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?
You’d think.
Going totally off topic here FRiend, I’ve got a question for you that has been bugging the daylights out of me, and I finally remembered to ask:
Could you tell me the significance of your screen name?
I’ve been trying to figure it out, and no luck.
I thought ‘dram’, could that be a reference to ‘dynamic random access memory’? No, that can’t be it.
‘ramB’, is that the successor to ‘ramA’? (you know, like the Mexican with two kids, a boy and girl, so he named them ‘Hosea and Hoseb’?)
Anyway, that’s all, and thanks in advance!
>>Going totally off topic here FRiend, I’ve got a question for you that has been bugging the daylights out of me, and I finally remembered to ask:
Could you tell me the significance of your screen name?
I’ve been trying to figure it out, and no luck.<<
No problem, other than its kind of geeky. Grond was the ram in Lord of the Rings that could break down otherwise impenetrable walls. Everywhere else, from my blog to my email and on other message boards, I’m GrondramB but due to a typo I missed the “r” when I signed up on Freep.
Ok, my wife was reading over my shoulder... She says “kind of geeky” doesn’t begin to describe it. :)
Hahahaha!
That's the issue that keeps coming up on other threads when I run into libertarians.
For example, they argue that a man's home is his castle and he has a right to live how he pleases, which I agree with to some extent. But the problem is that the cases that are being discussed are issues where the guy is living in a filthy pigsty, has rats living in the house and running the neighborhood, trash overflows and the stench can be smelled down the street.
Following their line of reasoning, I also have a right to live in a clean pest free environment. So who's rights win? They usually side with the slob. It doesn't matter if he's inflicting his lifestyle on everyone else, they just have to put up and shut up.
But under a true libertarian society, couldn't any one of the neighbors be justified in blowing the guy away under the same, I'll live as I please and nobody can stop me mentality?
Anarchy indeed.
That’s interesting, and ironic as missing the ‘r’ when registering at FR ends up making your screen name even more unique.
As for mine, most folks assume that I’m referring to the early UFO-researcher and astronomer Morris K. Jessup (aka ‘M.K. Jessup’), who died mysteriously in Dade County Park in 1959, some say his apparent suicide was actually murder, his final years were troubled, following a strange exchange of letters with a fellow calling himself ‘Carlos Allende’ (actually Carl M. Allen), who claimed to have been in the Merchant Marine on board the S.S. Andrew Furuseth in 1943, and in the vicinity of what is now referred to as the ‘Philadelphia Experiment’, and witnessed the physical conversion to invisibility of the U.S.S. Eldridge (DE-173).
In any event, after M.K. Jessup had written his book ‘The Case for the UFO’, he began receiving odd letters alluding to knowledge of eletromagentic field manipulation, all sorts of wild stuff, and Jessup was later contacted by the Office of Naval Research, after they had received a copy of Jessup’s book which had three different sets of handwritten notes throughout the pages, as if three different individuals were conversing over the contents of Jessup’s book.
Jessup was supposed to be on his way to dinner with his friend Ivan Sanderson, zoologist and fellow researcher into the paranormal. As it turned out, Jessup was found slumped over the steering wheel with a hose from the exhaust stuffed into he back window, in Dade County Park, Miami, 1959.
But having said all that, there is no ‘Morris’ in my family, the ‘mk’ in my screen name is simply short for ‘Mark’.
So far from gondramB being ‘geeky’, I would say it stands uniquely apart, and truly ‘one of a kind’.
And now everyone knows ‘the rest of our stories’, lol (thank you Paul Harvey)
Fer later
Mr. Robinson, You’re awesome!
When you have some time, read my commentary at www.raquelwalker.com.
Ahhh. What a relief! It only took 10 minutes to catch up.
The first time I saw this thread, I would skim through a page of 50 posts to find 200 more tacked on the end. Panic!!!
Apropos of this thread, let me say: All good things must come to an end.
I see you’re still talking to yourself.
Glad you guys got over your disagreement. ;-)
— I see you’re still talking to yourself.
Well, I enjoy talking with someone who listens, and I’m always in good company.
Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?
Cheers,
OLA
gondramB:
I like Clarence Thomas' take on this during his confirmation hearing. He said he believes in natural law, as a Christian, but he recognizes the Constitution as the only basis of American Federal law.
Betty Boop:
Yes, I like that, too. It's a truthful answer, albeit a rather artful one: For it's silent on the basis of this "only basis" of American law. Unless you think the Constitution just magically popped into existence out of a pure nothing....
Actually it is the brainchild of classically educated, self-identified men of God.
Sure most of the founders were 'men of God', but they had a real respect for the tendency of religious establishments to grab power, and drafted the Constitution to prevent exactly that.
Legislators were forbidden to write laws "respecting an establishment of religion" -- while protecting its free exercise. -- And no religious test could be required as "Qualification to any Office or public Trust" in the USA.
Our founders had seen enough of state sanctioned men of God, who attempted to rule as if they had the power of God.
Both parties are advocating government control of the means of production?
Actually, as I understand it . . . more than a few key players in all the power groups in Western society are doing so . . . but will not admit it until their global government is in overt and death grip control and power.
Fred would have a decent chance in the general election - Hilary and Obama are not strong candidates - which is why I strongly suspect Edwards gets the nomination.
Gingrich, Hunter, et. al. wouldn’t have the slightest chance.
= = = =
Goodness! Is one of us ill? I agree with you entirely.
It looks like the best shot may be Fred Thompson. There will never be another Reagan, but he is a good man.
= = =
Glad to see you say so. I think he is, too. Prayers for him and you and Jim and FR!
He sings and demonstrates the global socialist/marxist puppet masters song and values almost as well as SHRILLERY.
McChurian, Shrillery, Rudy are all kowtowing at the satan worshipping altar of the globalists.
Protecting and praising Hillary Clinton is a DISGUSTING thing to do in any context.
Disgusting and profane.
= = =
imho . . . disgusting, traitorous, suicidal, vacuum-headed, terminally stupid, satanic, demonized, foolish, soiling one’s pants, laz-y-boy & bed; . . . and profane.
Reasonable points to me.
I sure hope and pray Fred Thompson is not any shade of globalist.
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.