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?
Frankly, all I care about is my personal life. That was kind of the point of the post you are responding to.
My beliefs work 'big picture' too. Would you compromise your 'core beliefs', 'values' or 'morals' for 'victory'? Would you trust anyone who would? Would you actually vote for (actively support) a person who did not share your moral compass?
If you would, then you are not (by definition) a 'conservative', which implies a person who 'holds onto' their beliefs.
Luckily, I don't have a 'whole country' or 'melting pot of the world' to consider. I have enough on my plate already. The point of an election in a representative democracy, or 'republic' if you prefer, it to give those individuals who best represent you a chance to do so.
I don't think that it is selfish to expect millions of Americans to share my view, I would hope that ALL Americans do, since what I 'value' is (I would hope) the same as the rest of my countrymen.
And I don't want anything for, or from, 'the world'. Except, perhaps, to be left alone - to either succeed or fail in my endeavors, without the interference of government.
How so? Telling us how liberal he was, in order to support other liberals?
He was a great President, as is George W. Bush, but he was not a god, and he was not conservative perfection.
Straw man, no one says Reagan was God. He certainly was better than George W.
What I want to know, is whether or not posting accurate historical information about Ronald Reagan will get me banned from this forum.
I doubt anyone gets banned for posting historical fact. But one can be dishonest by posting SELECTIVE historical fact. Or by representing opinion as fact.
If you believe the media and get behind a liberal candidate, then who will fight for the unborn? Who will fight for your right to protect yourself? Who will fight for God in public view? This is also the demise of America.
> Are you sure about that? Some who have been believe they would have preferred to die than to live through the aftermath of such an attack.
They’re still alive to tell you about it, right?
Having been through that horror at the hands of a sadistic hippie B*ST*RD I can tell you that not only do I prefer life, but it has made me stronger and more resolute in my fight against evil.
God has his reasons for bad things happening to good people.
What a totally silly remark. A conservative would say America is already in decline. Restoring conservative principles would be the best way to fight the jihadis. To tell someone that if they don't vote for a candidate like Rudy makes them responsible for America's decline is pure hogwash.
Get a grip, Hillary is a Beast, but she is beatable by having a candidate who is the opposite of her.
I’d wish to have the Rockefellerian net worth, but that about as much in common as I have there, besides anatomy. I am a right-winger, secular, with strong libertarian tendencies. And Scrooge was projecting the fundamental libertarian motto: “ef them!”- the absolute antithesis of collectivisms of any kinds.
Ronald Reagan was a great conservative. Reagan at times had to pragmatically compromise and Reagan also made some mistakes.
I don't know what Peach said about Reagan to get herself banned but I would hope that an accurate analysis of the Reagan record is fair game on FR.
Why?
Because it is the conservative standard we hold our candidates up to.
Can we work the “Runaway Bride” into it, somehow?
Rudy is a NE liberal and that is a fact. Why would anyone on this site support one? I was for Rudy until I started learning more and more about him. After that, I knew that I could not support him for any office. He is against our conservative beliefs.
HEAR HEAR
I concur!
Bumpin’ it! Very inspirational!
> What is the rapist’s worse nightmare? A WOMAN WITH A GUN
PREACH IT SISTAH! :-)
one more reason an anti-gun Rudy is not my choice for President.
Dude, I thought I was the only one.
I swear I hadn't seen this when I wrote my last post.
You missed the genesis of the discussion. We weren’t actually talking about the serious issue you raise. A poster said there were freepers who actually said “they would vote for hillary”, and I just asked for links to where they said it.
And there have been no links provided yet. It had nothing to do with interpreting actions as support, it was about a specific claim and verifying that specific claim.
During the attempt to prove that claim, we found a freeper who said he’d give Hillary money. But that freeper never said he’d vote for her.
Explain Beethoven.
You and your compatriots on this site have done a lot to effect the political process in this country for good. I’m truly grateful to you for that.AMEN!Stick to your guns, pray for God’s help and don’t back down.
Not now. Not ever.
Yes, of course. Even Aristotle knew, and wrote, that not every life was worth living.
re: I wouldn’t choose either one [being raped or murdered].
***Then you’re a spoiled crybaby, according to folks like no-screen-name. Now be a good republican and choose one.
To: RabidBartender
it will be our fault if Hillary wins.
If you are a stay-at-home and/or 3rd party voter, then, yes.
Like the kid who throws a tantrum because he can’t get the ‘exact’ piece of candy he wants. He has to be dragged out of the store because he won’t move. The world should revolve around him - juvenile. Then grows up to be a stay at home or 3rd party voter.
1,085 posted on 04/21/2007 11:10:45 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
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.