Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why I'm not a conservative
worldnetdaily.com ^ | 6/13/02 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 06/13/2002 8:27:39 AM PDT by christine

Why I'm not a conservative

© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

I've said it before and I'll say it, again: I am not a conservative.

This comes as a shock to some people. We have come to view politics in America in this paradigm of right vs. left, conservative vs. liberal, Republican vs. Democrat.

I tell you that is no choice at all.

I don't like the label "conservative." I reject the label. With all due respect to my "conservative" friends, I find the description detestable, extremely unflattering, simplistic and an insult.

Let me tell you why.

Conservatives, by definition, seek to conserve something from the past – institutions, cultural mores, values, political beliefs, traditions.

What happens when a society moves so far from righteous values and freedom principles that there is little left to conserve?

That is where I believe America finds itself in the early part of the 21st century. Let me give you some examples of why:

the breakdown of the institutions of marriage and family;

the inability of many to distinguish between right and wrong;

the consolidation of power in Washington and in the executive branch;

the breakdown in the rule of law;

the usurpation of power by unaccountable supra-national agencies;

infringements on personal freedoms

increasing vulnerability to weapons of mass destruction and government's unwillingness or inability to address such a basic concept of defense; What do these and other problems our nation is facing have in common?

Today we have a federal government that acts without regard for the Constitution. What's the conservative prescription for that? Has "compassionate conservative" George W. Bush reversed unconstitutional government or continued it? Can you defeat unconstitutional government by putting your finger in the dike to prevent more?

No, it takes a radical agenda to defeat a radical agenda. Conservatives have no stomach for fighting – the kind of fighting it takes to restore real freedom to America.

It's not a time for timidity or compromise. It's not a time for defensiveness and conciliation. It's time to take the offensive in this struggle.

I'm not a "conservative" because I see precious little left in this world worth conserving. Conservatives, from my experience, do not make good freedom fighters. They seem to think a victory is holding back attacks on liberty or minimizing them. They are forever on the defensive – trying to conserve or preserve an apple that is rotten to the core.

What is the rotten apple? You can see it in the government schools that dumb down American kids. You can see it in the universities that pervert the concepts of knowledge and wisdom. You can see it in the federalization and militarization of law enforcement. You can see it in the proliferation of non-constitutional government. You can see it in the real "trickle-down economics" of confiscatory taxes. You can see it in the unaccountable authorities which give us global treaties. You can see it in the relentless attacks on marriage and the family. You can see it in euthanasia, population control and the phony "right" to abortion on demand. You can see it in the surrender of our national security.

It's all got to go. But how? Politics as usual will never get us there.

Conservatives, it seems to me, only forestall the inevitable slide into tyranny. I don't want to forestall it. I want to prevent it. I want to reverse that slide. I want to restore the dream that was America.

Was George Washington a conservative? No. He was a revolutionary. He is known throughout the world – or was when people appreciated such concepts – as the "father of freedom."

Today, those who stand for freedom, justice, the rule of law, self-government and the moral principles of the Bible are not part of "the establishment." We're the rebels. By the world's standards, we're the renegades.

The founding fathers knew that even the best designed government wouldn't work if the people were not righteous, moral and God-fearing – if they didn't love liberty and cherish it.

To practice self-government again, we must have a people capable of self-government.

It takes courage to stand in the gap, to man the barricades, to say "enough is enough" – and mean it. It takes more than a "conservative" vision to lead the way back to freedom.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last
"Today, those who stand for freedom, justice, the rule of law, self-government and the moral principles of the Bible are not part of "the establishment." We're the rebels. By the world's standards, we're the renegades."

i could add a few names that we've been called: whackos, malcontents, disrupters, tinfoilers, conspiracy theorists, bushbashers, blame america firsters....

1 posted on 06/13/2002 8:27:39 AM PDT by christine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: christine11
Bump
2 posted on 06/13/2002 8:35:24 AM PDT by Jagdgewehr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
BTTT
3 posted on 06/13/2002 8:37:05 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
i could add a few names that we've been called: whackos, malcontents, disrupters, tinfoilers, conspiracy theorists, bushbashers, blame america firsters....

...America-hater...

Rather Orwellian that those who advocate a Constitutional Republic in the United States of America should be called those names.

Recent events have revealed that those who want to abandon the Constitution and find exceptions in time of crisis are those who really didn't believe in it to begin with.

Hear that, Sean Hannity?

4 posted on 06/13/2002 8:37:22 AM PDT by Eagle Eye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
Today's Democratic and Republican Parties are the "revolutionaries" since they have effectively overthrown our government. The Farah's of world (myself included) simply want to restore our Constitutional Republic.
5 posted on 06/13/2002 8:37:56 AM PDT by BillofRights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

Thank you Registered!


6 posted on 06/13/2002 8:38:21 AM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
...America-hater...
Rather Orwellian that those who advocate a Constitutional Republic in the United States of America should be called those names.

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

7 posted on 06/13/2002 8:40:51 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BillofRights; christine11
The Farah's of world (myself included) simply want to restore our Constitutional Republic.

We're not conservatives... we are "counter-revolutionaries".

I like!! :-)

8 posted on 06/13/2002 8:41:08 AM PDT by Darth Sidious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: christine11
1) [T]he breakdown of the institutions of marriage and family; the inability of many to distinguish between right and wrong;

2)[T]he consolidation of power in Washington and in the executive branch; the breakdown in the rule of law; the usurpation of power by unaccountable supra-national agencies; infringements on personal freedoms

I broke the list into two separate groups to illustrate a point. Group one factors tend to cause group two consequences.

To paraphrase one of the founders: those who will not govern themselves will be governed by tyrants.

9 posted on 06/13/2002 8:42:35 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
Why I'm not a conservative

That's wonderful, Joseph. I am proud of you. However, you forgot to tell us exactly what you ARE.

I'm for all the things that you are for. We've just not reached the boiling point as a nation where we can list out our grievances and make a call to arms.

I'll tell you what, Joseph. You find a way to get the sheeple interested in returning to our Constitutional roots, and I'll join in behind you. Until that time, I am doing what I can -- teaching my kids about our founding, our fore-fathers, and how to get back there. It is practical, and it defeats the leftists at their own game.

By mushing the minds of children over the last 30 years, the left has advanced their socialist agenda.

We MUST raise the next generation of leaders for this country, if it is to be saved.

Homeschool bump!

PS - visit pocket declaration.org to see how to get our children to read the Declaration of Independence. We have to get our children to understand Liberty at an early age.

10 posted on 06/13/2002 8:47:36 AM PDT by ImaGraftedBranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
"freedom fighters" Probably not the best choice of words post Sept. 11.
11 posted on 06/13/2002 8:50:24 AM PDT by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillofRights
The Farah's of world (myself included) simply want to restore our Constitutional Republic.

Our Constitutional Republic will self-restore when Americans self-reform. That means rejecting irresponsible sexual behaviors (which lead to the breakdown of the family, the evil of abortion-on-demand etc) including so-called homosexual marriage, devil-may-care substance abuse etc. It means adopting, supporting, and living a God-based personal morality of right and wrong even if one does not consider oneself particularly religious.

As John Adams said, our Consititution was made for a moral and religious people; it is wholly unsuited to any another.

12 posted on 06/13/2002 8:52:00 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Group one factors tend to cause group two consequences.

Can you show evidence of the existence of Group one factors in American society in the early 1900's that led to the massive expansion of federal government and consolidation of power in DC under Wilson and FDR?

13 posted on 06/13/2002 8:57:51 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: christine11
I agree! Bump
14 posted on 06/13/2002 9:02:51 AM PDT by Osprey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic; Kevin Curry
If anything, I would say category two help lead to the category one results. If the government is corrupt, why should the citizens be any different, right?
15 posted on 06/13/2002 9:08:37 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: christine11
"Conservatives have no stomach for fighting – the kind of fighting it takes to restore real freedom to America."

Once a 'conservative' gets elected, all the talk about freedom gets shoved down the memory hole and suddenly the importance of government power to control people's behavior becomes important. In the last couple of elections, 'conservatives' have lost, because they opposed the lottery and opposed medical marijuana. Pro-freedom, pro-personal responsibility ideas get trashed in favor of some religio-moral crusade.

'Conservatives' can win, if they become pro-freedom and stay in power as long as they act on that pro-freedom agenda. "Stay out da' Bushes". George H W Bush experienced the biggest political collapse in American history. Why? He raised taxes, he signed the quota bill, he signed the ADA, he signed the Clean Air Act. He supported the out of control IRS and BATF. He backed the jack-booted thugs instead of the freedom of the American People. He went from 91% approval rating to getting 34%, while people desperately tried to turn him around on the freedom issue.

George W Bush is heading down the same path. The only thing holding him up is the war. Dubya said the 9/11 attacks were attacks on our freedom. Well, shouldn't our response be more freedom? Where is it? Where's our liberty going? He's doing nothing, but going along with the liberals. He's to the left of Feinstein and Boxer on terrorist profiling for Pete's sake.

16 posted on 06/13/2002 9:09:09 AM PDT by Kermit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
"Today, those who stand for freedom, justice, the rule of law, self-government and the moral principles of the Bible are not part of "the establishment." We're the rebels. By the world's standards, we're the renegades."

As the article points out, we need to have the courage of Peter and Paul and the other disciples, and that of great leaders like George Washington, to re-establish our country as it should be. As Christ feared no scorn, neither should we.

17 posted on 06/13/2002 9:10:38 AM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sentryoveramerica; kathleen; canadian outrage
ping!
18 posted on 06/13/2002 9:18:32 AM PDT by christine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally;Kevin Curry
If anything, I would say category two help lead to the category one results. If the government is corrupt, why should the citizens be any different, right?

I agree. Kevin seems to think it's the other way around, so I'm trying to determine if he can objectively support that theory.

19 posted on 06/13/2002 9:18:48 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: christine11
I believe Hayek in his Constitution Of liberty had a chapter, the last I believe, that was titled Why I am not a Conservative. His lament was the loss of the term liberal to the left. Liberal for most of the 19 th and early in the 20 th century was calling cry of human and economic rights of individuals and private voluntary associations. Alas the word was stolen perverted and sold like snake oil to the masses.
20 posted on 06/13/2002 9:21:48 AM PDT by TAP ONLINE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kermit
Well put. Mr. Farah's main objection to Conservatives is that they only seek to "forestall the inevitable slide into tyranny", when, in fact, they've been greasing the rails all along.
21 posted on 06/13/2002 9:24:20 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: christine11
The time that "conservative" meant something was when there was a consensus about right and wrong. Since that is gone, we have "conservative" people who are for abortion, for cloning, for selling babyparts, for euthanasia, for federalizing everything, etc.

Rather than calling myself "conservative," I simply give my positions on the issues at hand: pro-life (by which I mean the law should punish abortion as homicide), against the Sixteenth, Seventeenth, and Nineteenth Amendments, etc.

22 posted on 06/13/2002 9:25:26 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
Sign me up!
23 posted on 06/13/2002 9:26:37 AM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
That means rejecting irresponsible sexual behaviors (which lead to the breakdown of the family, the evil of abortion-on-demand etc) including so-called homosexual marriage, devil-may-care substance abuse etc.

Agreed. However, the pulpit and each Christian fulfilling his personal calling is the key to this, not unleashing the government upon the citizenry.

There is a bill board in town that reads:

"The abortion clinics in this town operate with the permission of the churches of Jesus Christ."

People cannot become moral through external pressures, only by internal cleansing and education. You cannot stop gambling by banning it. It must come from the inside out, not by government edict.

24 posted on 06/13/2002 9:35:55 AM PDT by Eagle Eye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: christine11
whackos, malcontents, disrupters, tinfoilers, conspiracy theorists, bushbashers, blame america firsters.

Its good to know that I am in good company afterall. All eyes must be on the Constitution or we're screwed.

25 posted on 06/13/2002 9:36:10 AM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
I think what KC said could be possible, meaning in a society, it could turn out that way, but I don't think that applies to America as we see it today. FDR's "New Deal" paved the way for fast government corruption/usurptation of power and freedom, which IMHO, helped lead to the "decline" in "societal values" that we do see today.
26 posted on 06/13/2002 9:37:02 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
Well put. Mr. Farah's main objection to Conservatives is that they only seek to "forestall the inevitable slide into tyranny", when, in fact, they've been greasing the rails all along.

Alot of conservatives are still stuck in the '60's. They are still defending "law and order" against the radicals and hippies. Someone needs to shake them out of their coma and tell them that the radical, socialist hippies won. They grew up, got a haircut, put on a suit, and began infiltration. They are now in charge of every major institution that conservatives used to take pride in defending. They run education, health care, law enforcement, even the military, which they once hated. Ironicly, they are even drug warriors now. Hell, one of them was even POTUS for 8 years. Yet some of our more "seasoned citizen" conservatives still defend these fallen institutions with blind passion.

The 60's are over. We are the radicals we once fought. It's time to realize this and re-adjust the game plan, folks.

27 posted on 06/13/2002 9:38:26 AM PDT by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: christine11
Try Constitutionalist, on for size, I tend to refer to myself in that manner more and more, as the right lurches left. Blackbird.
28 posted on 06/13/2002 9:40:08 AM PDT by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior
with pleasure! :)
29 posted on 06/13/2002 9:40:48 AM PDT by christine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: christine11
Thanks for the thread, Christine....Farah makes the point very well.

I no longer refer to myself as a conservative when discussing politics because the word has been so bastardized that anything to the right of Teddy the Swimmer Kennedy is considered conservative!

Think I'll just hang my hat on Constitutionalist. If the country were to get back on track of what the Founders gave us, it would be perfect. You see, I disagree with Churchill and others about our Constitution not being perfect but its the best the world's had to date. Our Founders were brilliant--they planned for the future better than any yahoo in the political or academic arena today.....they knew times could change--they included the Constitutional Amendment process to handle this.

I get a kick out of the mentally deficient who bitch that 'the CA process is too hard or its impossible'.....yeah.....right....that's exactly why it is set up the way it is! Changing governing policies should be a hell of a lot more difficult than changing a pair of shorts every morning {or evening}!!

As much as I would hate to see it, if Carter had managed to get Congress to write up a Constitutional Amendment authorizing the federales to jump into education, and it had gone through the process and was accepted, I could live with it--because they followed the Constitution I so love and respect. NOTE: I would still enocurage everyone to homeschool regardless because government is incompetent.

30 posted on 06/13/2002 9:42:20 AM PDT by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
FDR's "New Deal" paved the way for fast government corruption/usurptation of power and freedom, which IMHO, helped lead to the "decline" in "societal values" that we do see today.

That's the way it appears to me. According to Kevin's theory, the way to get rid of big government is for everyone to try to be just like him, and big government will simply evaporate of it's own accord.

31 posted on 06/13/2002 9:43:19 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: GingisK
you've just been added to my ping list! ;)
32 posted on 06/13/2002 9:43:51 AM PDT by christine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: christine11
>> With all due respect to my "conservative" friends, I find the description detestable, extremely unflattering, simplistic and an insult. <<

So I guess the word "conservative" really ticks you off, eh? WAHHHHHHH!

This article seems so be founded on the asinine idea that the term "conservative" refers to people who support (or at least are weak in the face of):

the breakdown of the institutions of marriage and family;
the inability of many to distinguish between right and wrong;
the consolidation of power in Washington and in the executive branch;
the breakdown in the rule of law;
the usurpation of power by unaccountable supra-national agencies;
infringements on personal freedoms

That doesn't sound like the conservatives I know. We are not "for" unconstitutional government and tyranny, we are for fighting it.

>>I'm not a "conservative" because I see precious little left in this world worth conserving.<<

Well, why don't you dig a hole, jump in, and pull the hole in after you? I do see things worth conserving and preserving. The Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, Rule of Law and Self-Government.

This article seems to be a blistering rant against the word "conservative." To what end? Okay, bid deal, you don't like the word "conservative." You're a "revolutionary". Or you're "Big Bird." Sheesh, lay off the term willya? Big deal.

My suggestion: quit aiming your cannon at a label, which is all it is.

33 posted on 06/13/2002 9:43:55 AM PDT by SerpentDove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darth Sidious
We're not conservatives... we are "counter-revolutionaries".

I would say "constitutional revolutionaries".

34 posted on 06/13/2002 9:45:44 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
True enough. The battle cry of "You can be free when you learn to live like WE tell you to" is an old one.
35 posted on 06/13/2002 9:48:39 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: JeffHead
would love to have your input on this? :)
36 posted on 06/13/2002 9:50:33 AM PDT by christine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
You'd better be careful. Charlie Puckett is a "Constitutional Revolutionary", and look what "big brother" has done to him!
37 posted on 06/13/2002 9:51:45 AM PDT by disgustedvet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
I would say "constitutional revolutionaries".

I think "constitutional reactionaries" would be more appropriate.

38 posted on 06/13/2002 9:51:47 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: christine11
To practice self-government again, we must have a people capable of self-government.

We've already lost that battle to the disciples and heirs of Gramsci and the cultural marxists that now dominate ALL of our major institutions.

And that is why we're headed for another American Civil War.

39 posted on 06/13/2002 9:51:55 AM PDT by Noumenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Recent events have revealed that those who want to abandon the Constitution and find exceptions in time of crisis are those who really didn't believe in it to begin with.

Thank you for writing this, it sums up my take quite well. I have had it with folks bleating, "Well, when we're in a time of war, blah, blah, blah ..." as some kind of justification for stuff going on and I'm a bit confused. Has Congress passed that Declaration of War yet? Or did I miss them voting an open-ended extension of time to the War Powers Act, whereby the president can get to do what he wants as long as he wants, no Congressional control whatsoever??

40 posted on 06/13/2002 9:56:42 AM PDT by MozarkDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MississippiDeltaDawg
I have had it with folks bleating, "Well, when we're in a time of war, blah, blah, blah ..."

Yeah. This boils my blood, too.

41 posted on 06/13/2002 10:00:34 AM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
It means adopting, supporting, and living a God-based personal morality of right and wrong even if one does not consider oneself particularly religious.

You forgot shooting anyone who doesn't agree with your idea of morality.

42 posted on 06/13/2002 10:01:01 AM PDT by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
I think "constitutional reactionaries" would be more appropriate.

If you are a "reactionary" it intimates that you are reacting to the opponent.
If your opponent acts first you have lost the initiative.
I want to be the one that acts first and make them 'react' to me.

Admittedly, that is going to take a while to be able to do.
I still don't want to get into the mindset of 'reacting' when I should be initiating.

43 posted on 06/13/2002 10:11:40 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
If you are a "reactionary" it intimates that you are reacting to the opponent. If your opponent acts first you have lost the initiative. I want to be the one that acts first and make them 'react' to me.

Admittedly, that is going to take a while to be able to do. I still don't want to get into the mindset of 'reacting' when I should be initiating.

I think you're confusing "reactionary" with "reactive".

44 posted on 06/13/2002 10:23:33 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Kermit
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people ...

Benjamin Franklin

You libertarians are part of the problem.

45 posted on 06/13/2002 10:25:36 AM PDT by mconder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Our Constitutional Republic will self-restore when Americans self-reform.

Though I agree with the statements you made following the above assertion, I do not agree that our Republic will self-restore. Too much power has been consolidated among too few. Our country is run by an elite oligarchy, who impose their will, under the guise of a voters' mandate. We've already lost our freedom and no one....NO ONE...is going to give it back. If it is to be, it will have to be taken. And I don't think enough Americans have the stomach for it.

46 posted on 06/13/2002 10:26:44 AM PDT by BillofRights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
I think you're confusing "reactionary" with "reactive".

Same root word, 'react'.
Not to quibble semantics, would you rather hit or be hit?

47 posted on 06/13/2002 10:28:49 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Not to quibble semantics, would you rather hit or be hit?

While they may have the same root, they have very different meanings. I don't make 'em up, I just use 'em.

48 posted on 06/13/2002 10:38:52 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
reactionary: 1.Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

reactive: 1.Tending to be responsive or to react to a stimulus.
2.Characterized by reaction.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

revolutionary: 1. a.often Revolutionary Relating to or being a revolution: revolutionary war; a museum of the Revolutionary era.
b.Bringing about or supporting a political or social revolution: revolutionary pamphlets.
2.Marked by or resulting in radical change: a revolutionary discovery.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

Pretty similar as opposed to revolutionary.

Still, as long as we return to the constitution I don't really care what we're called.

49 posted on 06/13/2002 10:50:39 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Still, as long as we return to the constitution I don't really care what we're called.

That "return to the constitution" part is what makes you a reactionary. A revolutionary wants to discard the whole works and start over. A liberal wants to screw with what we've already got. A conservative wants to keep what we've got, just like it is. A reactionary wants to go back to what we had before the liberals screwed with it.

50 posted on 06/13/2002 10:59:07 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson