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?
What has Rudy done to advance national security? What makes him experienced in national security? What is his foreign policy esperience? What is is military experience? In what way has he advanced the United States position in the world?
In what way has he strengthened support for the war on terror? How has he spent his time building up support for the War in Iraq?
Can you answer all of these questions? Can you answer ANY of these questions?
Rudy is “associated” with 9/11. He didn’t run away when the buildings collapsed. Well guess what — LOTS of people didn’t run away. Lots of people died doing their job, some because Rudy failed to take responsible steps as Mayor knowing that the WTC was the focal point for terrorism.
If you can’t answer any of those questions, answer this question — did Rudy ever make a speech denouncing Citgo for selling Venezuelan gas and supporting our enemies? Please point me to it.
If you can’t answer that question, just tell me — how many times has Rudy been to Iraq?
If he is really the best candidate for the war on terror, and you are a great supporter, you should be able to answer every one of these questions in a way that will convince us.
That was about all the good he did for NY when he sent the bums to LA.
Nice little insult there. Isn't it more of a liberal trait that when one gets frustrated with an argument they start name calling?
You lied. Liberal.
“I see that you are disappearing.....”
See, I told you so!
With pleasure. :-)
Hmm. You said you liked rudy, and you are still here. Maybe the claims that Rudy people are being purged is another exageration from the “Rudy is a conservative” crowd.
They love to play the victim.
I would rather put up a conservative tent anchored in the constitution (the one on the origianl documents, not the one Ginsberg dreams up) and invite everyone to join.
I think most Freepers would agree (if you could get them to shut up and think for a minute) that we should debate the merits of the candidates, then each choose who they feel would be the best President. This needs to stop being a horse race where you throw your money behind the nag who you think might win.
That false logic is what keeps giving us a RINO overpopulation problem. We need to stop feeding them so they go away.
Everyone here would grab a gun and fight for their liberty if we were invaded. But many of those same people will trade their liberties away piece by piece in the poliannish hope that somehow THIS TIME the RNC will go to Washington and act like conservatives.
They wont. If you elect a Democrat who seems to be a conservative, he'll go to Washington and vote liberal. If you elect a Republican who seems to be a liberal HE IS!
You need to stop that, you’re past disgusting.
That was another one. Rudy is a globalist, but Mia T. attacked Fred Thompson for being a globalist.
It’s like Rudy people attack every other candidate whenever those candidates agree with Rudy.
Meanwhile, the pro-gun crowd has to show up and PICKET and PROTEST whenever Rudy comes to town, just to show that we still support gun rights. I don’t want a candidate I have to picket before I vote for him.
You see THAT? What's next? Rudy in drag?
Well, let’s see my post, shall we?
It was this:
“I think he must share his screenname with someone else who posts under his name. First we were treasonous liberals. Now I’m an idiot and a liar. Social conservatism is all the rage and the heck with national security and fiscal restraint.”
You’ve repeatedly posted that Rudy is a gun grabbing, abortionist loving, gay marriage supporting liberal, without mentioning his outstanding fiscal conservative positions and tax cutting policies and his strength in terms of national security and hating the Arab jihadists. You’ve said that one can’t be fiscally conservative and socially liberal without being a full blown liberal which I don’t agree with. Since when did freepers who consider national security more important than social issues become liberals? In your eyes, maybe. Thankfully not in the eyes of the conservatives I know.
Do we have our own people over there posting pro-fred stuff and getting banned? :-)
What a lovely way to frame the debate.
So you've ruled out Fred and Rudy, correct?
Oh, exactly. I agree with that. And it’s so interesting that Reagan was permitted to change his party ranking and his positions on abortion but when other candidates do it, they’re pandering.
Are the cookies done sweetie?
They also make a habit of trashing Jim Robinson and Free Republic for supporting Ambassador Alan Keyes - like it was a bad thing to support a conservative in the Primary Election - one who pulled 14% in Iowa, 21% in Utah, and who had Fox News declare him the winner of a televised debate.
I expect liberals to trash Reagan. I expect liberals to attack people who support conservative candidates. But this is Free Republic and we're supposed to be conservatives. These types of attacks on conservatives should not be tolerated here. If they want to attack conservatives, they can go do it at their own stupid little site that they created to do just that. But it shouldn't see the light of day here.
...without mentioning his outstanding fiscal conservative positions and tax cutting policies and his strength in terms of national security...Well, because his so called "outstanding fiscal conservative positions" don't jibe with his actions in office and his so called "strength in terms of national security..." fails when we look at his draft evasions. Aside from that he is a gun-grabbing, abortion supporting corrupt NY politician. A liberal RINO.
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.