Vanity: Is protecting Constitution no longer goal of Freerepublic.com?

Me

[libertylady]

I have recently noticed that the home page of Free Republic no longer has the icon at the top which states that one of the goals of this website is protecting our freedom and our Constitution. Can anyone help me shed some light on this? I would hope that this is a temporary change and not an official declaration made by the staff of this website. With the lack of articles and lack of alarm posted on this website about the Draconian Patriot 1 and Patriot Act 2 I have began to wonder about whether this site really does support the Constitution.

[Bahbah]

Not sure, but I think Jim Robinson has had to take off all extraneous things to keep the site going while he looks into the source of the operating problems. FR's mission will not change.

[bassmaner]

If you havn't noticed, the moderators have been moving anti-"War on Drugs" postings to the Smokey Backroom almost immediately. That's unfortunate, as JimRob himself once posted a lengthy comment about the unconstitutionality of the federal component of the WOD.

Sometimes I wonder if FR is beginning to morph from a truly conservative website to a wholly-owned subsidiary of the RNC.

[FourtySeven]

Yes.

[steve50]

Sometimes I wonder if FR is beginning to morph from a truly conservative website to a wholly-owned subsidiary of the RNC

My question is what has the RNC became a wholly owned subsidiary of?

[I Am Not A Mod]

Free Republic Highlights, 2/28/03

[robertpaulsen]

Therein lies the reason that WOD threads end up in the backroom. Libertylady is talking about protecting our freedom and our Constitution, even mentioning the Patriot Act 1 & 2, and you jump right into the WOD.

It's in the backroom because there's more to the Constitution than your right to toke up. Maybe now those issues will get more prominent attention.

[_Jim]

the home page of Free Republic no longer has the icon at the top which states that one of the goals of this website is protecting our freedom and our Constitution.

The consitution as it has been known is history, it's through, it's suitable *only* for turning into TP now and the greatest experiment on earth invovving freedom is over.

I'm kidding!

I think, with the internet, that we have entered an even more challenging and productive period in our country - and thank God we have a Constitution ...

[eskimo]

With the lack of articles and lack of alarm posted on this website about the Draconian Patriot 1 and Patriot Act 2 I have began to wonder about whether this site really does support the Constitution.

My God, the silence in response to your interrogative is indeed deafening.

Perhaps it is true that succumbing to political party fanaticism can actually preclude ones desire for liberty and also ones sense of duty to preserve, protect and defend the law of the land.

[_Jim]

the moderators have been moving anti-"War on Drugs" postings

Let me do a Boolean logic transformation on this phrase:

anti-"War On Drugs" ==> "pro-drugs"

[BureaucratusMaximus]

My question is what has the RNC became a wholly owned subsidiary of?

I don't know, you'd think most people would demand as much accountability from the RNC (especially if they're donating money to them, as I am) as they do from the Dems; much less any of our elected leaders. Some people are satisfied being RNC cheerleaders (a.k.a. Bushbots).

GO Team GO!

[BureaucratusMaximus]

My question is what has the RNC became a wholly owned subsidiary of?

I don't know, you'd think most people would demand as much accountability and conservatism from the RNC as they do from the Dems; much less any of our elected leaders. Some people are satisfied being RNC cheerleaders.

GO Team GO!

[Steve Van Doorn]

”anti-"War On Drugs" ==> "pro-drugs"”

As you know the KLA, al-Qaeda and all the Muslim extremist groups are financed by drug money.

You would be correct to say, ‘if no one used drugs they wouldn’t be getting the finances.’
You would also be correct to say, ‘if drugs were legalized the money from drugs would dry up.’

[bmwcyle]

libertylady signed up 2001-03-28

bmwcyle signed up 1998-10-15

Wisdom and time says your question is NO.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

Bump

[Destructor]

Break out the tin foil!

[Jim Robinson]

The overall mission of Free Republic is the same as before and the same as it will always be: Defending the Constitution.

At the moment, IMHO, one of the most important things that can be done to defend the Constitution is to replace the liberal activist judiciary that is destroying it. There is only one way to do that, replace as many Democrats as possible. And we are doing all we can to keep that process moving forward.

Thank you very much.

[steve50]

The so called war on drugs is in fact a war on our Constitution. Can't find the authority in there anywhere to wage it, as evidenced by the amendment to prohibit alcohol.
Import and commerce regulations are allowed, and are enough to do the job.

If you agree with the distortions used to allow it, you must agree with them on various other issues as well.

[noexcuses]

There is only one way to do that, replace as many Democrats as possible

Amen

[savedbygrace]

Your logic is peccable.

Awright, I know it's not a word, but if it were, it would be the opposite of impeccable. IOW, flawed. Like your last sentence.