Roll over, grover, let sharia take over, Norquist, has accepted the mark & he is no longer relevant to anyone who loves America. EASD, grover.
Posted on 03/13/2013 9:14:53 AM PDT by AuntB
That person’t conservative, so therefore I am not. Why not throw everybody out of the tent?
“It appears that, in a nutshell, Robert Spencer is saying he is not a “conservative” according to how the Ministry of Truth applies the label.
In that case, I guess I’m not a “conservative” either.”
You two get it!! THank you.
Actually I always considered myself to be a “classic liberal” more than anything. But the Marxists hijacked the term “liberal”.
“I would classify myself as a progressive who’s a member of the Democratic party until something better comes along.
I think my progressive buddies and I feel the same way about the Democratic party that you and your conservative buddies feel about the Republican party so I can commiserate with you.”
One of these days, both sides (grass roots that is) will figure out we’re all in this boat together, and if we don’t stop playing gotcha, we’ll ALL sink together.
“Actually I always considered myself to be a “classic liberal” more than anything. But the Marxists hijacked the term “liberal”
I hear you, dfwgator. A freeper put it well yesterday...
“First Norquist hijacked the word conservative and now he hijacks “tea-party.” If we thought up a new name for ourselves every week, Norquist would steal it from us every time.”
(Thanks, Cradle of Freedom http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2995687/posts?page=145#145)
“No. They also banned Pamela Geller from CPAC.”
Thank you! Along with David Horowitz, because he dared to bring out the truth.
David Horowitz speaks at CPAC 2011 » The Right Scoop -
This is Horowitz’s main message… exposing Norquist.
http://www.therightscoop.com/david-horowitz-speaks-at-cpac/
"Progressive" usually means something along the lines of wanting more and more government programs to make everything "fair" -- or essentially leftist redistributionism. Thus, from your comment, I take it you are a classic leftist who is dissatisfied with the Democrat party because it isn't far left enough and isn't dismantling what is left of our capitalist economy fast enough, but you still belong to the party because it is the closest thing we have to a true socialist party. Does that about sum it up?
YOU Nailed it!!
How about calling ourselves Jeffersonians?
The Democrat party have never been more “progressive” (a classic Democrat misnomer) than it is today. Neither has the Republican party, so I sincerely doubt you can commiserate with me.
The labels "conservative" and "progressive" are becoming meaningless to ordinary citizens today, for political individuals under each set of labels focus on issues, avoiding the great principles of right and wrong, freedom and tyranny. Many who label themselves as "conservatives" have no idea just what they are supposed to be "conserving" and cannot articulate principled ideas.
The authors of America's Declaration of Independence and Framers of its Constitution were sorting out history's examples of those ideas which produced freedom and opportunity versus those which resulted in tyranny by government and oppression of the people.
Their documents reflected their focus on and passion for liberty among the people and strict limitations on any coercive power they would delegate to those who would serve them in government. Yet, today, when a former Congressman like Col. Allen West used the word "slavery" to describe the real human consequences of the government-over-people idea of so-called "progressives" and some self-described "conservatives," he is severely criticized and rebuked, even though he describes a concept which enslaves entire populations to the whims of petty tyrants and rulers.
The Founders of America used blunt and clear language to contrast the principles they embraced from previous examples of government-over-people ideas. Clearly, "politically correct" language did not stand in the way of their determination to produce outcomes favorable to freedom.
Examples:
"The liberties of our Country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have receiv'd them as a fair Inheritance from our worthy Ancestors: They purchas'd them for us with toil and danger and expence of treasure and blood; and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle; or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men. Of the latter we are in most danger at present: Let us therefore be aware of it. Let us contemplate our forefathers and posterity; and resolve to maintain the rights bequeath'd to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. - Instead of sitting down satisfied with the efforts we have already made, which is the wish of our enemies, the necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that "if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom." It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." Samuel Adams - Essay in the Boston Gazette, October 14, 1771
"When designs are form'd to raze the very foundation of a free government, whose few who are to erect their grandeur and fortunes upon the general ruin, will employ every art to sooth the devoted people into a state of indolence, inattention and security, which is forever the fore-runner of slavery." - Article signed "Candidus," in Boston Gazette, December 9, 1771
"If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them." Samuel Adams- As Candidus in the Boston Gazette, January 20, 1772
"The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave... These may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament." Samuel Adams - Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772
"It is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave." - The Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772
Why should freedom-loving Americans be cowered into refraining from using the word "slavery" to describe the condition which results as a consequence of coercive government power over the lives, rights, liberties, and pursuit of happiness of individual citizens in the society, right down to telling them what to eat and drink? The question is not new. It is as old as every arrogant petty tyrant with great ambition for power over people.
"To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account, but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:39
BTT
Grover was on the Sunday shows quite frequently but I havent seen him this year at all.
You would think he’d be upset about the drone program killing all those innocent Muslims who are on there way to Mosque with their kids to pray for peace, under orders from Obama of course.
I occasionally describe myself as a small-l libertarian. And yes, I’m used to being confused with big-l Libertarians. :)
“Grover was on the Sunday shows quite frequently but I havent seen him this year at all.”
He’s busy counting the $ (millions, btw) he’s getting using the tea party name. His groups...teaparty.net & TPNN have ‘offices’ in DC....same office for both....are actually ‘virtual’ offices...in other words, a mailing address.
Either he doesn't want to be asked questions or he is not getting invited on anymore since the election, assumed to be irrelevant by the networks.
We didnt see him commenting on O’s demand to raise taxes over the Sequester
Roll over, grover, let sharia take over, Norquist, has accepted the mark & he is no longer relevant to anyone who loves America. EASD, grover.
The filthy koranimals have infiltrated every..every segment of our government.
“Boykin: Well, Grover Norquist, and it is hard for the Republicans to accept this, but Grover Norquist is a Muslim Brotherhood facilitator. Now, he’s very popular because of his tax position and the influence that he has over taxes. But the fact of the matter is Grover is the one who brought in Suhail Khan into the conservative movement and has staunchly defended Suhail Khan, who is the son of a very radical Islamic cleric who had [Ayman al-Zawahiri] in his mosque in San Diego a decade ago raising funds, essentially to support terrorism. And Gover has a very checkered background and, let me say Glenn, that even now members of Congress are starting to recognize that Grover has been involved with some very questionable insurgent elements from the Muslim Brotherhood here in America.”
Bingo! The (Palestinian state) Romney's and the (ME connections) Grover's don't share much with me. Why are we allowing the likes of these two to be the "spokesmen" for conservatives (CPAC)? It truly does baffle me.
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.