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?

[Godebert]

"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?"

Well......you supported Arnold over the Conservative McClintock. So I'll believe it when I see it.

[Jim Robinson]

You are delusional if you think Rudy would appoint a conservative to the court.

[CharlesWayneCT]

But the republican still won in 2000, and he wasn’t a liberal.

And I don’t know what you mean by “I’m not terribly worried”. If you don’t care what people here think, why keep posting pro-rudy stuff at all? If you DO care, why do you care if you don’t respect our opinion?

And if you don’t respect anybody’s opinion, why do you bother being here at all?

[streetpreacher]

Jim supported Alan Keyes? News to me.

[HarmlessLovableFuzzball]

Will FR embrace Hillary instead,

FR should thank Hillary for exposing Rudy.

[Popman]

Now if liberalism infiltrates into the Republican party

if?

That barn door has been opened

Just depends on how mamy d'rats and RINO's can get in before conservatives shut the door

[Enosh]

No.

God Bless.

[Shelayne]

Do you really expect me to do that?

No way! I would expect you to keep up the good fight!

Thanks for the encouraging post. It has been quite alarming to me how many self-proclaimed conservatives are willing to sacrifice their deeply held beliefs and principles to support a candidate that is more palatable to the left. I just don't understand that at all.

[buccaneer81]

At this point it’s Fred for me. He’s electable, and he seems to pass Ronald Reagan’s 80% rule.

[quidnunc]

Jim Robinson wrote: I’d long for 75%. Hell, Rudy isn’t even 25% of what I want and he’s 100% of what I outright reject!

So you prefer Hillary, then?

Because that's the choice you know; a not-so-socially-conserevative Republican or another eight years of the Clintons.

[potlatch]

[But I would vote for a trained chimpanzee if it meant keeping Hillary out of the White House.]

Me too.

[Paperdoll]

PING

[nmh]

“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?”

I’m with ya!

I also see your concern of Demoncrats in drag pretending to be Republicans ... using the scare tactic of “want Hillary in there”? LOL! NOW is the time to weed out the Demoncrats in drag posing as Republicans and clean up the cultural and moral debauchery that the Rudy’s and McPain's of the world promote.

Hopefully Fred will run!

[VaRepublican]

Watch out Jim the rudy bots will get you banned.

[netmilsmom]

No way would I vote for him even if he was the nominee.
I’m with Thompson.

[Jim Robinson]

Up yours asswipe.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

Do you really expect me to do that?

Me? No.

However I'm not one of those trying to redefine conservatism into some bastard hybrid of libertarianism and old school marxism.

They, well yeah, they expect you to STFU and get your head right or suffer the consequences.

[2ndDivisionVet]

If we must set up a third party and run a Ronald Reagan type candidate, so be it. Voting for Rudy would probably be worse than pulling the lever for Hillary/Obama/Silky Pony, since his win would have the imprimatur of the so-called “conservative” GOP and he would face less opposition in leading the country further towards socialism.

[streetpreacher]

That wasn’t a presidential race.

[Vision]

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?

Rock on you crazy diamond!