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?
Who makes laws?
Congress.
Who controls Congress? Democrats.
So if you put a ‘liberal’ in the Whitehouse and bills are passed in the senate and house to totally outlaw ANY protest against abortion, then, who either VETOES or signs it into LAW?
That’s right. The ‘liberal’ president who is Pro-Abortion.
Good grief.
In light of recent events, you tag’s a little passé.
Touché!
LOL!
With a democrat congress and likely to stay the same until the next Census report, and even then it’s a crap shot, I dunno how this subject is terribly relevent.
That is a scenario I do not want to see.
Olé!
No, if he’s the GOP nominee, any swift voting is overwith. It’ll only help the democrat nominee at that point.. Or am I wrong?
You know the crew.....nicknamedbob, etc.
I think the point Rudy-supporters are trying to make is that Rudy is better than Hillary when it comes to prosecuting the WOT, and that only Rudy can actually beat Hillary. According to that logic, if we want to be tough on terror, we MUST elect Rudy, otherwise we'll get Hillary.
Convoluted logic, but it makes sense if you start with the premise that only Rudy can beat Hillary, which most Rudy-supporters ardently believe.
Ping me.
Make me laugh.
If you reverse the order of what I posted and put ‘republicans’ in charge, then a ‘Dan Qualye’ president can indeed affect law.
Any other scenario would be a ‘wash’.
Bob’s got a nickname?
Wow. Go feeger.
PBA was a line drawn for many people, gratefully. The pro-death crowd has stepped over that line and revealed their true intentions.
I can remember a time when I was young and pro-choice for others, but pro-life for myself. It didn’t hit me until years following my refusal to go with my niece for her procedure when asked to. I was all high and mighty for not getting involved. Then, I watched her self destruction over a period of time. My crime was avoiding it and not encouraging her to do otherwise from the start. I see things very different now. Gratefully, my niece has recovered, only by the grace of Our Lord.
Gosh, I hope not. I do think it likely that Rudy gets the nomination, and wins the Presidency.
I respect your feelings for him. I don't share them, of course, but you've always been very fair to me.
But of course, it isn't much fun to try and be a part of a political discussion where folks are simply calling me names over and over. I don't mind the flames, but I'm here for open, honest political discussion and debate with folks who think differently.
If it becomes too uncomfortable for most folks to express dissenting opinions here, I think that wouldn't be sad.
You're kidding, right?
Search some of Deb's old posts and get back to me.
Look at some of the discussions from 1999 as well.
Me either.
etc........:-)
: )
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.