Just a reminder: Free Republic is a conservative site

[Jim Robinson]

Just a reminder: Free Republic is a conservative site. We fight for conservative principles, values and causes. We defend the Constitution. We defend our borders. We defend our God-given rights. We are opposed to the liberal/socialist/Marxist agenda for America. We do not willingly give up ground to the Marxists.

It's true that the illegal immigration issue is very discouraging, and I don't know if anyone has a solution that will appeal to conservatives and yet manage to get by Democrat obstructionism, ie, a filibuster, but I don't see that as any reason to give up everything. We should not allow it to rip us apart and destroy the movement. We fight on.

We hold the majority. We continue working as hard as we possibly can to elect as many conservatives as we possibly can. We build a conservative majority that can overcome the Democrats and the RINOs. We do not willingly give up any seats to Democrats. We add seats. Preferably, conservative seats.

I would also like to remind everyone, that Free Republic does not condone racism and does not advocate violence. We exercise our first amendment rights to free speech and peaceable assembly. We do not condemn people because of their race, religion, ethnicity, skin color, etc. We do not advocate civil war, anarchy, or an overthrow of the government. We do not advocate shooting illegals or mining the borders. We do not appreciate people coming across our borders illegally, but as conservatives, we do not issue racial epithets or threaten them with violence or bodily harm.

And, yes, we are at war. And we do support our troops and their mission. We also respect our commander-in-chief and are mindful that when people disrespect him, it hurts troop morale. We do not appreciate the mainstream media's attempts to destroy America's will to fight and we do not do anything to assist the Democrats and their accomplices in the media in their treasonous mission of undermining the war effort by providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

And despite our dissatisfaction and disappointments in regards to the illegal immigration issue, we recognize that it is not the last issue on earth and there are plenty of other reasons not to allow the Marxist Democrats to retake power.

I'll list a few issues (by no means and exhaustive list) that will be adversely affected by Marxist/Democrats in power:

Islamofascism/terrorism
National Security/Defense
The United Nations (as in their control over us)
The Supreme Court
The federal judiciary
The legislative agenda
The right to life
Marriage between one man, one woman
The family
Education
Health care
Private property
Taxation
Oil/energy
The right to keep and bear arms
The right to freedom of religion
The right to self-governance
All of our God-given rights
The Constitution
The Republic
Liberty itself

Do not get so discouraged that we give it all up. It could take generations to get it back. If ever.

"Securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" is our duty.

[hawkaw]

Thanks for your post.

[fairtrader]

You voted for John Anderson over Reagan ?

Your penance will be 50 "Hail Mary's" and 20 "Our Fathers" and your sin will be forgiven.

[proud American in Canada]

Thanks, Jim. I haven't been around much, but I can imagine that the immigration threads have been tough.

Thanks again for making this possible.

[Broker]

Tough love is OK. Anarchy is a step in the progression to chaos. We can't allow this shining house on the hill we call American to collapse. Once it is gone, we will be as lost as the Knights of Arthur's round table in the dark ages and clouds of oblivion.

[1903A3]

I happen to be an " Europoster " from Belgium to be specific
I also happen to love the U.S.A
Partly because I remember our debt to you partly because I am sick and tired by our Socialist Euro-Government corruption and incompetence
Partly because I understand that the Western nation have to hang together or " will be hanged separately "
Mostly because while not perfect your nation remains the best hope for Humanity and most specifically so for any man who calls himself " Free "

[Skooz]

Well said, Jim.

It's amazing that we sometimes need such a reminder.

[wagglebee]

Thanks for the reminder Jim.

There are a lot of people here who are operating under the notion that libertarianism and conservativism are the same thing, obviously there is some overlap of principles, but there are just as many glaring differences.

[cvq3842]

A good reminder!

Thanks.

[reagan_fanatic]

I don't see any reason to fear the evolutionists. I have faith in the Creator.

Well put, Jim.

[Sloth]

I agree, voting 3rd party thinking you are proving some point is only helping the dems and hurting yourself.

I have asked this question before & never gotten a satisfactory answer.

If the GOP knows that they will get our votes every time regardless of the candidate, then what possible incentive would they have to nominate conservative candidates instead of RINOs that will attract more center/left votes?

[patriciaruth]

Perot was a loon. His work on MIA's, though wonderful, didn't give him the marbles or experience to handle the Presidency. Maybe one of these days you'll look back and decide that "can kicking" is not the best way to decide on a President.

For myself, I regret I voted for John Anderson, even though I waited to see how the vote was going (Carter was conceding before I went to the polls.) before actually committing to a third party vote.

[Vaquero]

Hey you brought it up first. whether you wanted to hijack the thread or not, the plain fact is that you made a statement. It was not a very pretty statement either. You denegrated a whole bunch of conservatives here whether you consider them as such or not.

Not very Christian of you.

[Echo Talon]

Cool, I was kind of young during Reagan's administration im 31 now, but i remember Reagan being a classy dude. :)

[Echo Talon]

oh, BTW i have never heard of "John Anderson"...?

[LibLieSlayer]

Yes, I understand fully. My point was there is NO WAY we can replace Lincoln Chaffee with a true conservative. His State will not vote one into office. At least his number allows us to control the committees in the Senate, and the agenda the Senate tries to put forth. To elect a dim by backing someone that cannot win, is to aid the enemy dim.

LLS

[BigSkyFreeper]

I disagree, he set a tone that made people want a change in leadership, an end to the status quo, that kicked to the curb a number of democrats, and since Perot didn't have candidates ready to fill their spots, people voted for republicans instead. He may not of effected it but he certainly caused it.

You can disagree all you want, but the Republicans took control of the House in 1994, during the midterms, and Perot didn't effect that at all, because he was no where on the ballot. The GOP won the House because they nationalized the midterm election, even though that election wasn't about electing a president. The GOP is at it's strongest when they run on issues that matter most to an entire nation.  The GOP took control of the Senate in 2002 for the same reason as the GOP took the House in 1994, because of nationalizing the election, and because the democrats were weak on national defense.

My original point stands. Perot gave us 8 years of Clinton BECAUSE of what you just said.  The democrats lost because of the democrats.  The republicans lost because of Perot.

[fairtrader]

He was the last 3rd party presidential candidate(1980) prior to Perot.

[usmcobra]

Tell the truth, just as you say Perot was a loon, you didn't vote for Reagan because he was an actor and a former democrat.

[patriciaruth]

Your penance will be 50 "Hail Mary's" and 20 "Our Fathers"

Said them long ago.

The point of my confession is to show voters, especially younger ones, that you can really regret a third party vote.