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?
At the end of the day, Rudy will get the GOP nomination, Conservatives will suck it up and vote for him, Hillary/Algore will be defeated, and we will be victorious in Iraq.
Of course, the borders will still be wide open, we'll be on pins & needles waiting for his SCOTUS nominations, and left to wonder what type of legislation he'll promote/sign into law.
As an aside, I'm still trying to figure out a label for people like myself who dislike Democrats more than they hold dear any true conservative principles.
I guess that makes me a single issue voter: I can't stand screechy lectures about why white males are the source of all evil in our world.
I'm mostly satisfied with Thompson's answer. It isn't the absolute best answer he could have given. But, it was enough. It demonstrates that he realizes that CFR was a mistake and that the unconstitutional limits should be removed and the full disclosure should be enhanced.
I’ve had too Brad’s Gramma. This thread is too long for me. I can’t believe I have watched it all day on and off. Nite.
Night Beautiful.
Many of us who supported Alan Keyes in 2000 felt that way when the management decided to support (then) Governor Bush and the "Bushbots" became very shrill and insulting to anyone who voiced the least criticism of their candidate. The shoe appears to be on the other foot these days. If those who became accustomed to ridiculing anyone who disagrees with them learn a lesson from being in that position, maybe this forum will someday be stronger for those people having learned how the other side feels.
Bill
What part of that don't you get, my friend?
Got a quote from Fred delineating why he was wrong to ramrod CFR through? Got a scrap of evidence that he's changed his position?
You sure? Getting there . . . . . .
I’m not trying to get you banned and I said none of the things that you just attributed to me in your rant.
All those hours wasted watching Matthews, Olberman, Russert, and NBC news. I could have sworn they all railed against "Bush's" war in Iraq and our lack of progress implementing democracy there.
Could be it was a combination of things--that way, we're both right!
I don’t think that Fred was ever trying to violate anyone’s freedom of speech. His whole career has been about rooting out corruption. I think that’s what he was trying to do, and he went about it the wrong way.
Can you name some? I'm scratching my head over what seems like a parallel you're trying to draw with the Giuliani people. I don't see it at all.
Which conservative candidate are you trashing now?
Turning into a pumkin even as I type..niters!
(((Hugs)))Thank you beautiful.
Okay, sweet dreams, and thanks for all your wonderful thoughts on the thread and for cheering us on in the Right direction...:)!!
Oh, from what I see you have no need to fear the mirror... :)
..gotta rest, be good, and sleep well.
There are other dynamics that make it even more explosive, such as the Internet and Youtube. One Macaca Gaffe could cost a frontrunner his entire campaign, just ask Mr. Dean. And again, Mr. Dean is indicative of the fast-paced exposure and ability to raise money through nontraditional channels.
One reason candidates flipflop is so they can figure out what’s important to the electorate and then jump in with both feet. That’s why JFKerry was losing to Dean in one month and was gaining fast 2 months later because the DNC noticed that the anti-war base was mobilized and took advantage of it. But the undercurrents that are important in this election cycle are WOT, jobs, immigration, security and what to do about Iraq. Lotsa soccermoms couldn’t vote GWB out of office so they voted in cut&run congresscritters to get their boys back home. The candidate who strikes the right chord on these issues will score big in the debates and find a downhill path to the presidency. I personally think that Duncan Hunter has it right on all of these issues and he doesn’t have to “moderate” his views one iota, he can be real about it when other candidates flipflop around like fish. The american electorate will be able to detect such phoniness when it is so well contrasted by someone so real.
The frontloading of the primaries will have one other bottlenecking effect we have not seen to date. Most voters are not all that interested in the campaigns just yet, and won’t be until the debates and the primaries come up. At that time, there will be a HUGE information push like we’ve never seen before. Only the Internet can handle that much bandwidth bottleneck, and we will see places like Free Republic hopping like mad with millions of hits daily. The MSM won’t be able to keep up. The result could be a candidate that flies below radar and only needs a bit of a push for more name recognition. At that point, even negative publicity helps such a candidate — and the polls will be so far off that they’ll be meaningless. As examples I would cite Tim Walberg, Bill Sali, Chenowyth. There may be other examples. It’s a wide open race!
It's so ironic that you don't see that this is the whole point. We want to talk to the choir of conservatives here on FR that are trying to support and elect conservative candidates. I'm sure we will even have heated debates and arguments over those conservative candidates, but we won't be completely wasting our time arguing over a liberal.
Okay, thank you and you have a pleasant slumber as well...:;)
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.