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?
I’m not a catholic (I’m not sure what being catholic has to do with it anyway) but am staunchly pro life. No way would I want to stand before God and try to explain my vote for a proabortionist.
I find your whole premise rather offensive - I cannot wink and nod at my religious beliefs, then vote as if they don’t matter. Either my beliefs and God given principles rule every area of my life, or they are worthless. There is no moral relativism when it comes to my beliefs.
Thanks, Sweetie....
I will promise to do my utmost not to support any republicants in the future whenever possible.
And its interesting to note that those who voted for dems thinking they were as conservative as the republicans they replaced are finding out they vote along party lines, instead of the values they campaigned on....
You have Crist and we have Ahnold! Can you imagine having Rudy in charge of it all?
"Personal attacks she endured"? I'd have to interrupt here to say that's not right. When it was obvious she'd be losing the debate or on the minority side, she'd begin name-calling and swearing at posters, then turn the discussion to "About Howlin" to avoid having face losing the debate.
One incident particularly coming to mind is when she called Tommy Dale a "damn drama queen", yet it was she who demanded attention on the thread. Note I used the word "demanded", not "commanded".
I'd wanted to post to TD he shouldn't be infringing on Howlin's territory - but I opted not to deal with the insults...
OK, I’ll check some other Rudy threads. I was on one this morning and it wasn’t the Rudy supporters who were the most vicious, but I’ll look around.
I have to say that a fair amount of flaming has always been a part of FR, though, so I don’t see that as the primary reason for tossing these people out.
Free Republic has been diminished with this purge. It was just starting to be placed on the world stage in ways we couldn't fathom. We, in very significant ways, brought down and exposed the enablers of the left in the media. We had a voice. Now,
We have marginilized ouselves. We have had a gratuidous blood-letting. We have spited our collective noses, so-to-speak. And, I believe that many here should be more introspective. When will your opinion be "wrong". When will YOU be descended upon by the frothing pack. Many of the people who are now gone ARE my friends. I respect and care for them. To see the celebratory rejoicing of some because of their departure is telling.
Pick a name, each one here contributed to our society, our community. Take quidnunc who you ask about, or any other. Do you honestly believe that ANY of them want Hillary or Obama to be President? Do you believe that any one of them wouldn't do ANYTHING to prevent the next 911? We ARE diminished. And, it saddens me to tell you that you have been a willing enabler. You, and the rest, should be ashamed. Wake up tomorrow, and tell me that FR is stronger, is better, is better respected because of this purge. Look in the mirror and ask, "Was this worth it?" I hope the answer is, "No" Can't you look at the body of there work? Can't you understand that even a dissenting view in the right context is valuable? In any event, I hope you are well. I hope your family is well. All the best.
Lando
-—Either my beliefs and God given principles rule every area of my life, or they are worthless. There is no moral relativism when it comes to my beliefs.-—
That’s the bit that people that don’t have a hard core seem have trouble with...
We don’t (or at least try not to) do things that compromise our core values for expediency.
It is a classic False Dilemma. Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Here’s my standard false dilemma to answer their false dilemma. No one has ever navigated through it because they just move onto another thread. Maybe that won’t be allowed any more, that would be fine with me.
Culling the herd has some strange effects...;-)
Go cry me a river...and Howl at the moom while your at it lol.
sorry, forgot to include my own...
Since team rudy is so fond of its own false dilemma, I would expect them to answer this false dilemma.
My contention: If rudy gets the nomination, he splits the base, possibly splits the republican party, and loses the election.
Rudy followers’ contention: If Hunter gets it, he wins the base and loses the election.
Hypothetical to answer the rudy followers’ hypothetical. Both sides losing to Hillary.
Side A: The solib republican splits the base. The MSM turns on him the moment he is nominated. Hillary wins. Republican party is split.
Side B: The socon republican wins the nomination, loses to hildebeast in a tough fight. Republicans are united against the hillary presidency.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?
Win-Win false dilemma:
Side A: Solib wins presidency by ignoring the socon base and permanently splitting the republican party.
Side B: SoCon wins presidency by (obviously) relying on the socon base.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?
Regardless of who wins or loses, Free Republic and the republican party is better off with Duncan Hunter than Rudy as the candidate. This social liberal candidate is simply not healthy for the republican party nor for FR. And rudy followers are proving to be very impolite freepers.
We could reword that....Let's try this instead...
and since some of the worst totalitarian governments over the years have been non-religious, while many non religious people like myself cherish freedom and the founding ideals of our country.
We can have that *like myself* mean me.
Don't forget that is was very religious people, like the founding fathers, that founded this country.
Add Huckabee to that list.
My concern is, with 10 people running for Prez in the Pub Party, how are some of the second (or third) tier candidates going to break out of the pack and get a chance to shine? For those of you who saw the Dem debate the other nite, they have a couple less candidates than we do, yet that alleged “debate” was a farce. It was just Brian Williams going down the line asking each one a question to which they responded with their stock stump speech answers. The only two who weren’t automatums were Kucinich and Gravel, but that’s because they are nut cases.
Now, I’d like to see Duncan Hunter break out of the pack. But I’m afraid the Pub debates will end up just about the same as the Dem one did, in that no one will get enough showtime to shine because there are so many of them to question. This advantages the frontrunners because of their name recognition or ability to pick up big bucks. I don’t necessarily trust Fred Thompson; just a gut feeling, my antennae are waving on him. He’s got the Bush point of view on illegal immigration, with a slightly tougher attitude about border control, but bottom line, he is for amnesty light at some point in time, it seems to me. He was for McCain’s campaign finance bill. I’ve got qualms about him. Brownback is bad on immigration also. For me, the illegal immigration issue is a big thing. Romney actually seems tougher on immigration issues than either of the other 2 frontrunners, namely McInsane and Rudy. I will never vote for John McLame. He has crossed the Pub Party on important issues way too often and I don’t trust him further than I can throw him. Hunter is my favorite,
Huckabee might be a sleeper, Gingrich has too much baggage, Tancredo is right on immigration, but is a polarizing figure because of it. Gilmore is a good man but dull as a post and won’t get anywhere. I keep looking for a shining conservative knight on a white horse to come riding in to save the Party from RINO’s and their ilk. But I’m afraid, with the exception of Fred Thompson, there aren’t any out there. Oh, I forgot Tommy Thompson, but that’s all right, because he isn’t going to get to first base anyway. Sigh, where is our savior?
You and others are missing, deliberately or otherwise, the point that GodBlessUSA is making. Read carefully, please.
It is not a matter of supporting or attacking one candidate or other this early in the game, it is remembering to remain united against the Democrat Left, not only for the future of this nation but for victory in the WOT. We have all spewed in frustration re RINOs but you and I know the DemoRats/Clinton machine are far, far worse. Conservatives now have a choice: split off into a third party or regain relevance in the Republican Party. RM, you already said you want to remain Republican. So do I.
I understand principles and convictions. I like Duncan Hunter the best so far. I am looking forward to the May 3 debate, and I would like to manage to see the man in person and gauge him, maybe even question him. One of the features about FR that always attracted me was that discussions would be about something ACTUAL... such as a speech being given, a debate, a news report, legislation, SCOTUS decision ... and not just wild flinging of off-the-cuff opinions. We want to remain conservative in demeanor, as well as knowledgeable. Leaping to conclusions is not conservative, IMO.
Because 9/11 is sacred to me, I don’t like seeing Rudy Giuliani trashed. According to some here, he actually did nothing right at that time... that is despicable, unnecessary commentary and I reject it. They should try to be mayor of NYC at such a time. Personally, I question whether all that has been said on this site about him is fact-based. I really do. What should we fear in taking a balanced view of a person? Are we now commanded to see him as totally evil? There has been too much spin in the presentation and I would like to see facts. Also, stop already with the photos in drag.
Maybe some people here just never liked the Republican Party, or have been mistrustful of the GOP all along. While GBU and I may end up supporting different candidates in the Republican primaries, I strongly agree with her that GOP is still our best hope. I am even more vehemence in my disgust with the “stay at home” non-voters from the November 2006 election and I posted about that on forum at the time. My convictions do not make me that stubborn and self-destructive.
Stand back from the fray and take a good, hard look, everyone. Do you care more about making political points...touche and all that ... or do you, in your heart of hearts, care most about the fate of this Nation and of Liberty? Then, you will be more careful not to paint yourself into a corner. I say, let every candidate speak for himself next Thursday. I don’t fear that. We can then discuss their points.
What I don’t like is how this discussion developed into so much glee over other posters being silenced. I have my opinions, but I don’t know most others here as people but as posters... ya dig? So why go on and on with character defamation. A couple of trollish types I don’t and won’t miss. Yes, I recognize how some banned themselves... I don’t support their disrespectful speech in the face of the site owner. But I will miss being amazed, annoyed, whatever by the thoughts of some of them. I like the fact that Liberty means that they are as free as I am.
I don’t think I support “Swift-boating” Giuliani unless something truly awful emerges about him. The reason I put Bernard Kerik in the keywords is that, as soon as his DHS nomination had to be rescinded, I knew it would be the kiss of death to any POTUS aspirations Giuliani had. Sad, but true, whatever the facts are. Insinuations suffice. I don’t think Swift-boating is necessary. Let’s have confidence in truth and letting facts emerge.
More than that, would my front-runner, Duncan Hunter want this type of anti-Rudy tactic to aid his campaign? Would any respectable and worthy conservative candidate WANT to benefit from this? That is my question, and I hope the answer would be NO.
Boy, that was really risky. /s
Thompson currently opposes a human life amendment. Why?
That means the questions you raise would be decided by state and local laws. The protection of the unborn from extermination would be protected by state and local laws.
Then why have a Preamble that guarantees the blessings of liberty to our POSTERITY? Why have a Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment that guarantees the the right to life of any innocent person?
That's how it was done throuh out the history of this country up until Roe v. Wade.
Yeah. Roe changed everything. Prior to that, or should I say up until the rash of pro-abort laws that were beginning to be passed which led to Roe, no state had the audacity, or the immorality, to believe they had the right to permit the murder of its citizens. If we do not have a nationwide ban on abortions, another court will simply, at some future date, enact another Roe.
The federal government fails to best protect life.
All that is required is the simple acknowledgment of the self-evident truth that babies are persons. And, voila, the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments kick in. No abortions are allowable anywhere. Period.
Now, what's the problem?
The problem is that Fred Thompson has never been a champion for the unborn. His voice is muted. Other than a series of easy party line votes, it is hard to uncover much of anything this man has ever had to say on the subject. That's why I told you I have serious questions.
Every day another 3 to 4000 children die to this scourge, and they can't afford to wait for leaders with the courage of their stated convictions to act.
Maybe it’s not a purge, but I get the feeling that a lot of people who don’t lie low are out of here, by choice or by decree. I think not all are even Rudy supporters.
Ah. Thanks. I forgot him.
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.