I’m Tired of Neo-Cons Being Tired of Conservatives (Rant alert)

Aw, Shucks southern News and Links ^ | 29 January 2004 | Jeff Adams

[Warren_Piece]

aren't you the one that's buying the whole "they have to be leftist to be conservative later" tripe?

We agree on this. On Law and order they would say "Offers facts not in evidence!" The same is true when the other side says "A democrat would be better because a Republican congress would stop him". Both are guesses. Maybe good guesses, but nobody can predict the future. It's better to deal with facts. I voted for GWB in 2000 with eyes wide open, knowing he would be less conservative than me on some issues. Anybody paying attention in 2000 knew it. Heck, he was floating an immigration proposal back then. He proposed the medicare overhaul. The education bill. These were there for all to see during the campaign. I measured the factors, and decided he was still better than Gore (And I'm from TN - you're welcome!)

And he's better than anybody else that will be on the ballot this year - including Libertarian and Constitution. Anyone who campaigns on bringing the boys home to avoid "foreign entanglements" is not living in reality.

[Abe Froman]

Since President Bush has had almost zero effect on the domestic abortion issue what difference does it make?

Social issues are the president's area of least influence, and he has shown that he will not even use his one method of influence to force the issue anyway---convincing his caucus in Congress to stonewall the Democrats into voting for his judicial nominees. If he won't even do it for the circuit judges, there's no way he'll do it for the SC judges when the time comes.

Tell me this----if Kerry wins, will any MORE babies be aborted than otherwise would be if Bush won again? How many American babies are alive today because of Bush? Oh, I forgot, the partial birth abortion ones. In other words, >1%. So that's the best the Republican party can do? We simply need to accept the other 99.x% as a political reality? Besides, my conscience will be clear with respect to this issue. There are plenty of uncomprimising third-party candidates. Abortion will only stop when enough hard-line principled candidates are voted into office anyway. Bush is not one of them.

[tpaine]

redlipstick wrote:

JimRob put it so well last night. It's a shame that thread ended up in
the SBR.

___________________________________________


Who do you think put that thread in the Backroom?
- And why?
299 tpaine

______________________________________



People like YOU got it stuck in the back room, because you are incapable of having a civil discussion.

---

Completely false comment..

Even ONE uncivil word from me, and I would have been history..

In fact, I'd bet you can't show me an uncivil comment on that thread by any of those who stood up for the principles behind Currys effort.
-- I won't hold my breath while waiting.

[OWK]

You seem to have the opinion that a political label is the goal.

And perhaps for you it is.

But for me it is not.

My goal is to prevent the subjugation of my liberty, prevent the enslavement of my children to the crushing debt which grows before them every second, shrink the size of government to the miniscule size authorized, and stuff it back into the constitutional box from whence it escaped.

Now I realize that you could give a crap less about these things... and that you're just fine with social programs, crushing debt, and unchecked government growth as long as the guy driving the bus has the right letter on his team jersey... but some of us aren't.

Some of us care about greater things.

Get over it.

[OWK]

I'd like your direct answer to post 484, if you get a chance.

[EllaMinnow]

Why do you keep posting my remark, and deleting JimRob's post?

I think it ended up in the SBR because the sight of unappeaseable martyrs lining up to say. "Please, sir, may I have another?" got to be too much for even the strongest stomach.

[Abe Froman]

That the truth hurts doesn't mean one shouldn't speak it. I choose to be a bit entertaining in my wording.

Before you get all indignant on me remember you suggested that my principles are evidence of my need for professional help. Again, quite similar to the liberal line of thought.

[dmzTahoe]

"I think it ended up in the SBR because the sight of unappeaseable martyrs lining up to say. "Please, sir, may I have another?" got to be too much for even the strongest stomach."

LOL...that's funny

[Tamzee]

Kay... I guess this means you will be asking to have your accounts pulled?

:::::::::::::::::::::::::

"Any person claiming to be conservative who is not motivated to keep the Democrats out of power after knowing EXACTLY what they will do with it if given the opportunity, has a real problem with reality. They're either political martyrs, have not been paying attention to what the Democrat candidates have been promising they will do if elected, or are ignoring (or are totally or willfully ignorant of) the history of the last seventy years, or are incredibly dense or insane, or have a morbid desire to toil their lives away in the misery of a Liberal Hell! Any person who would support a third party candidate who has absolutely zero chance of winning even one state or even a single electoral vote is so politically naive and devoid of the brainpower that The Creator so graciously endowed upon them, that it's not even worth wasting pixels on. "

"And I can tell you, that I probably won't be wasting very many more pixels on people who are coming to FR to trash and bash our candidates and or to trash and bash and drive away the very posters I'm trying to attract. If the intent of third party supporters is to cause as much hell and discontent on our forum and to inflict as much damage to FR as they possibly can, well, I can assure you we will have many fewer third party posters left on FR very soon. The LePur colony can have them. Thank you very much."

"It might be different if there was a primary involved. These kind of battles need to take place as part of the process of selecting the best person to run. In this case, there will be no primary. God willing and barring any major disasters, George W. Bush will be the candidate. So it will either be Bush or one of the Democrats that gets elected. No one else stands a snowball's chance in hell. And I've given every person on this web site plenty of advance notice (I've been saying it for the last three years) that FR will NOT be used to help replace Bush with a Democrat. Period. End of story."

"Again, if that is your intent, leave now or get yourself banned later. Excessive and repetitive attacks on our candidates or our posters will not be tolerated. Try your luck at DUh or LibertyPost. In presidential politics, they are interchangeable."


712 posted on 02/01/2004 6:55:33 PM EST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1069214/posts?page=712#712

[Dead Corpse]

Some of us care about greater things.

Well put...

[Abe Froman]

"So please, Mr. Nader, run again and Pied Piper the less mathematically-inclined leftists off to a third party :-)"

No one has explained to me the value of voting for Bush over a true conservative yet. Bush should change his affiliation to the DNC and get it over with. I suppose you would too and in the process reveal your true colors---that you vote on something other than platforms. Good looks, likeability, who knows? You don't care about your liberty, you just want to be on the winning team, even if in reality we all lose anyway.

I have explained my positions thorougly. Your turn. I asked you before, what would it take to change your vote? Your silence betrays your blind devotion.

[Dead Corpse]

Wow. I can't believe Jim nuked KC. Not that I liked KC, but wow. And threatening Laz like that? Musta REALLY gotten on Jims bad side. Laz is like a fixture around here.

I guess questioning the party line is no longer acceptable around here.

[Abe Froman]

If I get my account pulled because of my integrity so be it. I disagree with Jim Robinson on this issue. I have also explained my principled stances and disagreements with Bush so that they may be examined and rebutted or even corrected. So far they have not. There MUST come a point at which the leftward drift of the Republican candidate is so far that principled conservatives will revolt. Otherwise the platform of the Democrats today will continue to be the platform of the Republicans tomorrow, as it has been for the past 70 years. Bush, taken as a whole, on his record, is approximately equivalent to FDR, yet he's a republican. I must accept this? I see some of the worst possible things happen under Bush yet I must vote for him because he has an (R) next to his name and somebody assures me that it would be even worse if it was a (D)? Well, those things are even worse than what the last (D) did when he held the office so on what basis should I believe that argument??

Right now I am toiling my life away in liberal hell created by a Republican, so what difference does it make? If conservatives are not allowed to say when enough is enough then it will never end. Principles are never upheld by comprimise.

[dmzTahoe]

"...FR will NOT be used to help replace Bush with a Democrat."

The intent of those disgruntled with Bush is to make our unrest unknown, in hopes that the Republican leadership does not take the conservative base for granted. That leadership will never know the unrest that exists if that dissension in the ranks is muffled. For the opportunity to voice our dissent in hopes of steering the wayward ship back to the right, we thank JimRob for this forum.

That said, If the Republican candidate in future elections spews forth more liberal venom than the Democrat, will JimRob support the Republican because of the "R" after the name?

We must demand the best and the most when it comes to conservative ideals. We can always settle for less and compromise. But when we start off accepting mediocrity and diluted conservative principles, the result of compromise is liberal values.

This would not be so frustrating if we didn't believe the GWB had it in him to steer to the right in all, not some, matters. Set the course to the right, at least GWB, and if we have to settle for anything less, it won't be way off course.

[OWK]

I guess this means you will be asking to have your accounts pulled?

Do any of you people have the stones to stand on your own words, rather than kissing Jim's butt all the time.

It's kinda sad really.

[Neets]

Do any of you people have the stones to stand on your own words,

Well, actually yes. And they have. Numerous time over, on numerous threads.

But you see OWK, whenever they do post their own words, their own stand, whatever you wanna call it, the 5%ers jump in and start calling them Bushbots, and tell them they have brown stuff all over their nose, and so on and so forth.

Now you don't know anyone who belongs to that 5% group, do you?

[dbwz]

The quantum leap to the left aside, the biggest threat to freedom I see is the Kremlin-style, toe the party line mentality that has emerged in our national politics. Don't question, don't think. Our leaders know better, our motives are pure, we know what's best for you. If you do not conform, we will punish you in a hundred different ways. Those who control by threat or intimidation are not leaders at all.

The once proud-to-be-self-reliant right have gotten lazy. I see plenty of folks here who admit that they're less than delighted, but who seem resigned to the fact that they have no other option but to hold the nose and pull a lever.

Who works for whom here?

[Dead Corpse]

If by "5%" you mean the type of person I was refering to back in post 406 of this thread. I'd be proud to be counted in that same 5% that stood up to the British Empire and Founded a country.

Rather than the rest of the Torries more interested in appeasement.

[dmzTahoe]

Count me in...I'm a 5%'er, and proud of it!