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?
You have that right stephenjohnbanker, we absolutely will not be bought or sold. And neither will Jim Robinson.
And, we will not be coerced into accepting a Presidential candidate with a Socialist agenda.
This is a topic that we should discuss more!
Pure class all the way, Jim. So nice of you to say. /s
My comment was only about the mood of the country at that time.
What is that kind of talk? Are you drunk?
Jim...please see post 690...another person who believes Banning Fierce Allegiance was wrong!
I’m asking you to reconsider his banning...he was NOT stalking anyone!
I’ve seen that you don’t like Rudy. But at least you don’t threaten to vote third party or for Hillary.
I say it’s time to ‘thin the herd’ and start over.
Just like our fore fathers told us we should.
A Hillary or Obama victory will destroy the country.
Methinks we are doing just that this very minute : )
If that doomsday scenario ever plays out during my life time, what I will have to say about it will come from the barrel of a rifle.
But, in the meantime, I will continue to speak up for true conservative values, and demand that anyone wishing to represent me, uphold those very same values. I am no sell-out, as it seems that many like you apparently are. You sell the very birthright of your children and grand children for a bowl of porridge. Quite pitiful really.
LOL - tell it to the supporters of Mayor Giuliani who keep claiming if we don’t vote for Rudy, it will be our fault if Hillary wins.
Conservatives don’t vote for liberals, even if they have a R behind their names.
If you find JimRob's Founders Statement on FR`s homepage so outrageous and replusive, why continue to hang around here? FR`s mission statement is quite clear. We are a full fledged conservative website, a full service conservative forum on ALL issues --- fiscal, social, economic, religious ... whatever.
We FReepers advance conservatism, we defend the Constitution and we oppose liberalism in all its many forms and facets.
I love Free Republic?
You seem to hate FR.
Whoa, whoa no name calling!
You cannot be the Jim Robinson I came to respect all these years. Not possible.
Jim, you're better than this.
Old Poppy seems quite fond of Bill Clinton, what should I take that to mean?
The Republican Party is sometimes referred to as the big tent party.... That allows a fair diversity of opinion....If “true conservatives” want to go it alone,ok ...they have tried it before ...it doesnt go very far
I agree with everything you posted. However, there are things I really like and dislike about Rudy Guiliani. It’s the first time that I’ve had to decide between presidential candidates in a primary. Plus, it’s too soon before the actual election for me. I like McCain in some ways, but not in others. I don’t know enough about Thompson yet. Part of me wants whomever is capable of defeating the democrat candidate (I don’t care for the top 3 at all: Hillary, Obama, Edwards). I dread any of the them winning. I think Hillary would scare away enough middle road voters that if she won the primary then any other option would win, but it worries me because the whole female for president thing - many women would just vote for her so history is made - the first female president. Another part thinks that if either Hillary or Obama is the democrat candidate then any republican has a shot. If it’s Edwards, then unless the Republican party can get the numbers at the polls to vote, we’re lost. I guess I’m hoping either Hillary or Obama win the primary because then we have a shot. I think if Edwards wins, barring a miracle, the republican party won’t be in the executive office.
Basically, I’d like the republican candidate to be pro military, pro life, anti-gun control, anti-big government, but also someone that has a real shot at defeating the democrat candidate because the 3 prospects for president in the democrat party are way too extreme for me to be comfortable with - I think they’re socialists.
If the RNC appeared to be dysfunctional, it is because it was and still remains so.
In the effort to play "Base Politics" in Washington, they lost.
It was inevitable!
The two parties were nearly equal, with each garnering 50% =or+ one or two percent which was the margins of defeat or wining.
In 2006, the Democrats as a minority were able to maintain unity, while the Republicans, as a majority were not able to because the base is split on divisive issues like immigration, stem cells, abortion, and other RTL issues. Rather than avoid these issues like the plague during the election, a portion of the "base" (that might be you, I dunno) decided to press ahead and forced the party to position themselves on these things and the democrats gleefully took the "populist side of all of them, including the war. This is all they needed to do to break up the unity and damage the swing vote margins that we once had. Without that populist swing vote, now alienated due to controversial crap, we lost...and will continue to lose in 2008.
The damage is not yet complete. The cyin has not yet begun, because if you thought 2006 was referendum on a party that was not conservative enough, you are dead wrong. That opinion is held by a small piece of the party base, some 25% at most, and the rest are trying to tell you how it is. But you won't listen just as you were told not to push divisive issues through to the general election in 2006.
This myopia, hubris, or stubbornness within the base is going to completely destroy it and result in a Dem sweep in 2008.
I know I must sound like a broken record, but I've been harping on this issue for more than four long messy years.
I don't think I care any longer. I think the party and this country are in dire need of a rude awakening which I believe is forthcoming in the next decade. A rude awakening that will prioritize issues like they have never been prioritized before, except perhaps at the founding of this nation. All the things at are important to you now, will be forgotten or moved so far down the list that they are not spoken of, except by people recounting the past.
You have a choice to continue in your myopic, small picture ways, or you can come to your senses. I think the first choice is more likely, and that is why I predicted what I have deduced as our future.
In the end, it could be said that our society became lethargic and vain, and in that lazy vanity, we no longer placed the important logical things ahead of our self gratifications.
In other words, we screwed ourselves.
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.
Yes, what credentials does Rudy Giuliani have in regard to fighting terrorism?
“I honestly don’t know what “Poppy” did although I imagine I could find out,”
Do you remember “READ MY LIPS! NO NEW TAXES!”
And nearly right after he was elected cow towed to the democratics and signed a ‘tax increase bill’.
Oh, okay. Thanks.
Yes, we are a big tent party and we used to be known as a party that accepted independent thought, although I can see that concept is relatively foreign here.
Y’all chill out.
We all have our moments of weakness.
Wow, it seems the forces of RINO land are here in force now...a concerted effort by the Rudybots...lol.
I am hoping for a Gingrich or Thompson.
I cannot vote for Rudy or Mitt. (Gun grabbing)
I cannot vote for McCain. (He’s nuts)
I do not care about so called baggage the Conservatives are up against. It does not compare with the baggage the dem candidates bring to the table.
Xacly. Gnight all. Dream of a Rinoless America!
Malignant Self Love - Narcissim Revisited.
By Sam Vaiknin.
Your comment made me think of that intriguing treatise. Not going over to that other place for sure now.
Thank you Jim - I’m with you all the way!
I like Gingrich (sometimes) and was surprised when FNC posted a poll among Republicans that showed his unfavorable ratings in the 60 percentile.
Regardless, I’ll vote for whomever the Republican candidate is.
McCain really messed up with his song about bombing Iran!
Quite frankly, Mr. Robinson,
I don’t know what to expect.
Am I clear in understanding that the Patriot Act is anathema, and that we should pull out out Iraq?
I’m not going to insinuate that we entered Iraq for a stupid reason.
Two things wholly bother me about the way it is that things are right now: Washington’s admonition not to become entangled in foreighn affairs, and Franklins warning that those who trade liberty for security will soon lose both in short order.
Only you, Mr Jim Robinson can answer that question with any sense of authority. How do you feel about NSA letters being served to you?
Please be explicit if you’ve not received any, and that if you do receive them, you will not comply.
We live in very troubling and difficult times, and I’m skeptical that its as simple as you suggest that it may be.
On the other hand, isn’t it convieniant to create a crises whereby the government is granted greater authority? I’m alluding to the “Pincer Movement” that every rational individual on this board likes to throw away/trash as being some sort of CFR/globalist elite paranoia.
The foregoing notwithstanding, and nevertheless, I’m certain that you are undoubtedly correct.
I nominate Jim Robinson for President of the United States of America.
A Republican whose views largely are the same as Clinton’s in his own words, would be better?
If I have to fight a liberal, then let that liberal be from the party that is osetnibly liberal.
“First we were treasonous liberals. Now Im an idiot and a liar.”
A cathartic memoir?
Amen. Sweet dreams.
Thanks for identifying yourself as a Cut & Run Republican. I bet you are one of those who voted Democrat in 2006 just to teach the Republicans a lesson.
An apology at this moment would be highly appropriate.
Yep! Lot’s going on here, would really appreciate a personal chat with ya!
You know, I appreciate your candor.
FReepmail tomorrow. Thank you, and I will be thinking about our common goals.
Ok. You were doing good until you hit this line...
“On the other hand, isnt it convieniant to create a crises whereby the government is granted greater authority?”
What do you mean by ‘create a crisis’?
Are you eluding that our government is somehow responsible for 9/11?
Well Jim .. if you did that .. I would no longer support this thread.
And .. I continue to support this thread because your conservative principles are the same as mine.
The real problem might be whether people would vote for a NY liberal - against another NY liberal. If push comes to shove and we unfortunately end up with Rudy as our nominee (I’m praying that does not happen), how many people will stay home and not vote AND ALLOW HILLARY TO BECOME PRESIDENT ..??
Will I allow the Clintons back in the WH by refusing to vote for Rudy ..??
I am not supporting Rudy, nor am I sending him money. I’m really supporting Duncan Hunter - and I will also support Fred Thompson if he gets in the race (which is looking more and more probable).
If Rudy turns against the tide and supports the illegals - I don’t think he can get the nomination.
You meant to say “accepting”, I think.
And the answer to your question is no. My point about the Republican party encouraging independent thought is we don’t expect our Congressional representatives to march in lockstep the way the Democrats do.
This has been widely discussed and reported on by Congressional historians.
And my point was, it’s interesting the party encourages independent thought but this web site seems to discourage it.
For the record, I asked you two very clear questions which you refuse to answer:
"Are you telling us that if a candidate who opposed abortion was nominated by Republicans, you would vote in opposition in the general election? Are you of the opinion that opposing abortion renders a candidate "unelectable"? (Hint: of the last four presidents elected, three opposed abortion)"
Such questions are hardly impenetrable. Please answer them.
The reason I asked them is equally simple. You employ tactics in support of Rudy Giuliani nearly identical to those FairOpinion employed in support of Arnold Schwarzenegger. You have seen where that leads, and to be banned here would harm your effectiveness in supporting Rudy far more than it would harm FreeRepublic, I promise you. Thus, you dance around my questions like a coward.
You see, this dichotomy, between moderate and conservative has existed since the day moderate Republicans betrayed the party nominee in 1964. Moderates have refused to support conservative candidates as "unelectable" ever since, demanding we support their policy preferences while they refuse to incorporate ours. Exposure of that failure to reciprocate threatens them, just as it does you simply because conservatives may respond by staying home if a moderate is nominated in response to like treatment. I promise you, if Rudy Giuliani is nominated on the false pretenses he portrays today, the MSM will so loudly blandish his history that, considering the history of the GOP betraying conservative candidates, there will be no chance he would ever be elected.
I don't want to see that event. Should you portray a conservative as "unelectable" I will demand the criteria by which you support that assertion. Opposition to abortion is clearly a distinction that matters to you.
Please answer the questions.
Take a hike. I’m not here to answer your questions.
“McCain really messed up with his song about bombing Iran!”
I thought it was one of his better moments. LOL
Interesting analysis. One more reason to vote my conscience.
Here’s another: If we end up with Hillary, at least we can look forward to JimRob declaring open season on RINOs.
If the Republican party writes off the pro life, pro liberty, pro gun planks, well, lets just say it will lose a great deal of respect, and Im predicting a great deal of support. I can just about guarantee you that Free Republic will become much more anti RINO, anti liberal, anti big government than its ever been. If we are left with no conservative leadership and no conservative majority to worry about maintaining, then I think itll be open season on all RINOs from the top down and there will be a complete overhaul in the works.
148 posted on 02/15/2007 12:13:35 AM PST by Jim Robinson (Electable gave us Gerald Ford and Bob Dole. Voting for the right-wing kook gave us Reagan. ~ A.C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
Sure you will
Suffice it to say all the charges you've made here tonight concerning those who's values you distain apply just as well to you & your friends. Difference is you don't own the site. Too bad.
And that is relevant why? Do you think Rudy will become pro-life if we just vote him president? Or do you think being pro-abortion is OK because Reagan voted for a bill once?
What is your point?