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?
:-)
If all I’m given is the choice between horse poop and cow poop to eat.
I’ll starve.
I’ll be there on election day voting for conservative candidates. Both in the Primaries and in the general. Not for some limp wristed dimlight maggot that the Republican Party feels I should support.
If they Republican Party gets it’s ass handed to it again in the 2008 general election they only have themselves to blame.
I will no longer compromise.”
Excellent post Leatherneck. Worth repeating! BTW, that “horse poop” and “cow poop” analogy cracked me up—but so true.
“Thing is, “none of the above” isn’t a choice. If the choice in the general election is between Rudy and Hillary, ONE of the two WILL be President, no matter how much you detest them both, and you will have the live with the consequences of that.”
Missed this part sorry.
No I won’t have to live with the consequences of a damned thing. The Republican Party will.
A choice between horse poop and cow poop isn’t a choice.
Thanks for posting that. Saving it for later so I don’t have to remember who posted it for me to find it.
“Thing is, “none of the above” isn’t a choice. If the choice in the general election is between Rudy and Hillary, ONE of the two WILL be President, no matter how much you detest them both, and you will have the live with the consequences of that.”
Missed this part sorry.
No I won’t have to live with the consequences of a damned thing. The Republican Party will.
A choice between horse poop and cow poop isn’t a choice.
Thanks :)
The lesser of two evils is still evil. And nowhere in my Bible do I find any excuse for supporting evil in any way, shape or form.
Stand for what's right, and leave the consequences to God. That's my philosophy, and I think it jives with the founders'.
"Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair; the rest is in the hands of God." - George Washington
Other than their naughty bits, what are these differences between Rillary and Hudy? I keep hearing that they're different, but I can't see where that difference lies. On issue after issue, they're like two peas in a pod.
Yet, we are supposed to believe that once this thread dies, the taunting, insulting tactics from The New and Improved FR Thugs™ will end.
I don't believe it for a moment. Their behavior is best described as internet gangbangers. Their reign of terror has only just begun.
What I find most interesting is that none of The New and Improved FR Thugs™ will share with us their conservative activism credentials. They become belligerent when asked to share something positive that they have contributed to the conservative cause. Back in the old days, they would be labeled Trolls for pounding out drivel on their keyboards with nothing to back it up. Today, it is a badge of honor to have done nothing more than mock and taunt people.
Times have changed, indeed.
I'm not ready to be zoted yet.
There are some very critical flaws in the theory that has deemed Hillary’s nomination a foregone conclusion.
Note: ALL OF THESE STATISTICS ARE BASED ON YEARS OTHER THAN WHEN A DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT IS RUNNING FOR REELECTION.
The Democrats almost never nominate the person who is the “clear favorite” a year out from the nomination. They did do it in 2000; however, Algore was the incumbent VP and he didn’t face much competition.
The last Democrat nominated who was not the incumbent VP who was the “clear favorite” a year out from the nomination was Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and again in 1956.
And it is worth noting that Gore and Stevenson both LOST.
The last Democrat nominated who was not the incumbent VP who was the “clear favorite” a year out from the nomination and actually went on to win the presidential election was Grover Cleveland in 1892. However, Cleveland had previously been POTUS which makes him more of an “astrix” than anything else.
So, who was last Democrat nominated who was not the incumbent VP or former president who was the “clear favorite” a year out from the nomination and actually went on to win the presidential election? That would be Andrew Jackson in 1828.
The only people who've been shown the door have been those who had to say something liberal in order to say something good about Rudy. Say something good and conservative about Rudy and you'll be just fine.
...You'll also be the first to have done so!
I like to eat peanut butter cookies while lurking through your hurricane threads :)
Bump, thanks for posting that list of candidates and how you view them.
Liberals bash conservatives left and right, and not a peep out of you. But when they get their butts handed to them, you whine to high heaven.
***That’s about how I’ve viewed it for the last few months, until this thread. Thanks for posting that.
You put it very well. Horse or cow manure. Not gonna swallow either one.
That's my worry as well. Only time will answer that.
So, I want to apologize for every snarky comment I’ve ever made to you, and I make a commitment now to use far more wisdom and restraint in how I respond to you in the future. Please accept my apologies.
***Somehow that post to you that said you represent everything that’s wrong with Free Republic just rings hollow after seeing this. I’ll keep praying for you and for Free Republic.
The Sons of Liberty always were a mob. A restrained one, but a mob. Learn some history.
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.