Posted on 02/25/2007 2:46:59 PM PST by wagglebee
We all know about "limosine liberals" and "San Francisco liberals" and "east coast liberals" and "Hollywood liberals" and we all say we are against them. So, why is it that we seem to have a new breed of liberalism that is festering on a conservative forum?
By my calculations it is a small number (only about 15%) of FReepers that seem to be supporting a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage, thrice-married (once to his cousing) gun-grabber for the office of President of the United States of America. And I'll be the first to admit that many of them are supporting Giuliani because they think he is the only Republican who can win. However, what about those FReepers who seem totally comfortable with Rudy's liberalism? In her book Treason, Ann Coulter describes in detail how communists infiltrated the Democrat Party and my fear is that decades from now, someone will describe how liberals infiltrated and destroyed conservativism in the name of pragmatism.
We all know that there are liberals here and I'm pretty certain that they aren't going anywhere. As a conservative, I know that conservativism consists of a belief in a strong national defense, fiscal conservativism and social conservativism, so to call these FReepers conservatives in name only (CINOs) would be incorrect because many of these FReepers don't even claim to be social conservatives. So, my question is this:
WHAT SHOULD WE CALL FREE REPUBLIC LIBERALS?
That and they'd rather not have a 757 come crashing through their or their husband's office window.
Yes, I know what we should call them:
Freeper.
Just as I call myself.
We differ, but not much.
And I am big enough to have someone who disagrees with me on some issues but who has the same whole picture in mind on my team.
So let's stop playing games here and work for our main objectives: A conservative court, second amendment rights, less to no abortion, lower taxes and less goverment intrusion.
Why? I'm just asking a very simple question.
I don't suppose you think that your juvenile insults are helping your cause any?
Have your fun playing Torquemada; I'm sure it will add dozens of lik- minded boors to your candidate's side.
Really... Should that mean something to me?
There's a schism, all right. It's been created by those who pander to the middle by turning their backs on bedrock (former) Republican principles. As the old saying goes, ya dance with the one who brung ya, but the Pubbies seem to have forgotten that pearl of wisdom. Go ahead and dance with the libs, but don't be surprised if you wind up going home alone.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Goodness. Were you really in the mood to make so many enemies? Sheesh! You ask for a name and some people react as if you asked them to be banned! Others are basically calling you a bible thumping devil!
For the record, I was going to say FRiberals, but someone beat me to it. Besides...its really hard to say! ;o)
His wisdom was true then, and it's true today. Hilliary/Obama should be your targets.
Rudiberals
“We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all.” --Ronald Reagan
I've already used the term FRino in this forum.
Amen!
Interesting. In comparison to Clinton almost all FReepers seemed conservative. Now there's a republican candidate that shares a lot of Clinton values and FReepers are gaga for him.
"Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all.” --Ronald Reagan
Well I don't know it and neither do you.
So'd you'd rather go down in flames for ideological purity and let Hillary Clinton be president.
Hot News Flash: Obama's going to be the front-runner, Hillary will be L-U-C-K-Y to get veep (I wouldn't hold my breath.)
I'm despairing over the possibility of a conservative candidate in the near term. With 1/2 the voters seemingly firmly esconced in the lib wing (q.v. Gore & Kerry's election numbers), the MSM stacking the deck, apathy (around 50% voter turnout), etc., the system seems rigged against it. Factor into that the number of people who, whether consciously or not, think government can solve problems, and/or are easily caught up in hype.
My worst fear is that it will take a disastrous lib term(HRC, e.g.), an economic downturn, huge tax increases, and/or a bad turn in the war on terror, to bring a conservative to the fore. And I don't wish any of those things on the US.
I don't see anyone catching the imagination of the public yet.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
This is just............................dumb. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, yes? To group people that support Guiliani into one camp is ignorant. I guess since I don't agree with your premise, that makes me?
Not all RINOs are created equal. McCain is just plain evil with his overt and deliberate flouting of the First Amendment. Of the other two front runners, Romney seems better than Giuliani. I'm not wild about him, but he does seem to have some sense of fiscal conservatism, and he's at least trying to court the conservative vote. Rudy seems to think it should be his by default.
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.