Posted on 02/11/2007 10:46:19 AM PST by PhiKapMom
Edited on 02/11/2007 12:14:43 PM PST by Lead Moderator. [history]
In this winter of their discontents, nostalgia for Ronald Reagan has become for many conservatives a substitute for thinking. This mental paralysis -- gratitude decaying into idolatry -- is sterile: Neither the man nor his moment will recur. Conservatives should face the fact that Reaganism cannot define conservatism.
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
Pro-lifers are merely treating Rudy EXACTLY the way Rudy himself treats the unborn.........as a disposable nuisance
Abortion is savagery beyond imagination.
Psychiatrists with principles should come forward to explain the deep-rooted psychoses of people like Rudy who get a sense of personal satisfaction unleashing abortionists with knives and suction machines on helpless unborn babies, and the threat people like Rudy pose to the rest of us.
Put in a position of power, Rudy's obsession with legalized killing may not stop with the unborn. Those of us that espouse a reverence for human life shudder at the thought of this disturbed individual, Rudy Giuliani, being unleashed on America.
From JoinRudy2008.com
Protecting Children
Acting on his belief that “One of the most important responsibilities of government is to
protect children from harm,” Mayor Giuliani worked to create the city’s first independent
child welfare agency, reducing the foster care population by promoting a record
number of adoptions, and doubling child support collections by cracking down on
deadbeat dads, and implementing a program called HealthStat, which identified
unenrolled children eligible for health insurance.
Nary a peep regarding abortion. Reckon ol' Rudy doesn't consider that an 'important responsibility of government to protect children from harm'.
The states did eventually decide slavery but it took nearly eighty years, a war, and finally coercion to pass a constitutional amendment, the 13th, that required three quarters of the states to ratify it.
Up until that time, slavery was widely an accepted practice, American people bought Africans from other Africans and treated them as inputs of production (like a capital investment), and the practice was vaguely written into the US Constitution in Article 1, Section 9.
Yes, slavery was (and still is) detestable but it has to be viewed in in context and through the perspective of the politics of the day. And don't think the Republican's hands were clean on this one: a careful reading of the Emancipation Proclamation that President Lincoln issued only was designed to free slaves in rebel states only -- it was not directed at Northern slave holders...the Proclamation didn't even have any congressional authority, either.
But now that we've jumped this wretched hurdle in history, are you seriously proposing that something like this could return or are you just reaching back in history and pulling out the ugliest example of where there was a failure that couldn't possible reoccur? Or is it that you are just not a big believer in federalism and actually prefer the leviathan that has become the federal government? Or, were you just looking for any excuse to rebut my previous post because you don't much care for me or the things that I have to write? It has to be one of these choices here; which makes you either: a) irrationally fearful of things that won't happen again b) a misguided big-government extolling 'Conservative' c) someone who wanted to get a cheap shot at me because you didn't like my views.
which is it?
If the answer is "yes", then why not participate in (or even start your own) non-profit group that uses a smarter, more cooperative approach to reducing the number of abortions performed in this country? If there are options like these, there's a much better chance to revisit and overturn Roe, no?
The republican party can leave conservatism behind if that's what they wish to do.
But they will do so at the risk of being the minority party for the rest of their existance.
No one is leaving Conservatism behind and don't know where a lot of us of advocating that social issues be returned to the States not the feds is not conservative.
Define the issues -- and the appropriate stances on said issues -- that define Conservatism, Marine.
You know, the famous bunch that originated the profound statement that: "If you can't stand the heat, just move on!" Phhhhhhhhht!!!
Sure glad I didn't conclusion jump just based on the title!!! There are three things us old guys suffer from... neuritis, neuralgia and nostalgia for another Reagan... Go Duncan Hunter!!! (he's as close to genuine conservatism with electability as you're gonna git these days)
What I liked most about President Reagan was that he was optimistic and not afraid to tell it like it is!
Yes, indeed! I agree!!!
I disagree. I always thought Reaganism DEALT with the negative but DWELT on the positive.
LOL, Good One! : )
I never did like Rockefeller.
Definitely agreed. That's my take on Newt as well.
And the solution isn't Guilianni.
We have a Bill of Rights because God-given unalienable rights are not to be taken away by any man or any state.
Your comments are nothing but a phony ploy on your part, I'm sad to say, to gloss over your candidate's gross Leftism.
The values expressed in the Torah are what makes liberty possible, nor is anything Yeshua said in conflict with it. Indeed, He said that any thought in conflict with Torah was equivalent to the deed.
I suggest you familiarize yourself with I Samuel 8.
Time and evil marches on.
Please pray for America.
If that makes sense to you now, and you admire its author's long distance vision, be aware that he had more.
For those possessing patriotism, faith, courage -- leadership qualities -- the author offered a remedy. It's a peaceful one: a process provided by America's Founding Fathers -- and by God as if in answer to a prayer. Although it's been weakened, yet it remains.
But to have a chance, it needed the right time. The remedy could only effectively begin when more than a few Americans felt that their two main political parties were comprised more of rulers than of public servants. You may not there yet, but you seem on the brink. You and I have never spoken of this before. PM me Jim.
Avoiding Sulla
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.