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.

[Jhoffa_]

I guess I was born with the tacky gene.

I even wear plaid boxers.

[wizzler]

Stepping in late here. But I wanted to say that Federal Farmer has been absolutely correct throughout this thread -- devastatingly correct, judging from the defensiveness he's provoked from others.

It's as if people are clinging to this old idea about the Republican Party, the values it once stood for, and the actions that appropriately backed up those values. Apparently, WANTING to believe that the Republican Party remains the leading light of Constitutional principle and freedom and small government causes eyes to glaze over when confronted with the actual reality. So we see these agitated defenses of the Republican Party -- all because of what Republicans USED to be. Seems a lot of people are wedded to the party, not to the principle the party used to represent.

At this point, supporting the Republican Party is not about voting for the principles named above. Voting Republican is, in most cases, just voting for a name -- a name that no longer stands for that which it used to stand.

Yes: For many, it will hurt -- on a genuine emotional level -- to abandon the party that once inspired such hope and served as a fundamental part of one's self-identity. But ultimately that pain shouldn't be any worse than that little pang of nostalgia felt when driving by your old childhood home, long abandoned to some other family.

Again, Federal Farmer has been dead on here. Through this whole thread, his logic and clear-headedness stand like a kind of calm glow next to the knee-jerk, obstinate posts directed back at him.

[dcwusmc]

It's a stretch, but what comes closest is the charge to build and maintain "post roads."

[dcwusmc]

Like the right to own property, free from goobermint confiscation through "asset forfeiture"?

Change your habits/your lifestyle

Like the right to be secure in our homes and persons, free from ninja suited rambo wannabes breaking in our houses and shooting unarmed people?

Change your habits/your lifestyle and your friends

Like the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure, like those conducted at road blocks and traffic stops?

Change your habits/your lifestyle and your friends and those you associate with

All these things and more are the consequences of your beloved WOsD.

Nope.

They are a result of chocies yo nake regarding your habits/your lifestyle and your friends and those you choose to associate with ...

Hey, sheepdip _Jim, as long as we're all changing our lifestyles to conform to YOUR specs, dno't forget to list ALL the changes we need to make: Like, don't own property that can be coveted by drug warriors and "justify" a raid that will get you killed trying to defend yourself and your wife... as did the late Donald Scott. I'm sure he would have greatly benefitted from your advice.

[MrLeRoy]

WW II: Internment of Japanese and German aliens, discontinued after the war. Wage and price controls, rationing of basic commodities by government order, discontinued after the war. Conversion of private property in the form of industrial plants, into war production, discontinued after the war. Censorship of journalist reports, meaning REAL censorship, with a black pen, discontinued after the war. Servicemen's mail opened and censored for sensitive information, discontinued after the war.

VietNam War: As soon as the end of the war was in sight, the military Draft was ended.

The question wasn't whether government EVER withdrew from "grey areas" but whether it TYPICALLY does. There are numerous counterexamples, such as at http://www.independent.org/tii/news/990700Higgs.html and in the book Crisis and Leviathan:

"In 1987, economic historian Robert Higgs published Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government. The book was a watershed event in the study of the growth of the American state. Higgs brilliantly and consistently argued that the rise of the modern mega-state can be traced to one phenomena: government's reactions to crises - imaginary as well as real. And the two types of crises which led to leviathan, according to Higgs, were economic recessions and wars, with the latter of the two being the more important. Indeed, he argued that war was the primary instrument for the collectivization of the United States in the twentieth century.

"America's involvement in the two world wars not only laid the groundwork for the New Deal, but was necessary for its completion. Only through World War II could FDR gain the power necessary to complete his domestic agenda; not even the Great Depression was sufficiently exigent to justify the massive taxation and regulation that was central to the development and implementation of the New Deal." - The Michigan Review, 9/27/95

[jimt]

How do you find a sniper escaping a scene without stopping people to look and see? How do you stop a terrorist cell without watching them, collecting evidence, obtaining search warrants and going in?

Uh, Clancy, I was talking about road blocks in the drug war. A sniper gives the police probable cause to stop and search anybody remotely likely.

Observation, collecting evidence, getting search warrants, arresting suspects - these have all been part of American police work for the last century. No knock raids, flash bang grenades, ninja suited masked men armed with miltary equipment - these are new, and way overused.

Lon Horiuchi shooting an unarmed woman from hiding 300 yards away is not my idea of "law enforcement".

Police arresting armed robbers, murderers, etc., is. Good police work is essential to liberty.

Please don't extrapolate one to the other.

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

The link below for starters, and the question of Clinton and Waco,Elian etc...etc.. then the current President and homeland security and search warrants, and as Fox reported 'secret courts' under homeland security federal laws. Terrorists are on our soil so I agree go after them, but does anybody know how many federal agencies, usurption of rights and $$$$$$$$$ this is taking? Is terrorisim leaving us free, is the question. Why are our borders not more regulated and the INS called to carpet?

PLUS the United Nations and NATO...

Move over Constitution, we've got U.N. charter: war maneuvers play into hands of internationalists

[Protagoras]

Whatever. I'll take the Republicans over the Democrats any day of the week, thank you.

Ok, you can have George Ryan in Illinois.

[Protagoras]

Then why is CulturalJihad still around?

Was there a reply? If so I missed it.

[Protagoras]

A radical, violent theocracy is the only agenda of some people who pose as conservatives on this site.

[IMHO]

There was a couple, but luckily nobody took me seriously. CJ even showed up, but he hasn't addressed this yet.

[Protagoras]

Radical theocracy hiding behind a conservative website.
Hatred becomes love, up is down.
Don't pray for your enemies, bear false witness against them.

[archy]

However, I also strongly favor flooding the drug market with lethally poisinous 'look-alike' drugs to kill the druggies.

So,you think it is Constitutional for the gooberment to murder "undesirable people"? You ARE _Jim.

Not so. _Jim would surely be aware that a very large percentage of the illicit narcotics distributed in the US are transshipped into this country with the complete knowledge and acquiesence, at least, if not the active complicity of the U.S. federal government. The *war on drugs* is just the matter of the elimination of a few too-independent competitors or suppliers like Noriega, once partners in the racket who got too big for their britches. Anything that would effectively reduce the number of customers, whether poisoning the supply or effectively reducing the demand through more effective rehab schemes than have been advanced so far would hardly be desired by those in government receiving a cut of the profits.

On the other hand, making birth control pills addictive could have some interesting societal results....

-archy-/-

[Jim Robinson]

Gray Davis, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and a state legislature dominated by socialist, homosexual Democrats and other assorted fruits and nuts. End of story.

[Protagoras]

Dueling bad guys?

George Ryan put the finishing touchs on the ruination of my state. Lied about taxes and raised them the most in history. Set aside the legislative branch and commuted the death sentences of hundreds of murderers. Ran a huge criminal enterprise and coddled up to Richie Daley at every chance. The list goes on and on and includes things that would make Grey Davis envious.

When you paint with a broad brush, you get a sloppy job and undermine conservative goals. End of story.

[Jim Robinson]

I do not want to allow the Democrats to retake the majority. Period.

[Protagoras]

I do not want to allow the Democrats to retake the majority. Period.

Neither do I. The difference seems to be, I don't support liberals just because they are Republicans. The line has to be drawn somehwere, at least for me.

[Jim Robinson]

Yes, we all have to draw a line somewhere. Mine at the moment is drawn to keep the Democrats out of control.

[Wrigley]

George Ryan was a disaster. I don't see the IL GOP recovering for a long, long time.