Posted on 03/03/2007 5:38:03 PM PST by ZULU
"Therefore, we wholeheartedly support the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes on known terrorist states and organizations that are believed to present a clear threat to our freedom or national security. We support our military, our troops and our Commander-in-Chief and we oppose turning control of our government back over to the liberals and socialists who favor appeasement, weakness, and subserviency. We do not believe in surrendering to the terrorists as France, Germany, Russia and Spain have done and as Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton and the Democrats, et al, are proposing.
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty. "
Bump.
Then why are all you "conservatives" trying to tell the GOP who to pick for their next candidate?
Amen.
And you are not alone in your opinions.
:-)
LBT
-=-=-
It has been said the problem with Republicans is that we eat our young.
I'll support the GOP nominee and rest easy knowing the nominee will be better than any the Dems could put forth.
I do want a candidate with vision and a set of core values, not just a series of issue positions. There is a reason for that, of course, and you probably know what it is.
When we elected W. none of us knew how much terrorism would affect his presidency. There are some who can probably rightly say they thought it was coming, but it was not really much of an issue to the electorate as a whole. This was possibly because of Clinton's miserable record in that area and so the media never allowed it to be an issue.
Who knows what issues will come up between 2008 and 2016? I certainly don't and I pay attention to those things. So, I want someone who is a conservative and understands why they are conservative. That shouldn't be too much to ask, but I believe I may not get my wish.
(Sigh.)
I think it's a well written and logical proposal youngjim. I agree with all your points.
Thanks for the ping.
LBT
-=-=-
Well...don't get too down.
It is still relatively early...but, the GOP has such a hard time fighting the MSM, and the dems...that the more they fight each other...the weaker they might become to fight against the dem candidate.
I watch the House and Senate as much as possible...and there is one thing I can say about dems...they may be wrong on just about every subject...but they are wrong TOGETHER!!
Very seldom, except for a Lieberman or a Zell Miller...will they stray from party votes.
Now...the GOP takes great pride in being individuals..and not socialist everyone the same..
However...there is something to be said for a party that KNOWS how many of their party will vote one way or another.
Lately, the GOP has had too many bad surprises.
We can't let the POTUS election, which is the most important, to be sure....to take our attention totally away from the Senate and House races.
IF for some awful reason a Dem is elected POTUS, it would be necesssary for the GOP to control at least one side of Congress...or this country will be the hands of our enemies soon.
Lots of luck with that.
But if it's any consolation, I agree with you; and according to me Freepmail, so do a whole lot of other posters.
The courtesy here is to include the person who whom you're referring in a post.
who whom = to whom
This is a conservative forum. Not a Republican forum
I don't hate where I am on FR, I love it and always have! And, I completely agree with your point of view, about participating on a chat board designed to discuss topics and exchange ideas, not march in lockstep with each other --or else.
I really can't say whether they were closet moderates bordering on liberal all along, or if they are just so convinced that Giuliani is the only man with a capital R after his name who can defeat Hillary that they're willing to sacrifice their conservative principles in order to keep her out of the White House. Come to think of it, I don't recognize many nom de plumes of FReepers from the "old days" of FR among the posters who are trying to force Rudy on us.
But whoever they are and whatever their reasoning may be, or lack thereof, they're becoming increasingly combative and hostile toward anyone who won't follow them down that road to defeat and 4 years of wandering in a Democrat controlled wilderness. I have been down that bumpy road before enough times to know that liberal RINOs lose at the national level and conservative Republicans win, and that's just one reason why I won't be tagging along.
"Then find a candidate who ucan take on hillary"
This is another amazing thing - how can you be sure it's going to be hillary?
The worst mistake the GOP could make is to run a liberal republican up against a conservative talking democrat.
Have a good evening. It's 1 AM here and I have golf tomorrow. Ahhhh, golf. Got to break in a new Odyssey putter.
But the Rudyhaters are and whatever their reasoning may be, or lack thereof, they're becoming increasingly combative and hostile toward anyone who won't follow them down that road to defeat and 4 years of wandering in a Democrat controlled wilderness
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.