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?
I have more.
Yeah, but I don't think I could take the swooning from the desperate housewives.
I didn’t save that particular post, but as you can see upthread, there are already two freepers who are just fine with Hillary being president instead of Rudy.
If you think I should start saving posts from crazy freepers, I’m going to start wasting a lot of bandwidth saving them to my bookmarks. I certainly don’t mind if you don’t.
To: Ultra Sonic 007
I’d rather elect Hillary than vote for Giuliani.
35 posted on 02/11/2007 8:29:19 AM CST by Mr Ramsbotham
I was going to start saving some of those posts, but decided there were too many freepers on the Rudy threads, especially early on, that I didn’t bother. After the jeering they took for their positions, they moderated somewhat.
What are you, the Jack Chick of the new media? I reject the premise that your five semi-quotes in any way define Giuliani.
Moderating abortion? Give me a break. The man is and always will be an abortionist! You are one sick puppy if you go along with that “moderating” crap.
Mind your own freakin business.
That would be me... But I said it after your post, not before.
I do believe that Rudy is more dangerous than Hilary, because all of the republicans would oppose Hilary’s liberal policies and she would need a veto proof vote. Many republicans would go along with liberal Rudy Fruity.
My daughter was born in California. I lived there three times and was a disc jockey in the San Joaquin Valley in the 1970’s. I’ve posted facts and you’ve posted opinions.
Reagan was no liberal. But your boy Giuliani sure is.
Awww ... feeling the sting of truth with that one?
Just curious, do you disagree that Rudy holds those positions, or, is it that you think there is much more to the man, so simply stating those five positions doesn't accurately define him?
Oooh, another good one.
I see management doesn't mind those people. It's the people who happen to support a Republican they don't like they attack. Sure -- that makes sense. /s
Not at all. I’m just thinking since this is the new accepted language here on Free Republic that I’d try it out.
Sure you will. Plug your ears and don’t listen to what your man has said and done and is still saying today. It’s a classic example.
What are we talking about here? Half an abortion? 30% of an abortion?
“Even Newt has called it one of the greatest urban achievements of the 21st century.”
As far as I know and remember, he was the greatest Mayor that New York City (The Capitol of the World) ever had.
Giuliani ain’t no nobody, or he wouldn’t be the focus of this thread, but if the issue is furthering our conservative hopes for our nation, he is opposed to our goals, and his strengths, define the threat.
There is a precedent for that with W. Most of FR supported the medicare plan, no child left behind, etc. etc. Just because we had a Republican president.
Actually, I am very happy about this thread because it suggests we have learned from that mistake.
Rudy is moderating his policy on abortion and has talked about states right.”
Duh ya Peach, He wants to be President and he wants your vote and he will say anything you want to hear to get it.
I appreciate your civil question.
“Wow Reagan Man chill, your starting to sound like Stalin.”
Drop the hyperbole pal. Stalin would take you out and shoot you. This is just debate on a political board. I get tired of all the people who drag Hitlers and Stalins out every time their side is losing an argument.
No kidding? Gosh, the things you learn on Free Republic.
I’ve only mentioned 2-3 times upthread that when Reagan was a Democrat and then Republican and pro choice and then pro life, he was embraced. Now when Republicans moderate their views more toward our liking, we call it pandering.
See my post 1472.
My tagline during the 2004 election was, "If President Bush loses this election because of his stand on abortion, he is still the winner". I felt that way then, and I still feel that way now.
9 posted on 02/07/2007 12:47:23 PM CST by Texagirl4W (Jesus came to forgive sin, not to accept sin.) *
I get tired of all the people who drag Hitlers and Stalins out every time their side is losing an argument.
Godwin’s law lol.
You must have some file, Rex!
“I hope you’re out looking for a post that backs this up:
Like the time you insinuated that I was on drugs and gay because I dared disagree with the miers pick.
I’m gonna need a link from you to back that up. “
If the thread is still around and didn’t get deleted (last I remember it was in the smoky backroom, irrc) I’ll find it.
Does this ring a bell - you tried to equate me with anderson cooper, because you like to make jokes about anderson cooper being gay. Yes, it was a fun time all around - you resorting to your little attacks.
Gosh, it is late. I’m hitting the hay. Take care, all.
Same here. Thanks for finding those posts; I appreciate it.
Why don’t you post my lie then, papasmurf. It should be so easy to do.
I could actually vote for the guy if he is the nominee. He was a great mayor (at least his first term. He had the normal 2nd term problem that almost all Republicans do). If I thought he actually bought into Forbes's worldview of a flat tax, privatising social security, at least holding government spending to the level of inflation, and he really, really meant it and would fight for and champion it, I might even vote for him in the primary.
I have told myself that I could never in my life vote for an abortionist or gun grabber, but the GOP has so completely screwed up this country and destroyed conservatism in the last 6 years with Medicare, all the other spending, etc, that I could go for a guy who promises neutrality on the abortion and gun issues if he would be a real supply sider.
Unfortunetly, as soon as Giuliani said some nice things about the flat tax, he backed off of them.
LOL. Abortion, gay rights, gun control, taxpayer FUNDED abortions for poor women, sanctuary for illegal aliens, etc, don’t define the man? What does define him then? His sterling character and success as a husband and father?
What position did Rudy change? He keeps insisting his positions have not changed, and Rudy supporters say he is firm as a rock and doesn’t give in to anybody or change in any way.
Oh oh! Look up the person that said they would rather vote for the monkey, too. You guys need all the ammunition you can get because you know if someone threatened to vote for a monkey they are really going to do it,too!
Why, can’t you read, or is all you do post your lies. Reagan never was pro abortion, for one.
Now that you've whined that way, it sure does! It all makes sense now; I knew I didn't call you gay; but you have to admit, the way you carry on is just like Anderson!
And thanks for reminding me that you do, in fact, sound like a whiney Anderson Cooper!
Or maybe Shep Smith? Would you like that better?
And I can see why you'd be so upset when I'm around............LOL. Well, go ahead; your little fits and distortions don't bother me at all!
I too will be interested to see how he fleshes his position on the flat tax out during the debates. His statements so far have been sketchy and seemed on the fly - or at least press coverage of them read that way - it is incumbent on him and his team to nail that down. I am hoping the flat tax is part of his platform.
Did you forget one of the “n”s? I did that at first and got the answer you are getting.
For the record, here's what Giuliani had to say on a partial-birth abortion ban in 1999:
"No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing."
Adults look at the whole picture? Sheesh. Looks more like some adults (namely Rudy supporters) use colored glasses and refuse to look at the whole picture.
Wow, and you’ve been around since 1999. I think you flatter me with your award. And just yesterday I was all atwitter just because someone said my vanity threat about “I’d hit it” was the best they had seen this year. Now I’ve got the “dumbest post ever” award.
Thanks. Is there some sort of certificate with that I could post on my desktop?
And you said we were all out of self-rightousness. You were hiding some!
Here's something to consider: I have never heard Rudy Giuliani speak to anyone the way you do on this forum. So perhaps it's best that he not follow your example of Christian decency, high moral standards, and conservative behavior.
I’m a newbie, so I’m just speculating, but I think the old-timers, some of them, were more scared of clinton than anything, and we see that even now when they will sell their soul just to beat her.
To: Spiff; Peach
In my view a Rudy nomination will RUIN the party. We would loose 80% of our positions for 1 guy (for maybe 1 presidential term). It’s not worh it.
I’m fighting against his campaign. And should he somehow get the Republican nomination, not only will I stop donating to the party, I’ll freagin’ cut a check to Hillary and post proof here on FR.
That’s how bad I think this nomination is going to be for the Repoublican party. Call me crazy...call me a troll..I don’t care
20 posted on 02/15/2007 7:16:02 PM EST by right-wingin_It
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
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.