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 can say I’ve voted a straight R ticket several times, but that doesn’t mean I’m a straight-R voter. In fact, some would be surprised whom I chose when Huffington was my congressman and he was running for Senator in California. But I do think my assessment of the character at that time turned out to be correct.
This time around I definitely intend to vote straight R, but it might not necessarily mean I voted for Rudy if he’s the nominee.
And you're still as divisive as ever, disruptor.
Not necessarily. Based on the current polls, Rudy could win a series of states with 30% of the vote, with several conservatives splitting the remaining 70%. Rudy could win the nomination with just the RINO vote and a minority of the moderate/conservative vote.
The thing that amazes me about the aforementioned poster, is that if you truly loathe Hillary Clinton, the last person you want to support or nominate is the guy who bailed in 2000 and gave her the seat of her power.
Fighting for your principles IS 'the hard way'...
You're flopping around like a fish on dry land...
There's a time to divide the sheep from the goats. This is one of them.
Reality is that they made that choice for themselves. But regardless of how it happened, I suspect it's a good thing. FreeRepublic has a mission of advancing conservatism, and undoubtedly the other site has a mission of its own. Better that each one attempts to advance the cause in its own way then have one site's members constantly at odds with each other.
You voted for Feinstein?
Keep up the nameplates from this other site. It’s good to know which ones really despise our mission enough to go form their own circus.
If Guiliani wanted to do his Party, his state, his country a GREAT SERVICE--he could have removed her from the Senate this last November!!
He might have actually gained some conservative support for that huge accomplishment by keeping the Senate in Republican control!! He could have ALSO destroyed the mere thought of Hillary being a Pres candidate now (much like what happened to George Allen).
Rudy can 'spare us his efforts' now. And after all her anti-Clinton rants, MiaT supports him now? Give me a break.
In any case, it is irrelevant since Reagan did the "right" thing.
As I have posted here several times, the last time the ‘Rats nominated a nonincumbent who was the “clear frontrunner” and that person actually went on to win the presidency was 115 years ago.
I think dances with nobody in perticular or whatever the heck their name was, hasn’t even been here a year.
Are you talking to me?
For a note denouncing the claim of belligerance, it was pretty belligerant.
I was, I’ll admit, using a bit of hyperbole about the other site “plotting the overthrow of conservativism”. Anyway, I understand that happens in the secret room which so far as you know I don’t have access to..... :-)
The Rudy supporters have been quite belligerant. I know because I’ve gotten some pretty interesting responses and my posts are rather issues-focused. And I read every rudy thread, so I’ve seen most everything written.
The cutesy “LOL” stuff doesn’t hide the harshness of the “our guy’s in the lead, get used to it, you are all losers, too bad for you” tone of many of the rudy posters.
This site isn’t to cheerlead for a liberal, it’s to push conservative principles.
BTW, I’m not into paranoia. I only mention it to counter the crododile tears for those who seem to have deliberately gotten themselves banned after establishing themselves at the other site, where they seem to do the same things only without having to answer real criticism of thier candidate.
But more power to them, everybody has the right to their own web presence.
I do feel honored that my posts caused you sufficient consternation that you felt compelled to break your silence for me. Thanks. Even if you did so mostly to launch an ad-hominem attack on me suggesting I needed psychiatric treatment.
It would have been more helpful if you would offer actual facts about anything I said that is wrong.
Okay Ive only been lurking lately, but I have to admit that Ive read nearly this whole thread and missed seeing you!:) Have you forgotten FR?-its just not a debate with out seeing your posts!
I've said that hundreds of times in here and the Rudy Rooters have yet to come up with a logical explanation as to why he didn't.
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.