Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?

vanity | April 21, 2007 | Jim Robinson

[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?

[Mojave]

The general incivility on this thread - and other places - is one of the reasons that FReepers have RECENTLY flocked to places like WideAwakes, yes.

The WA is crawling with posters who lacked civility on FR.

[IrishRainy]

They wanted an echo chamber where their false and easily refuted talking points wouldn't be challenged.

Much like this place is becoming, I'm afraid.

[Jim Robinson]

What the heck is all this Keyes stuff about?

In answer to your second question, FR plays no role in any campaign. Have no idea why you would direct such question to anyone but me. Have noticed a whole lot of people piling on to EV lately. What’s this all about?

[Jim Robinson]

Boo!

[bannie]

It looks like the Civility Mardi Gras:

We’re all mostly-civil outside of this thread, but...in this thread...anything goes.

[dmw]

The question of who you support is not important to me. However, it makes your motives suspect when you don’t want to share with us here who you support, and yet you have no problem getting up on your high horse admonishing conservatives here at FR but you’re not willing to do the same over at WA where you also post. If you are a man of integrity, as you try to present yourself to be here, then you need to recognize that you are basically showing favoritism to one group by excluding them from having to be accountable for their actions. You only want FR to be held accountable but not your buddies over at WA. If you aren’t willing to be honest enough to admit that, then don’t try to pretend that you care about the tone of this debate. I take it from your posts that you are a Christian. That being the case, you know what the scriptures say about showing favoritism. You can make all the cute remarks to me that you want, but you lose credibility with us when you only insist that we tone things down, but don’t insist upon it from your friends at WA. I hope you will think about this and come back later and admit your mistake in only admonishing one side and not the other. You can dislike me all you want, but you know that on this issue I'm right.

[Rheo]

I don’t believe I ever took the time to say Thank you or I appreciate what you have done NautiNurse.

Thank you.

[BykrBayb]

That’s funny. Could you be the first established freeper I’ve come across who doesn’t know what an anti-freeper is? No, I’ve seen others, but they were all anti-freepers. Even if you’ve never heard of one, a basic understanding of the English language should help you to figure it out.

So now you’re saying that the direction FR has taken in the last week or so caused freepers to join an anti-freeper site over a month ago? You’re still not making any sense.

[dixiechick2000]

“What makes WideAwakes an anti-FReeper site or the new Clown Posse?”

Because of the management, and the fact that they have a “secret room.”

Why not open everything to the public?

[Mojave]

Much like this place is becoming, I'm afraid.

Nonsense. Rudy apologist who avoid attacks on Reagan and conservatism continue to freely spam FR.

[Texas Mom]

I for one have not decided who I will vote for in the Primaries. There are many issues I'm interested in but until everyone, Republican and Democrat get their heads out of the sand and realize we are at war. It's not just the war in Iraq or Afghanistan.

I want a President who will take a strong stand against the Islamo Fascist who want to kill everyone. Conservative, Democrat.

I am against abortion, gun control, tax increases, homosexual marriage as much as the next guy but if we don't win this war on terror and the Muslim fanatic succeed those other things will be the least of our worries.

I want a candidate who is strong on defense and not only one who says they support out troops, but one who supports their mission and will see it through to victory for our guys.

No more Vietnam..

[LowOiL]

Only God can decide who is a liberal

"Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren?" (1Cor. 6:2-5).

"every tongue which rises against you in judgment you shall condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord…" (Isa. 54:17).

Want more, let me know.. we will take it to the source brother.

[bannie]

I’m too fond of FReepers. When I wanna’ kick anybody, I eat another popover. (I’m quite fat.)

[dmw]

“gosh, you’re right.”

I’m glad to see we agree on something. ;^)

[Mojave]

they have a “secret room.”

Really? That's too funny!

[EternalVigilance]

That just might be the funniest post I’ve ever seen on FR.

[La Enchiladita]

Thank you for your thoughtful post.

You're welcome, and thank you for taking the time to read...:)

Some more thoughts: I don't think Duncan Hunter attracts the shrinking violet type in the first place, so we're not easily bullied. I always noticed, on the first pro-Rudy threads that appeared, there were various types of posters. Some were bullies, some were not.

Some just simply explained themselves as motivated by the fear of another Clinton in the White House, an honest confession as it were. Some were out and out ridiculers of conservatives, and the especially irksome ones sneered at "social conservatism."

I actually got along with posters like PhiKappaMom, didn't lock horns with many. But one kept posting obscure innuendo linking Hunter with Cunningham, etc., and then there was something about Hunter handling checks.

Anyway, my point is you can't put Giuliani supporters (or "leaners to") into one bag. And you made a mistake going after GodBlessUSA. If you read all her posts carefully and put yourself in her shoes, I think you can understand what she is saying. She made good points about the extent of presidential power to affect social conservatism. She wasn't pushing Giuliani on anyone but asking for fairness to him and truth.

We need to be mindful of how fatally we are becoming divided as conservative Republicans. Very few are FIRMLY in the camp of one candidate or another, but "leaning" towards, so don't you think that education and persuasion are the way to go rather than attack?

I look forward to Thursday's debate and how the primary candidates commend themselves. Too bad Peach won't be here to transcribe for us....:)

[new cruelty]

and wow, how important that must be for you.

[Jim Robinson]

And I want our constitution and our freedom to live on long after we have defeated our foreign enemies, which we WILL do. We will win the war against our enemies both foreign and domestic, but we must never ever surrender to either. We cannot live on in freedom unless we fight and defeat both.

[Kevmo]

Which is why this thread is at 14k and counting. There are some dynamics operating that are worth looking at. One is that with the new anti-freeper website WideAwake up, they now have a place to go and many of them feel like they gain more credibility over there if they get zotted over here. It’s an attempt to push us to the limit so they can show how unreasonable we supposedly are. Another is that a lot of people signed up in 2000 during the presidential race and it was because FR was the best spot on the web to discuss republican politics at the time. Some never realized that this was a socon site. I’ve pointed it out many times prior to this thread and got “huh?” or “It SHOULD say such & such” or “screw you/bye bye” or “I don’t have to explain myself to you” or even that socons are for big guvmint because outlawing a private choice of abortion is an intrusion into citizens lives and all kinds of other responses. Rudybots like to say he’s so strong on WOT but once you point out a few surrounding inconsistencies with rudy on WOT, they don’t back down because the real reason isn’t WOT, it’s that they AGREE with rudy on social issues and they know that if they admit that, they’ve lost their leverage in the debate. It’s another reason why there are so many crickets on tootyfruityrudy threads.