Posted on 02/05/2007 4:55:12 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Are you suggesting that FR and FREEPERS endorse a fringe party, now?
Are you actually advocating the Constitution Party!?
That will NOT happen.
I don't know what will win the election, but the social in social liberal can be restated as cultural liberal without changing its meaning. And being culturally liberal has precisely nothing to do with being a socialist.
I agree.
And stick him as the head of a bunch of rhinos?,No.
Term limits need to be debated,these goofs on both sides of the aisle are there way to long.
Your elected for 2 years,do your job,then go home.
If a true conservative somehow wins the GOP primaries, I'd donate my organs to his/her campaign.
"If a true conservative somehow wins the GOP primaries, I'd donate my organs to his/her campaign."
Great. You can be sure of one thing, It wont be a radical social liberal that wins the nomination.
I wouldn't donate my organ; I play it too much. Maybe a ukelele..
The Republican Party never was and never has been "THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY", per se.
So how about we start up that Freeper political party now? We've already got an infrastructure in place (the website), are well-known in all conservative circles, and have a history of organization of real-world events. We could start with local elections and work our way up.
Obviously not.
That's what I've always objected to about the acronym RINO. Republican is the name of a group whose objective is to gain and hold political power. It's hard to imagine being that in name only. However, conservative means founded on certain principles, and it is certainly possible to adopt those principles solely for the purpose of gaining office, then dropping them. That would be a CINO. And that's what we have an administration and Congress full of. CINO, not RINO.
Duncan Hunter: I'm sorry, but Americans (even just conservative Republicans) are not going to nominate someone to lead the party who has no executive experience. Let the Dems do that: Hitlery, Edwards, Kerry, Dodd, Obama, etc. etc. Far and away the best president in our lifetime was the former Governor of California. Please: no senators or representatives or trial lawyers need apply.
And while perfect conservative pro-life, pro-second amendment, pro-traditional marriage credentials would be nice, there aren't many of those with any kind of executive or leadership experience around. I remember in the 1970's wondering if Republicans would allow Reagan to be their nominee -- after all, he was divorced... he was part of the Hollywood elite... his kids were a bit wacky. Some people even wondered about his commitment to the pro-life movement.
What I'm suggesting is focus on the first principles: this country needs a proven experienced leader. One who is prepared to fight the war on terror at home and abroad. One who believes in limited government and "republican" principles: states rights; strict constructionist; low tax rates; personal responsibility; eliminating pork in the budget; focusing on top priorities and seeing that they are accomplished.
Rudy.
That sounds like Newt to me, Rudy. And the socons will submarine him in an instant.
> Actually there is a party that supports their beliefs of
> low taxes and unencumbered immoral behavior: The
> Libertarians.
Once upon a time, there was a libertarian wing of the Republican party.
Maybe driving out the people you agree with 60% of the time wasn't the greatest tactical move?
LOL. No. I'm suggesting we stick to the pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-gun, pro-individual freedom, small government, low tax, strong national defense principles and shun the liberal candidates. You know. Kinda like we would expect from conservative REPUBLICANS.
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.