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

Skip to comments.

Clint Eastwood Pledges Support for Gay Marriage
Hollywood Gossip ^ | 03/03/2013 | by Hilton Hater

Posted on 03/03/2013 8:10:25 PM PST by SeekAndFind

He's one of the few big-time celebrities who is also a big-time Republican.

But Clint Eastwood has veered from the viewpoint of many Conservatives in one regard: the actor signed the American Foundation for Equal Rights’s “Friend of the Court” brief this week.

In doing so, the actor became one of over 100 prominent Republicans to support this gay rights organization's document, which it has filed with the Supreme Court.

n April, the highest court in the land will listen to arguments about the legality of California’s Proposition 8, an amendment that passed in 2008 and which declares “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized" in that state.

Those such as Eastwood have affixed their name to this brief in the hope that this gay marriage ban will be overturned.

And recent poll revealed that 61 percent of CA residents would support marriage equality.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; clinteastwood; diversity; eastwood; gaymarriage; hollywood; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; homosexuals; oldnews; pc; politicalcorrectness; tolerance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-136 next last

1 posted on 03/03/2013 8:10:38 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This news does NOT make my day....


2 posted on 03/03/2013 8:13:43 PM PST by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Oh Clint!

“a man has to fondle another mans fudgies” just doesn’t have a ring to it.


3 posted on 03/03/2013 8:14:56 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The case of the state of California is a very clear example of the DOWNARD SPIRAL of America’s values.

On the March 7, 2000 primary election, Proposition 22 was adopted by a vote of 61.4% to 38%. The one-sentence code section explicitly defined the union of a man and a woman as the only valid or recognizable form of marriage in the State of California.

Then in November 2008, Proposition 8 added a new provision, Section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights, to the California Constitution, which provides that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

The result: 52.47% in favor of Proposition 8 and 47.53% opposed.

Note how the pro-marriage numbers have GONE DOWN from 61% top 52% in just a little over 8 years !!

Now, 4 years after 2008, we see a poll showing a HUGE SHIFT in California favoring “marriage equality”.

The downward spiral continues.


4 posted on 03/03/2013 8:16:25 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frank_2001

The case of the state of California is a very clear example of the DOWNARD SPIRAL of America’s values.

On the March 7, 2000 primary election, Proposition 22 was adopted by a vote of 61.4% to 38%. The one-sentence code section explicitly defined the union of a man and a woman as the only valid or recognizable form of marriage in the State of California.

Then in November 2008, Proposition 8 added a new provision, Section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights, to the California Constitution, which provides that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

The result: 52.47% in favor of Proposition 8 and 47.53% opposed.

Note how the pro-marriage numbers have GONE DOWN from 61% top 52% in just a little over 8 years !!

Now, 4 years after 2008, we see a poll showing a HUGE SHIFT in California favoring “marriage equality”.

The downward spiral continues.


5 posted on 03/03/2013 8:17:20 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Why Romney lost the election. Too many of the country club set think as Clint does.


6 posted on 03/03/2013 8:17:28 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

FROM HOTAIR:

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/03/02/what-we-can-learn-from-clint-eastwood/

Clint Eastwood may have something even more valuable to teach us.

He’s a Republican. He’s a conservative. But beyond any of that, he is is own man with his own opinions on each and every subject in which he takes an interest and he doesn’t much give a fig if you disapprove of his position. He doesn’t agree with the text book position of the “real conservatives” on every single issue. And I suspect that, like many of us, he doesn’t pay much attention to what anyone else chooses to define as the “texbook conservative” stance on hundreds of different policy points. He goes where his own beliefs lead him.

The story here about Clint Eastwood has nothing to do with gay marriage. It has to do with the idea that somebody – anybody – can define conservatism for you on each and every issue. There will be disagreements inside the tent on both sides


7 posted on 03/03/2013 8:19:27 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Well said.


8 posted on 03/03/2013 8:20:48 PM PST by SoCal SoCon (Conservatism =/= Corporatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
And recent poll revealed that 61 percent of CA residents would support marriage equality.K/i>

Didn't the majority of people vote for Prop 8?
If 61% now support it why don't they just have a new proposition and with their supposed majority they should win.

9 posted on 03/03/2013 8:21:13 PM PST by oldbrowser (They are marxists, don't call them democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Get off my lawn, Clint.


10 posted on 03/03/2013 8:22:18 PM PST by TADSLOS (The Event Horizon has come and gone. Buckle up and hang on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He is a libertarian.


11 posted on 03/03/2013 8:23:16 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
He’s a Republican. He’s a conservative.

He obviously isn't conservative, and he isn't republican, Clint Eastwood is a libertarian, an anti-conservative.

12 posted on 03/03/2013 8:27:01 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

RE: Didn’t the majority of people vote for Prop 8?

The emphasis is the past tense -— DID SUPPORT.

That was 2008 ( 4 years ago ).

I’m not sure of the new shift of opinion is due to the EXODUS of conservatives from California. The state has been losing people like crazy for the past 10 years ( most of them businessmen and producers ).

What we’re probably seeing in California is a shift in demographics -— the state becoming even MORE LIBERAL as conservatives flee and liberals stay.

As for another proposition coming up for a vote, this is going to be really interesting.... We will soon be seeing the state constitution changing regularly every time some group does not like a section.


13 posted on 03/03/2013 8:27:18 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

A few years back I was castigated around here for pointing out the speed and direction of the shift in public perception on this issue. I’m not in favor, but I’m also not stupid enough to refuse to recognize when a cause is lost. If it isn’t lost yet, it will be shortly.

Andrew Breitbart was exactly right on this issue, as so many others. Laws, especially in a democratic society, don’t really matter in the long run. It’s the narrative, and the Left controls the narrative on this issue in particular. When sufficient shift in public opinion has taken place, the laws will adjust to reflect the new value system. Only a year or three to go now, probably.


14 posted on 03/03/2013 8:27:49 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yep, the star and main feature of the Republican Romney 2012 Convention.


15 posted on 03/03/2013 8:29:20 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to Dems and Obama is not a principle! Its just losing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; SeekAndFind

>> Clint Eastwood is a libertarian, an anti-conservative.

The obligatory rejection of your premise that libertarians (small l) cannot be conservative — notwithstanding Eastwood’s pandering foolishness.


16 posted on 03/03/2013 8:30:09 PM PST by Gene Eric (The Palin Doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It tells me more about Romney than Eastwood. Eastwood is a libertarian. For heaven’s sake, look at his lifestyle. On fiscal issues, he is an economic liberal, meaning he believes strongly in capitalism. That Romney chose to showcase him instead of a social conservative told me not to expect too much from Romney even if he won.


17 posted on 03/03/2013 8:30:43 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Somebody take that empty chair of his and bust it over his head please!


18 posted on 03/03/2013 8:32:27 PM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Libertarians are old fashioned liberals, not conservatives.


19 posted on 03/03/2013 8:32:27 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; NFHale; sickoflibs; fieldmarshaldj; BillyBoy

The liberals are fleeing too and infesting places like Idaho and Wyoming.

Democrat polices cause failure and the liberal people leave and bring their voting habits with them phucking up the new places they go.


20 posted on 03/03/2013 8:33:59 PM PST by Impy (All in favor of Harry Reid meeting Mr. Mayhem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Libertarians are not conservative, that is why they call themselves libertarian, to show that they are half lefty.

Clint Eastwood, Bill Maher, Eastwood’s hero, Noam Chomsky, all libertarians, even Mitt Romney is very libertarian.


21 posted on 03/03/2013 8:37:26 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If people were wondering how the Republican Party will finally split up for good, it will be over this issue. I would suspect virtually all “moderate” Republicans support homosexual marriage. Unfortunately, Dick Cheney has chosen to follow the dictates of his feelings for his homosexual daughter rather than do what a real conservative would do. True conservatives simply cannot support homosexual “marriage.” You don’t pass a law on the basis of that not approving of some act will make certain people unhappy. Homosexuality is a disorder and can never be considered the same as heterosexuality.


22 posted on 03/03/2013 8:38:04 PM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The other day there was discussion on radio about a 6 year old boy that felt he was a girl and the kid wanted to use the girls bathroom at school.

Well Mommy and Daddy tumbled, and called him Susie.
The school tumbled and called him Suzie.
The Judges tumbled and called him Suzie.

And access to the girls room was granted.

Meanwhile.. on Planet WTF, Susie,Jane,Nancy and even Billy Joe And Junior pinched their nose.

Since when does the 98% capitulate to the 2%?

Then some fellow called in that said his 7 year old anglo daughter informed him that she felt that she was black, born in a white body LOL

Let us take it to the courts!
I am sure that all the Congressional Black Caucasians will agree that this is a travesty that Must be addressed LOL

Libtards, Feh.
Who needs them?

And I am The King of Mars LOL


23 posted on 03/03/2013 8:39:32 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Mr Faber will not like this, Rowdy.


24 posted on 03/03/2013 8:42:33 PM PST by logitech (Who's here so vile, that will not love his country? If any speak, for him I have offended)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

Furthermore, any Republican who supports homosexual marriage will not get one dime from me. I will not support the national party candidate if that candidate endorses homosexual marriage. Or if my state party, Wisconsin, passes a resolution endorsing it, that is the end of my support. That is one issue where I refuse to compromise.


25 posted on 03/03/2013 8:44:03 PM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

Prop. 8 passed by 52% in 2008.

The reason they haven’t used another popular vote to repeal it is because they are hoping for a broad opinion from the courts that will reach farther than CA, in my opinion.

If the guys in black robes fail them, then look for another popular vote. As far as the state is concerned, 50% +1 of the popular vote defines what a marriage can be. It was always a danger.

Freegards


26 posted on 03/03/2013 8:46:43 PM PST by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

His convention talk was uninteresting to me and obviously did not help any. He is part of the establishment and probably still craves popular acclaim.


27 posted on 03/03/2013 8:50:33 PM PST by Theodore R. ("Hey, the American people must all be crazy out there!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife

RE: And access to the girls room was granted.

What if the kid PRETENDS to feel like a girl and only want to go to the girl’s room to get the chance to peep?


28 posted on 03/03/2013 8:55:43 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed

RE: Prop. 8 passed by 52% in 2008.

Notice that a mere 8 years earlier, Proposition 22 passed by 61% ( in 2000 ).

The trend in California is not the friend of supporters of traditional marriage.

Something seems to be happening to the population of California in the past decade....


29 posted on 03/03/2013 8:58:11 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Who knows what is going on in a 6 year olds mind?

It is the so called adults that worry me.


30 posted on 03/03/2013 8:58:36 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Libertarianism is the opposite of statism distinguishing the force of law. It’s not a measure of morality and tradition as defined by conservatism and liberalism.

The Libertarian party represents libertarianism as well as the Democrat party represents democracy, and the Republican party represents republicanism.

Conservative libertarianism does not put minors at risk, nor does it pass law that forces citizens to service and support homosexual behavior. It’s about smaller govt and deregulation. The statists disagree.

Statism is not good whether it’s servicing conservatives or liberals.

The lack of critical thinking on this subject typically yields brazen misrepresentations that cite pedophilia, prostitution, and retail heroin — pedantic forgeries not worth legitimizing.


31 posted on 03/03/2013 9:01:52 PM PST by Gene Eric (The Palin Doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mylife

RE: It is the so called adults that worry me.

Here’s my point — kid or adult, you can never know what goes on in a person’s mind because He or She can always use his gender and feeling to PRETEND.

For instance, we have laws here in the USA that gives special privileges to foreign spouses of citizens so that they can be LEGAL RESIDENTS ( call that fast track to citizenship ).

So, if an American who marries say a Mexican, the Mexican spouse quickly bypasses most of the immigration line and soon becomes a LEGAL resident.

Now let’s talk about pretense. Let’s talk about a scenario where gay marriage is now legal in the US ( as Obama wants it to be ).

What if a Mexican is NOT GAY, but wishes to come to the USA, and has an American buddy here in the US who, in order to help him, agrees to PRETEND to be gay and they both “marry” in order for the Mexican to be fast tracked into the US? Why can’t that be the possible?

They can “marry”, live together, and (by agreement) continue to date other women.

When the Mexican finally gets his legal papers, they can “divorce” and lo and behold, the “gay” Mexican is now a LEGAL US resident with a quick path to citizenship !!!


32 posted on 03/03/2013 9:07:48 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Not only that, but NC tied prop. 22 last year with 61% of the vote and was hailed as a great victory by many. We can reasonably can project that NC is around 12 years behind CA on the issue, in my opinion. I can see an acceleration of the trend if enough states accept ‘gay marriage’ fast enough. But there are some states that passed their amendments in the 80% ranges, those will last a while. The ones that only passed theirs in the 50% ranges might be repealable by popular vote today.

I recall a time on FR when many thought a popular vote on the issue would never fail.

Freegards


33 posted on 03/03/2013 9:09:30 PM PST by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
That Romney chose to showcase him instead of a social conservative told me not to expect too much from Romney even if he won.

Please! The convention stage was littered with social cons. Further, without the support of the LDS, Prop 8 would not have passed.

Eastwood asked for time and he got it because he's Eastwood.

Lately I get the sense around here some spend their every waking moment denigrating the conservative credentials of anything or anyone not their own reflection.

As mentioned up thread, this cultural battle was lost and only now are the shockwaves reaching some peoples' horizons. Traditional married was not upheld, was not valued my the parents of the last generation or two. If you want to know how it came to this look in the mirror. Look to your left, look to your right. That's how.

34 posted on 03/03/2013 9:10:13 PM PST by newzjunkey (bah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
That Romney chose to showcase him instead of a social conservative told me not to expect too much from Romney even if he won.

Please! The convention stage was littered with social cons. Further, without the support of the LDS, Prop 8 would not have passed.

Eastwood asked for time and he got it because he's Eastwood.

Lately I get the sense around here some spend their every waking moment denigrating the conservative credentials of anything or anyone not their own reflection.

As mentioned up thread, this cultural battle was lost and only now are the shockwaves reaching some peoples' horizons. Traditional marriage was not upheld, was not valued by the parents of the last generation or two. If you want to know how it came to this look in the mirror. Look to your left, look to your right. That's how.

35 posted on 03/03/2013 9:10:35 PM PST by newzjunkey (bah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

The people can not be trusted one more time with something so important. Best to let the professionals handle it this time. /s


36 posted on 03/03/2013 9:10:55 PM PST by pennyfarmer (Your socialist beat our liberal AGAIN.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That is my point.
It is tedium unworthy of consideration.
Certainly unworthy of consideration if it erodes the wider society by being considered.


37 posted on 03/03/2013 9:12:43 PM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Libertarianism is all over the map, from libertinism to anti-statism. IAC, Eastwood fits somewhere in that range because he is a denizen of Movie land. On social issues, well, he made a (very good) film that justified mercy-killing.


38 posted on 03/03/2013 9:14:28 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Law that forces citizens to service homosexuality is statist by nature. It’s also anti-Conservative law. It’s an act of a leftwinger to enact law that forces the Christian photographer to service a homosexual event. That’s not libertarianism, that’s statism.

Few people live perfectly within the political jurisdiction they spout about belonging. Some are worse than others. And I’m not here to defend Eastwood’s dalliances with liberalism.

We’re not going to agree, ansel12, given our sharp disagreement on terminology. So, I have nothing else to add today, but I will read any follow-up you post.


39 posted on 03/03/2013 9:17:43 PM PST by Gene Eric (The Palin Doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

“Traditional marriage was not upheld, was not valued by the parents of the last generation or two. If you want to know how it came to this look in the mirror. Look to your left, look to your right. That’s how.”

“Now, since the family and human society at large spring from marriage, these men will on no account allow matrimony to be the subject of the jurisdiction of the Church. Nay, they endeavor to deprive it of all holiness, and so bring it within the contracted sphere of those rights which, having been instituted by man, are ruled and administered by the civil jurisprudence of the community. Wherefore it necessarily follows that they attribute all power over marriage to civil rulers, and allow none whatever to the Church; and, when the Church exercises any such power, they think that she acts either by favor of the civil authority or to its injury. Now is the time, they say, for the heads of the State to vindicate their rights unflinchingly, and to do their best to settle all that relates to marriage according as to them seems good.”

Pope Leo XIII, 1880

He saw it coming 130 years ago, that many would be conditioned to think the state defines marriage, and how the statists would use that.

Freegards


40 posted on 03/03/2013 9:19:01 PM PST by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Well, the battle was not engaged by the Republican Party very strongly. Remember the reaction of the 1992 Convention to Pat Buchanan’s speech? The Republican Party was the pro-abortion party until it was outbid by the Democrats after Roe v. Wade. Even under Reagan, the pro-choice forces in the Party dampened Reagan’s and Judge Clarks’ pro-life iniatives.


41 posted on 03/03/2013 9:21:10 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

It was the 47% comment which democrats pounded on without stop.


42 posted on 03/03/2013 9:21:31 PM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed cuz people have figured out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Libertarians support homosexual marriage, it is part of their war against conservatism, libertarian politics are to advance libertarianism resulting in homosexualizing the military, gay marriage, abortion and so on, it is why they exist and cannot merely be conservatives, they are anti-conservative and that is their role in politics.


43 posted on 03/03/2013 9:24:16 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Eastwood is part of the left-wing of the Republican Party.


44 posted on 03/03/2013 9:24:25 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That is a brilliant point. Even I with my equally brilliant mind had not thought of that angle! I must be getting old haha.


45 posted on 03/03/2013 9:27:11 PM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed cuz people have figured out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I voted in 2005 for an addition to the Texas constitution that marriage is only between a man and a woman. The moment the SC decides to force legalization of this perverted crap onto my state of Texas, I’ll be 100% in the secession camp. The rest of America can just go burn to the ground at that point.


46 posted on 03/03/2013 9:28:12 PM PST by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed

Foreigners have their views, but if he were American he would know that the US government had already moved against church imposed polygamy.


47 posted on 03/03/2013 9:28:30 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Hard to tell where the LDS stands on these issues, because theologically they don’t mesh very well with the Christian monogamy which serves as the basis of family law in this country. I should say the traditional Christian monogamy, since Luther found the Bible record to be ambivalent on the issue.


48 posted on 03/03/2013 9:29:42 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Hard to tell where the LDS stands on these issues, because theologically they don’t mesh very well with the Christian monogamy which serves as the basis of family law in this country. I should say the traditional Christian monogamy, since Luther found the Bible record to be ambivalent on the issue.


49 posted on 03/03/2013 9:29:55 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
Libertarianism is the opposite of statism distinguishing the force of law. It’s not a measure of morality and tradition as defined by conservatism and liberalism.

The Libertarian party represents libertarianism as well as the Democrat party represents democracy, and the Republican party represents republicanism.

Conservative libertarianism does not put minors at risk, nor does it pass law that forces citizens to service and support homosexual behavior. It’s about smaller govt and deregulation. The statists disagree.

Statism is not good whether it’s servicing conservatives or liberals.

The lack of critical thinking on this subject typically yields brazen misrepresentations that cite pedophilia, prostitution, and retail heroin — pedantic forgeries not worth legitimizing.

Excellent post. The demonization of libertarianism is the current political target, focused on by both Liberals and RINOs. It consists of extreme misrepresentation and total avoidance of actual small-government issues that libertarianism is all about. And why? Because the Liberal-RINO axis is the opposite of the Libertarianism-Constitutionalist allies, that's why.

Social conservatives need to see the massive correlation between their positions and true libertarianism, before the enemy divides and conquers the Right. The ONLY way the retaking of the country from the communists will happen is the Right gets its sh!t together, and that means focusing on small government mechanisms COMPLETELY. It's time "conservatives" learned that the Founders intended people to live and let live, as long as the government was kept on a tight leash - and that's ALL the Founders intended.

It's called freedom, and those who intend to deny it for their own pet social theories are walking right into the communist trap - because the MECHANISM for social control is the SAME, Right OR Left. That's why we were given a Constitution of NEGATIVE rights, not positive privileges to be argued over by totalitarians of ANY stripe.

These are FACTS, and if they are ignored, America, the Great Experiment, WILL fail - NOT by intrinsic weakness of the system, but by a lack of wisdom of its people, who failed to understand and protect their Founder's precious gift.

"A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it."

- Benjamin Franklin

50 posted on 03/03/2013 9:34:54 PM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-136 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