..Here We Go Again...
Posted on 02/04/2007 11:08:45 AM PST by Clintonfatigued
For this reason, contrary to conventional wisdom, a victory by Rudy Giuliani would strengthen even the socially conservative agenda in the long run. As the new Fox Dynamics Poll shows, 65 percent of Americans would be “comfortable” with a Rudy Giuliani administration. Being comfortable is a major step in the right direction. Americans might actually listen to him when gives the State of the Union (without a teleprompter no less, as he usually speaks with note cards or does so extemporaneously). A Giuliani administration that would focus on fighting the Islamic Extremists, reducing the size and scope of government, handling crisis, and putting strict constructionists on the bench who will interpret the law properly will draw more support from more people in the short term. This will translate to more understanding of conservative policies on other matters because individuals will have more patience to read the conservative ramblings of columnists and pundits. In the long run, as a result this will turn into more votes. As Winston Churchill is often quoted, "If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain"...
Due to the challenges facing this country, this election cycle we Republicans need to nominate someone with an actual record of accomplishment of tackling seemingly intractable problems. As George Will said on “This Week,” “His eight years as mayor of New York were the most successful episode of conservative governance in this country in the last 50 years, on welfare and crime particularly." Giuliani, more than any other candidate (Romney comes the closest) has the record of taking on major institutions and reforming them.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
So after 180 AD, the Roman Empire was at once degaying and decaying?
During the Republic, homosexuals were barely tolerated. To be "greek" was a bad thing.
Glad to be of assistance! ;-)
Rome lasted almost 900 years before they embraced 'gaydom', Rome was sacked about 200 years later.
I never took cognizance of the gay gene or other "bad" genes with the apple before, but with your help, I'm there! Thanks again.
That's quite safe to say, yes. Sexual mores became steadily more restrictive during Late Antiquity.
That's a big part of why I chose a starting date two generations after the fall of the Republic and during the height of Roman Hellenization.
It is sort of like global warming. Let gayness or CO2 out of the bottle, and even as one puts it back in, it is too late. The die is cast. But hey, we got 200 years or more left per the Roman model, so it works for me.
The way I read the abortion decisions and the homosexuality decisions by the SCOTUS, they're saying that neither the federal government NOR the states can outlaw consensual homosexual activity or first trimester abortions.
In other words, they're saying that the people did not delegate these issues to the feds nor the states, and neither have the power to outlaw them.
Non-regulating is the exact opposite of regulating.
I heard that there was a bridge in Brooklyn for sale as well...
Good point. It is common among conservatives to use acceptance of homosexuality as an indicator of imminent societal destruction, with Greece and Rome as the main examples.
Unfortunately, the high points of both civilizations more or less coincided with the acceptance of homosexuality, which declined in rough parallel with the civilizations themselves.
..Here We Go Again...
We have the internet. It can go faster now.
Every state that had an established church abolished it either before or within a year of ratification of the Constitution but one, Connecticut.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion#Former_state_churches_in_British_North_America
I suppose you'd support your personal denomination becoming the established church of the United States?
Reading comprehension a problem? I never said they had an established church, rather a tax for the support of churches.
Five states kept state tax support of religion for many more years. The Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Northwest Ordinance both REQUIRED public lands be set aside for churches. They 'admixed' a lot.
Of course Rino Rudy TOOK the money from NARAL and raised money from gay groups while in drag.
Bush is not a Democrat. He may not be whatever you wish in a President, but he is not a Democrat.
If you think it can't get any worse, then you're an optimist.
Oh, my, someone forgot to take their "nice" pill today.:)
Which five states are these?
Sorry sweatpea, do your own research. The evidence of 'admixture' is all over the records. Even a blindman could find it.
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.