Posted on 04/21/2007 6:42:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
We've got some real challenges facing us. FR was established to fight against government corruption, overstepping, and abuse and to fight for a return to the limited constitutional government as envisioned and set forth by our founding fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and other founding documents.
One of the biggest cases of government corruption, overstepping and abuse that I know of is its disgraceful headlong slide into a socialist hell. Our founders never intended for abortion to be the law of the land. And they never intended the Supreme Court to be a legislative body. They never intended God or religion to be written out of public life. They never intended government to be used to deny God's existence or for government to be used to force sexual perversions onto our society or into our children's education curriculum. They never intend for government to disarm the people. They never intended for government to set up sanctuary cities for illegals. They never intended government to “rule” over the people and or to take their earnings or private property or to deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech, free religion, private property, due process, etc. They never intended government to seize the private property of private citizens through draconian asset forfeiture laws or laws allowing government to take private property from lawful owners to give to developers. Or to seize wealth and redistribute it to others. Or to provide government forced health insurance or government forced retirement systems.
All of the above are examples of ever expanding socialism and tyranny brought to us by liberals/liberalism.
FR fights against the liberals/Democrats in all of these areas and always will. Now if liberalism infiltrates into the Republican party and Republicans start promoting all this socialist garbage, do you think that I or FR will suddenly stop fighting against it? Do you think I'm going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?
Do you really expect me to do that?
“Giuliani really is a pretty decent man.”
Off the top of my head I can’t think of any of the measures that I use in determining a decent man that Rudy meets.
The thing that makes us admire Reagan so much is that when you look past his success in all the ways the general public know about him, wealth, fame, power, etc., we learn that his personal, private life was just as rich, and reveals him as a truly decent man.
From his extraordinary and dangerous service as the regions most successful lifeguard to his degree in economics, his personal drives were always combined with service to others.
The only time that Reagan tried to beat the system was to somehow manage to pull off nine years of military service in spite of a disqualifying medical condition.
Rudy is financially successful and a celebrity, and and a great Mayor of that liberal cesspool of New York (sorry, NY people, but remember the context).
The man seems to have no character or decency, and during his successful career as a lawyer on the fast track to bigger things, I’m not aware of any time he spent on quiet, decent, humble service to anything but his garish self.
He is a wealthy, powerful man, but he is not a decent man.
“He is a wealthy, powerful man, but he is not a decent man.”
That’s what I should have said (lol)
Great! See you on the flip side then...
You disclaimed support for him out of one side of your mouth, while in the same post you were praising him to high heaven. I don’t know you, so all I have to go on is your own words.
It’s funny I don’t like attacking him, but when people keep trying to persuade us to get behind him in the primaries we have to point out his problems and when you examine his missteps during his time as a big city Mayor, they seemed to result from flaws in his character.
When I was trying to warm up to Rudy, a nagging truth kept hitting me, in 1991 we political junkies knew Clinton’s character, I told his supporters that we can’t know what challenges he will face if he wins, but we do know his character and that means that his Presidency will be destructive.
Rudy was a hard nosed New York lawyer, and a hard nosed New York Mayor with no scruples, but to make him the face of America to represent our national character and identity is a body blow that this nation should not have to absorb.
We all know by now that who the President is as a man, has a large effect on our culture.
Good grief. Open your eyes to what Rudy actually and truthfully is. He’s
a walking talking constitutional violation! He’s not even close to being presidential material!
All excellent points. What’s tricky is the extremely wide-swath of non-political junkies. It’s so easy to fall fictim to “the establishment cannot be broken”. History has prove this in countless scenarios.
He knew and still does know that as a tsunami of character and non-conservative reality check gets to the “non political news junkies”, then he’s toast. And the tragic, albeit great effectiveness of a tsunami is the lack of good early warning and when it’s high-tide IMO.
The media mulch machines and tree chippers run in cycles. I personally don’t want to see a third party option at all. And I also don’t want to see viable conservative candidates get pre-mulched before the MSM even gets to handle them. Their campaign Managers know where to keep the length of the leash (figuratively), so I don’t see any pre-mature self-sacrifices. JR was absolutely right to come out now and come out swinging to saying NO to Rudy. There’s a lot of dynamics here of course. And I’m glad to be learning and be part of it, in whatever way I can.
Ping...I did it again :( Not used to putting another name in the To: line
Maybe it’s late too, and I should catch some zzzzzz’s :)
Have a great one! See you all tomorrow!
Excerpted and enhanced, for emphasis. ;)
Honestly, one of the most flabbergasting aspects of all this (to me) is just how many recently opused/suicided FReepers -- a significant number of whom (as they took great pains to remind one, at every conceivable turn) "have been here since 1999/1999/1776/The Early Bronze Age/[Insert Huffy Chronological Benchmark Here]" -- feel/felt no discernible compunction whatsoever, re: sassing, insulting and/or flagrantly disregarding the owner of this web site; energetically trolling with all the low, mean persistence of the most stereotypical DU or Kos troll.
Reading back through this elephantine thread, it is immediately and irrefutably clear that -- in virtually every instance -- the recipients of ZOTtings have behaved no less abominably than the visiting houseguest who brusquely commandeers the contents of your liquor cabinet; vomits noisily into the aquarium; and (when rightfully instructed by their host to cease such loutish behavior) spits curses at the wife and children. That several of the uglier of these even went so far, on another thread, as to ostentatiously declare themselves "Christians for Giuliani" virtually redefines the ages-old concept of naked, preening chutzpah.
The comparison of this (or, indeed, any) website to a host's own home is, I believe, entirely to the point, here. Jim's feeling -- paraphrasing, from his accumulated postings over the past several days; correct me please, Jim, if I (unintentionally) miscolor your sentiments in the retelling -- is that, over recent months, specific house guests have become increasingly unruly, to the extent that they've not only been sneering openly at the stated house rules (i.e., "Free Republic is a conservative site"; "Free Republic is a pro-life site"; etc.), but actively and aggressively making things unpleasant for the greater, more polite majority of attendees.
No one poster -- no, nor any group of posters, so far as that goes -- is so important, invaluable or irreplaceable to this forum as to somehow gainsay their repeated (and increasingly mean-spirited) flaunting of said rules; and the bizarre, inflated sense of... entitlement on the parts of those who've found themselves righteously "called" on such oafishness -- the red-faced and indignant whinneys of (essentially) "well, yeah, but surely that rule was never meant to apply to ME, for God's sake!" -- is, by definition, anything but a conservative one.
The host has (re-)(re-)(RE-)stated his long-standing house rules, clearly and emphatically. He does not wish his home (i.e., this site of his own creation) to be cluttered, for instance, with unwelcome pro-abortion sentiments; endorsements of pro-abortion politicians; or "practical" apologia on behalf of same. He does not want his front lawn littered with defenses of homosexuality (or of any politicians defending same), no matter how enthisiastically lobbed. And -- quite justifiably enough, certainly -- he isn't signing for delivery of any packages of RINO Chow whatsoever, no matter how enthusiastically endorsed by whichever poster, of whatever age or pedigree.
None of this is even remotely in any way "new," or "sudden," or "unexpected," or what-have-you; and all this feigned, whey-faced miming of shock and dramatic clutching at pearls is, quite frankly, as pathetic as it is patently absurd.
We're all guests in someone else's house, people.
Kindly grow the hell up.
“He’s a walking talking constitutional violation!”
Now that’s Marketing Material there! Ok, I’m outta here! Nite!
“But in Reagan’s spirit, we shouldn’t tear down a fellow in our party. Rudy will probably not achieve nomination but he shouldn’t be torn to pieces by us.”
We are conservatives we are always trying to run out the most liberal candidate during the primaries, in this case the threat is unique because a terrorist attack artificially thrust someone in front of Republicans that normally would not have even made it into the national party consciousness.
He is against every thing we stand for, we don’t even know the whole list of who our choices are yet, and you want us to just shut up and not interfere with his efforts to defeat our favorite candidates?
We are conservative political activists, we aren’t going to sit out the primary because you guys want your man to emerge victorious with the appearance of having the conservative voters support.
This forum has formally been declared as a group that is going to promote a better candidate for the Republican party than the ex-Mayor of New York city.
Well I don’t have teenagers, I’m inflicted with the same illness (and machine count)........
And instead of causing the drooling with the mention of another ‘item’ the other evening, this time I’M one of the droolers! I’m ‘craving’ a long-arm too! Ha!
How about I’ll keep my ‘offer’ on the table, I think we can share ‘it’ while awaiting the day of the arrival of object of desire seen below! Something (and company) to distract us during the wait for possession of a long-arm machine!
Hee, hee!
“The 3 sewing machines are key
I have three as well, but I can’t wait for the day I have a long arm.
Quilting is an illness, but it keeps me sane with 3 teenagers!”
“Giuliani tamed the town that couldn’t be tamed”
Watching how he steamed rolled over a bunch of New York city Yankees with a handful of Republicans as collateral damage was at times unbearable to watch.
To unleash that kind of arrogance and disregard for the constitution on the states with national forces and agencies would tear this country apart.
Who’s the Duncan Hunter fans out there? No baiting, I’d like to hollar at one.
And yes, I’m still up (shaking head)
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.