will help convince the Republican movers and shakers that successful private sector experience should be an important resume item for candidates being groomed and promoted for national office. And when the 2012 nomination is done, if Romney is it, hopefully we can agree that given a choice between Romney and Obama, we’d do better with Romney. At least Romney doesn’t pal around with home-grown America-hating terrorists and racist America-hating preachers.
Perhaps not, but it is for those who long to see resurrected those principles espoused by Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Ronald Reagan. Is there such a man among us now who reflects what these former leaders stood for? I don't know, but I do know that there is a woman who most certainly does.
At some point....the free and open exchange of ideas about common sense freedom (a.k.a conservatism) on the internet was supposed to trump the influence of the the old media.
Are we there yet?
Don't blame me. I voted for the chick!
ONce you get it right, you don’t need to waver.
FR is not Republican before conservative, but a lot closer to Republican than any other party that has a chance of winning. As tantalizing as it may be, a third party route would only split the conservative vote and make it even easier for the Demonrats to win. And they already have the huge, built-in advantage of the people’s ignorance.
Do you consider Huckabee to be a Conservative?
When FR tops NBC numbers we are there. :^)
You just can’t go wrong with RR platform. Thanks for posting that bit of history. Those are the roots we need to return to.
I would have done the same.
but I would do it again considering the alternative.
as far as Hunter is concerned...he needs to get himself VISIBLE by 2012 if he plans to run. the population at large said WHO!
considering the VISIBILITY of relatively conservative pols, I would have to say Jindal or Palin. Not because they are the best conservatives, but because they have visibility.
Its almost as if Conservatives need an ACORN equivalent...though most conservatives are law abiding citizens so that wouldn't work I suppose.
Thanks you Jim Robinson for a conservative place to hang my hat......
They’re like cockroaches. More keep coming out of the woodwork no matter how many we are able to squash.
-Its strong...often too strong for some!
-Its misunderstood and feared by the easily-swayed
-Its absolutely hated by some...and those individuals are determined to force others to share their opinion via large and small attacks on free speech and freedom of choice.
-Though it's nowhere as good as Irish whiskey
Youre right...its not for everyone!