Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?

vanity | April 21, 2007 | Jim Robinson

[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?

[Howlin]

Of course an old crow like you probably doesn't find a whole lot to laugh about.

I'm laughing at you.

[rintense]

Yep. Not one single Rudy supporter would vote for him if he had a D behind his name. Not a single one.

[Just sayin]

See that is all you have Howlin. Attacks. Just like anytime Nancy Pelosi had anythin to say about W in he runup to 06 election.....you sound just like her. Truth hurts huh.

[Howlin]

I thought spring break was over.

[Rodney King]

It ought to be clear by now Jim that he is not going to answer questions put to him.

[Spyder]

Thanks. I’ve seen too many people driven away from our own church by the holier types, trying to “do them a favor” by pointing out the mote in their brother’s eye while ignoring the log in their own.

[NapkinUser]

“Are you too stupid to read a tagline?”

That’s a great question coming from someone insulting anti-Giuliani conservatives on what is clearly marked as a Rudy thread.

[rintense]

Cripe, get home late and try to jump in and BOOM! Everything changes before I can get to page 2!

[Elyse]

Beneath contempt.

I could just picture your nose going up in the air and giving a little sniff. Glad you showed up because we really needed some more self-righteousness.

[mkjessup]

Your post was, at best, very wierd

Yeah I know. But that was only my 'basic' wierd, Howlin really isn't worth the intermediate or advanced 'wierd'. But I refuse to let the old bag get under my skin, and that drives her nutz even though she'll deny it.

[Billthedrill]

Still up? You're gonna regret it in the morning...oh, well, never mind, it is morning...

I'm afraid, though, that what you just said didn't really address the difficulties I pointed out. I don't blame Rudy for attempting to triangulate on those three issues - most politicians do - but due to their very nature I think it's hurting him more than helping. He cannot be weak on gun control and convince any conservative that he's strong on national security - the two positions are mutually exclusive. He cannot be weak on illegal immigration either for the very same reason, and he isn't alone in that regard - this is a thing that has hurt Bush deeply with conservatives and accounts in part for his (Bush's) low job-approval polling.

I don't know what to advise. For a big-tent politician these issues are truly best avoided, and with the exception of abortion the MSM have been allowing the Dems to avoid them for the last three elections. Rudy won't be the benificiary of that largesse, at least not if he should win the nomination, and he really does have some considerable baggage to carry with all of them. I wish you the best of luck but I really don't think I can help you.

[flashbunny]

“Shove it up your butt, punk.”

Nice. All class, as usual.

And isn’t about now the time you start claiming people are attacking YOU?

[Howlin]

Nice. All class, as usual.

Just taking my cue from you.

[mkjessup]

I apologize too. We really should patch things up and start anew, what do you say?

[Rodney King]

That is my question, and your response was non-responsive to that question, and I'd really like to know the answer.

That's a great question, I have asked it myself and never gotten an answer. I suspect you won't either.

[CharlesWayneCT]

As well, NYC’s economy is exceeded only by 6 or 7 states

And in what way does being the mayor of a large economy make him strong on the war on terror? His city was hit by terrorist attacks at least 3 times in the last 15 years, once right before he took office, and twice afterwards. One time he refused to acknowledge it was terrorism, and instead used the attack to take people's guns away.

And before the 9/11 attack, he refused to move his terrorism command center out of the buildings most likely to be targetted by the attack.

And 8 years after the buildings came close to being taken down by bombs, He had not ensured that there was a plan in place to evacuate both buildings if either of them were struck by terrorists, a simple act which might have minimized loss of life in the 2nd building, which was hit much later than the first.

But Rudy wasn't any more in tune with terrorism on 9/11 than the rest of us, he didn't recognize the threat until the 2nd plane, like the rest of us.

The MEDIA made him the face of 9/11, not because of anything special he did, but because, as blackirish noted, he happened to be there because he attacked his city, since it was still a ripe target 8 years after their failed attack.

[Rex Anderson]

Excuse me, but have you read the posts to Howlin? Take a look at the last two pages, and you might notice some pretty hard core venom spewed her way.

[Jim Robinson]

We got Bush as the nominee in 2000 because he was the "anointed one." He was selected by the PTB (whoever the hell they are) and proclaimed “frontrunner” and de facto nominee by the media and all pundits before anyone else could even get out of the starting gates. He was ramrodded through over the objections from the grassroots. Kind similar to what’s going on now, but it’s even starting earlier.

[Just sayin]

Not by me.

[Howlin]

But I refuse to let the old bag get under my skin, and that drives her nutz even though she'll deny it.

I never laid eyes on you until about 3 days ago.

Get over yourself.

[flashbunny]

You’re always the one who starts it, then tries to act like you’re the innocent victim. I remember the miers thread where you first pulled that on me.

Are you just trying to see how much you can get away with before you’re banned? You seem to be pulling out all the stops tonight to get there.

[Peach]

As I’ve said many times now, I post that about Reagan to show that we will never, ever agree with all candidates 100% of the time. It just won’t happen.

That you’ve missed that part of my posts doesn’t surprise me in the least little bit.

So just keep asking your little questions. I’m still waiting for you to back up your lie that I said ALL Rudy supporters were being banned.

[Rex Anderson]

Who should have rightly been the nominee in 2000?

[Rodney King]

We got Bush as the nominee in 2000 because he was the "anointed one." He was selected by the PTB (whoever the hell they are) and proclaimed “frontrunner” and de facto nominee by the media and all pundits before anyone else could even get out of the starting gates. He was ramrodded through over the objections from the grassroots. Kind similar to what’s going on now, but it’s even starting earlier.

Same thing with Dole in '96.

[Howlin]

If you read my tagline, you’d see who I support.

[philetus]

FR should thank Hillary for exposing Rudy.”

Rudi exposed himself LOL a long time ago.
I didn’t need Hillary to show me that He’s a flaming liberal.

[Jim Robinson]

Is there something wrong in my statement above?

[Jim Robinson]

Yup.

[M. Thatcher]

We got Bush as the nominee in 2000 because he was the "anointed one." He was selected by the PTB (whoever the hell they are) and proclaimed “frontrunner” and de facto nominee by the media and all pundits before anyone else could even get out of the starting gates. He was ramrodded through over the objections from the grassroots. Kind similar to what’s going on now, but it’s even starting earlier.

Bush won the primaries. This notion that nominees are forced on anyone is tinfoil. Same tinfoil that's going on now regarding Giuliani. If you don't want Giuliani, field a candidate who can garner more votes.

[Howlin]

Glad you showed up because we really needed some more self-righteousness.

Isn't that the truth; you're already spent all yours tonight.

[Rodney King]

As I’ve said many times now, I post that about Reagan to show that we will never, ever agree with all candidates 100% of the time. It just won’t happen.

If that was your point, then it was a bad point because Reagan was strongly pro-life by the time he ran for President.

[mkjessup]

How old are you, 12?

Why, are you looking for 12 year olds or something?

This ain't the website for you 'Rex'.

[CharlesWayneCT]

It’s the best they have, because Rudy has no anti-terrorism experience, he has no foreign policy experience, he has no military experience. He was the mayor of a large city with an even larger bloated government, with a governor and a state above him to protect him and give him outside revenue and other infrastructure. He was a small enough fish in the scheme of things that he could be petulant without to much harm, like summarily overriding the government’s foreign policy when it suited his fancy.

[Politicalmom]

That’s a woman posting that porn? Notice I didn’t say lady.

[Spiff]

You’re the one threatening a 7-year FR poster who voted twice for Reagan, in fact never voted for a Democrat, who followed her husband through his Army postings, who continued to be strongly pro-military despite his two tours in Korea, with banishment. At least as I’m typing this, Jim hasn’t threatened me, and if it gets to that point that he bans me, then there probably isn’t much use in my hanging out here, occasionally learning good and bad from people with stronger viewpoints than my own, occasionally posting things I do feel strongly about (such as separation of church and state).

Benedict Arnold won several battles and received many medals and commendations. And then...

[Rodney King]

Bush won the primaries. This notion that nominees are forced on anyone is tinfoil. Same tinfoil that's going on now regarding Giuliani. If you don't want Giuliani, field a candidate who can garner more votes.

That is what we are doing. It is the Rudy side that says they have the only candidate who can win, and if we don't get behind him Hillary will be President. Just see post #50.

[Centurion2000]

Dumbass

So leave already ya carpetbagger. Opus is ready when you are.

[NapkinUser]

"If you read my tagline, you’d see who I support." I can see that clearly. It says Fred Thompson. This is a Rudy Giuliani thread. Why are you on this thread going after conservatives who oppose Giuliani? It would make since if this was an anti-Thompson thread, but it ain't.

[Peach]

They’d rather spend their time trashing the frontrunner instead of trying to boost their candidate.

Same as they did in 2000 when they were calling Bush a cokehead and pushing Alan Keyes. There are a lot of freepers who are feeling marginalized that they can’t pick a winner.

[Rex Anderson]

Immature and classless.

[Just sayin]

This notion that nominees are forced on anyone is tinfoil.

If that is true, could you then explain to me why the MSM states that no candidates exist in the race that appeal to the conservative base....when there clearly is an they just don't want to talk about them?

[donna]

The Presidency is just too dangerous a position to give to a sick person.

I hadn’t even thought about Rudy and McCain having cancer. Now I have two reasons each to not vote for them.

I can just hear the clicking of Pelosi’s high heels.

[Jim Robinson]

I don’t know. But I’m guessing you’re pulling 100% for the media’s choice again this time.

[Howlin]

You’re always the one who starts it, then tries to act like you’re the innocent victim.

Is that a macro, because you post it every single time you post to me; and YOU post to me; I never post to you because you are so utterly useless it's a waste of time.

I remember the miers thread where you first pulled that on me.

You're a one trick pony. And boring as hell.

Are you just trying to see how much you can get away with before you’re banned?

Is that some kind of threat? You seem to think you have some pull here that can get me banned; give it your best shot, punk.

And you ARE a punk. Always have been, always will be.

[Peach]

Another freeper who doesn’t know how to trace back posts. My post mentioned that this was all when Reagan was Governor of California. Keep up with the posts already :-)

[mkjessup]

Of course an old crow like you probably doesn't find a whole lot to laugh about.
I'm laughing at you.

Awww, you're too kind, and I'm just getting started!

[TAdams8591]

I like Alan Keyes, and usually agree with him on the issues. I do not agree with his proposal for black reparations AND he makes a terrible candidate.

He WAS a good spokesperson for the conservative cause. But his last campaign significantly damaged his credibility.

[politicalwit]

Click on the name(Texwhatever)...Opus was in the form of a standard eviction notice.

[Howlin]

Is there some new rule I missed tonight about people who support one candidate not being allowed on other candidate’s threads?

You people are turning into worse locksteppers than damn liberals.

[Rex Anderson]

Bush wasn’t my original candidate in 2000!