A Strong Man Of Character
Posted on 03/22/2007 11:28:22 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
...We constantly present the false impression that government can solve problems that government in America was designed not to solve. Families are significantly less important in the development of children today than they were 30 or 40 years ago. Religion has less influence than it did 30 or 40 years ago. Communities don't mean what they meant 30 or 40 years ago.
As Americans, we're not sure we share values. We're sometimes even afraid to use the word values. We talk about teaching ethics in schools -- people say, "What ethics? Whose ethics? Maybe we can't." And they confuse that with teaching of religion. And we are afraid to reaffirm the basics upon which a lawful and a decent society are based. We're almost embarrassed by it.
.... What we don't see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.
... The fact is that we're fooling people if we suggest to them the solutions to these very, very deep-seated problems are going to be found in government.
... They are going to have to be just as solid and just as strong in teaching every single youngster their responsibility for citizenship. We're going to find the answer when schools once again train citizens. Schools exist in America and have always existed to train responsible citizens of the United States of America.
If they don't do that, it's very hard to hold us together as a country, because it's shared values that hold us together.
(Excerpt) Read more at query.nytimes.com ...
He doesn't need to count on my vote. I'll sit this one out before I'll vote for this kind of a Republican.
Agreed. I can't vote for a liberal statist no matter what letter is next to their name.
A Strong Man Of Character
You're dodging the main point of his post
And then you just dodged the point of this post. Two in a row!
That's how the saying goes, right Rudy?
So you''re claiming that the 90% of freepers who get the douche chills when they read that quote are unintelligent?
Then why are you supporting a guy who is too dense to understand the plain meaning of the 2nd Amendment?
So it's all about power...
No time for principals or for putting forth the best candidate (opposed to 'most likely')?
It's better to have a meaningless R following the candidate's name than to have a candidate who agrees with at least a few conservative positions?
And, no, illegal immigration, gun control, abortion, homosexual unions, and intrusive state control do NOT equal a single issue - they split Rudy away from most registered Pubies.
He's being lauded by the media and by those of you who seem to believe that to regain power the rest of us need to discover our 'inner centrist'.
Here's a poke...THAT AIN'T WHAT HE SAID! I remember when it was actually somehat challenging to debate you.
So are you trying to claim that Hunter is not a conservative?
Are you really going to play dumb and pretend that you've never read any of the hundreds of FR threads explaining the whole "well regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment?
Please explain. This should be really good.
Freedom is about personal responsibility and self reliance, not "authority".
Conservative men look like this?
LG: "Everyone was expected to be part of the militia, and everyone was expected to own a specific weapon and munitions.
If you did not own one, and had no means to secure the required weapon and supplies, what did you do?"
FB: "Another non answer and another attempt to slightly change the subject."
It was fun to watch this contortionist poorly attempt to defend the indefensible.
The saga began with this from LG at 251
"Explain the notion of freedom without the presence of authority."
To wit I responded in 253:
"I can help you on this one. There is authority which is needed, and then there is abuse of authority which is not needed. To take away the right of a law abiding citizen to self defend is an abuse of authority."
to wit LG responded in his 260:
"It seems that you agreed to take someone's ability to self defend based on your own willingness to exercise authority over others."
I realized then that I had a rabid slippery little weasel on my hands, and before it was over I would need a round of anti biotics.
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.