Skip to comments.Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?
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?
Since when did you believe anything a pro-rudy person posted? :-)
“Giuliani’s liberal positions and utter contempt for the constitution, individual rights, the rule of law, national security, national sovereignty, etc, disqualifies him from any consideration for the presidency,”
Stealing that for my next tagline lol.
If you examine the picture closely, you’ll see that abortion and closely related issues are indeed the key division with in the Republican Party. This may not be YOUR key issue — I didn’t say it was everybody’s — but it is most certainly the key dividing line. If you look at FR threads regarding potential Presidential candidates, they are always heavy on posts like “He’s pro-abort and I’ll never vote for a pro-abort”. This is a VERY frequent comment when Condi Rice’s name comes up, despite her ample conservative credentials. That the first black President could also be the first female President AND support the real Second Amendment is a breathtaking possibility, with major implications for the future political landscape in the US — devastating the general perception in the electorate that the Democratic Party is the party that’s “for” women and blacks, shifting many blacks and women into the RKBA camp who’d never before had any reason to seriously consider making that shift, and greatly weakening the the popular Democratic/Socialist refrain that US blacks are disproportionately poor and crime-prone because they were “oppressed” (hard to prevent black people who’ve bought into that from considering that if Condi was oppressed — which she clearly was — and didn’t let it hold her back, they can too). But a huge percentage of FReepers don’t give a crap about any of that, because she’s “a pro-abort” and they don’t need to know anything else about her to know they’d never vote for her. The colossal amount of time and energy our elected representatives are spending yakking about abortion, morming after pills, embryonic stem cell research, and of course the other pet issue of the same camp of the Republican Party, gay marriage, is all a very convenient distraction, which enables the socialists — both Democrat and Republican — to keep on piling up new government spending and wealth redistribution schemes without any noisy opposition. Most of the potential noisemakers are too busy putting on a show for their constituents of trying to get full citizenship rights for zygotes, and of trying to prevent Jim and Joe from ever getting a marriage license, to bother much with the details of the ever-growing tax-spend-redistribute monster.
Forum Question of the Night
You are doing a great job defending you positions from the rudy haters.
Somehow I doubt it.
“I don’t sink to your level of discourse.”
After reading your tag line, I would say that statement is an ‘oxymoron’.
“Lets see a link and Ill believe you.”
No. You run and fetch! Its been posted dozens of times refuting Rooty suports the flat tax. I wont bother posting it again for someone that refuses to read things when they are posted.
AC—I dug up some of the original quotes by Reagan at the time the abortion bill passed in 1967 when he was governor of California. He was anything but liberal. Unfortunately, the law was interpreted over time much more liberally than it was intended. See my post for some of his quotes:
Jefferson had fifty male relatives in the state of Virginia, any of whom could have been the father. We essentially went from no chance to a 2% chance. I don’t take odds on a 2% chance.
If they learned their lesson they would not be trying to so hard to alienate the conservative base.....again. Oh and they aren’t my sit at homers. You see, there are alot like me, who didn’t sit at home but didn’t vote for the those we were told we should “because they can win’. Some of us actually do vote FOR our values rather than bandwagon style.
If a lesson was learned, ‘Republicans’ wouldn’t be so eager for a New York-New York Presidential race. While this would be a slap in the face to Al Qaeda, it is a slap in the face to Americans as well. To me, it isn’t worth it.
The most valid criticism, imho, of GWB is his lack of serious action securing our borders. Do you think Rudy will do anything different? Hardly.
“Sweetie’s one thing, calling me Hillary is another. Discussion is obviously over, as I don’t sink to your level of discourse”
1. This from the person that insults the owner of the site.
2. Are you delusional? nobody called you Hillary.
I agree with you. That is a very good analogy.
“This is just so precious. A perfect example of the kind of sh*tty attitude JR is seeking to eliminate, IMO”
My opinion too!
so exactly when was it that a conservative got any movement and is fred thompson a conservative ?
Thank you, staytrue.
I would be right on board with you if it weren't for one thing... Hillary. I'm sorry, but I'd vote for Gore before I let her get into office. Rudy bothers me on several issues, but HC scares the crap out of me.