Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?

vanity | April 21, 2007 | Jim Robinson

[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?

[sodpoodle]

“”””You log off?””””

LOL!

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

Mornin JW - Still up or up again?

[jedward]

Morning. Up again. Was curious what the backlog of posts would have for today.

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

Seems like mostly “I’m more conservative than you. Are not. Am too. Are not ....

[Knitting A Conundrum]

There is a lot of that going around. And some folks who seem to want to nudge people into the center trying to claim that’s actually conservative.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

And a few people who feel that if we don’t model ourselves on the democratic moderate side, we’re going to be out of power forever.

[jedward]

I’d say it’s a reflection, but of course one can view their own reflection differently than another. It reflects whatever someone want’s it to reflect in their own mind and in their own mind only.

[Barset]

My post was in response to what I consider an excellent analysis of the political reality facing us in 2008 in which the possibility of a Guliani war-time candidacy was profferred as an example of a possible Republican strategy.

I wasn’t aware that that made me a member of the “Rudy can win crowd”, or indeed any “crowd” since my opinion of the post was based on my own reflection on the post’s contents.

You ask if I think that Guliani can take Texas, adding the complaint that no one has bothered to respond to this question.

Perhaps the non-responders are like me, lacking the powers of divination that would enable us to predict the outcome of an election almost two years away in Texas or any other State.

I’m not sure where you get the idea that others “assume that red states vote Republican...” Perhaps it is part of your faith-based political acumen that permits you to see into the minds of others, and which apparently compels you to “believe” that Guliani cannot win Texas.

Since no candidates seem to grasp the the fact that we are at war, and though Guliani has stated that we are in a war, he, along with the others in both parties, seem almost blithely ignorant of what our enemies have planned for us, militarily and through the use of our laws and our demented commitment to the “multi-culti” excesses that hasten our doom.

Based on his public record in LE and during his time as mayor of New York City, Guliani seems capable of demonstrating the ruthlessness required to clean out our intelligence services, the DOJ and the State Department — or as they are usually referred to, the enemy within.

Whether or not this translates into votes is up to how informed voters are about the peril we face, and our slap-happy celebrity obsessed media will make certain that the reality of our situation, the imminent surrender of the West to lawless primitives, will not make it past the wall of solid fluff the media moguls have erected.

The red state/blue state split may have no part in the 2008 election as events unfold that shock voters into an awareness that on one thing, and one thing only, we cannot be divided, and that is our survival as a sovereign nation at war with a fanatical enemy.

[Elyse]

Waiting for those links ansel12, put them up....

It wouldn't do any good to post a link. Last time we posted a link to that site, within a few minutes they pulled the whole thread. They also have a private area, that not all posters on their board can access. That is where they post the worst stuff and you probably can't link to it anyway.

[jedward]

Note post # 13034 is just now being responded to by Barset. That’s what I meant (lol).

[BlackbirdSST]

“””My time over there was always as an agent provocateur, and merely a hobby for me. I’m watching from a distance, now, because it amuses me to do so. I have no stake in what happens there, politically or otherwise. “””

That sounds like something the howler might say. Blackbird.

[si tacuissem]

Great googly-moogly, I like the way your mind works.

umm....thanks?

[Iwo Jima]

You are making no sense, and are most disingenuous. In your original post you said,"If we can take NJ, PA, and FL, we can sustain the loss of Ohio and win. But there is only one Republican I can see, capable of winning in New Jersey."

You claim to have formed opinions that Rudy can take NJ, PA and FL, but cry that you are "lacking the powers of divination that would enable us to predict the outcome of an election almost two years away in Texas or any other State. So, you can divine about NJ, PA & FLA but not about Texas?

You fail to take into account that the very factors which make Rudy more attractive as a candidate in states such as NJ & PA make him less attractive in states like Texas, OK, Louisiana, Georgia, etc., etc., etc.

The bottom line is that if Rudy is the Republican candidate, you cannot count on Texas as a safe Republican state. It will be a battleground state, and the outcome up in the air.

[BykrBayb]

Only almost always? But I have it on good authority that we're all like minded sycophants. Then again, maybe that wasn't such a good source.

[Sam Cree]

Thanks for 14380. But I don’t see that it backs up your point?

[BlackbirdSST]

Yep, and conservatives became a laughing stock the last election by some "sitting it out." That is NOT a solution... ticked me off no end.

The BIG lie continues. Blackbird.

[EternalVigilance]

Bingo.

[EternalVigilance]

This thread currently shows 301,416+ views.

Sheesh. That's more viewers than MSNBC gets in a week.

;-)

[BykrBayb]

Do you mean to tell me Texans don’t like their governor to have mob connections? Next thing you’ll say Texans don’t even want their governor to put his gay lover in charge of security. I’m shocked!

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Mornin’ EV!