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?
If I were going to put national security over constitutional issues, I’d probably be more inclined to McCain...but I just can’t bend the first amendment the way he seems to think is ok...
Bump for later reference on rudy’s crimefighting.
No, social conservatism isn't just the rage today. It's been there all along but because we have these so-called Republicans that think conforming to political correctness is the correct thing to do social conservatives have been pushed aside. Doesn't protecting future generations from the War on the Unborn count for anything? Isn't it self serving to claim to be "tough on terror" when you support the "pro-choice" movement. Isn't it hypocritial to say you're "tough on terror" all the while you restrict the RTKBA and sue manufacturers of firearms. It is after all your first responsibility to protect your family and yourself. Isn't it hypocritical to say you're pro-family but yet denigrate marriage with "civil unions". I see nothing civil with homosexual relationships.
Take a good look at the Republican Party Platforms. See where Rudy fits in...I think you will find that he is more in line with the Democratic Party Platforms.
What good is defending this nation from terrorists if we continue to kill our unborn and forfeit our God given rights?
But what are we all to do now in 2007? Who is our Reagan? I just am not seeing a Conservative with a depth and vison of Reagan.
So, what are we to do. The Dem ticket will be, Hillary and Obama. They know the only way to win is by overcoming Hillarys negatives by putting an african-American on the ticket.
Hillary is the most evil, Machiavellian Beast to run for POTUS ever. I think she is worse than Bill, if that can be. So, just think.
Hillary:
SCOTUS: More Ginsbergs....
Another Janet Reno and WACO?
Dont ask, dont tell becomes Tell!
Universal health care?
Taxes up to?
Kyoto treaty?
Islamic terror on the march?
Israel has to give what?
Kisses PA leader on the cheek?
Hillarys CIA?
Hillarys NSA?
Hillarys FBI?
Hillarys Pentagon
Hillarys China policy?
Hillary WILL destroy OUR nation. Period. She must be stopped at all cost. What ever it takes. SO, IMHO, those who at the end of the day, go play hooky instead of voting for someone, other than Hillary, will have a hand in our destruction.
Take the long view friends. The big picture. We had to go through Ford to get to Reagan. But look what we got in between. CARTER! And we are still paying for it! Iran and the Islamofascists.
We conservatives may have to wait to launch another Reagan. But, we dont have to have Hillary-Carter to destroy OUR nation while we wait.
Thank you, Thank you, thank you. I am SOOOO glad to see this thread. I see some of these R’s that support Rudy and I can’t see what the attraction is for them.
Run, Fred please run.
You asked if he would “forfeit your duty and honor and stay home” if Rudy was the republican candidate.
I don’t see how else that can be interpreted than saying that not voting for Rudy in the general election would be dishonorable and a deriliction of duty.
If you would like to explain what you really meant by that statement, I’ll be happy to gain wisdom.
Good answer, Blackirish. As well, NYC’s economy is exceeded only by 6 or 7 states.
I heard Rudy on FNC a few weeks ago and in 60 seconds he articulated why the president is right about Iraq and why the Democrats are wrong better than anyone I’ve heard in 5 years.
He said something like: “Since when has a national party suggested giving the enemy a timetable for our withdrawal from the battlefield? It’s unheard of and unprecedented.”
Free Republic has melted down many times.
And is now irrelevant
“And died to never be heard from again.
The predictions of it’s demise are legion.
And all the good posters have been banned or left. (and they are now on other sites MUCH better than FR)
All Rudy supporters are being banned.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, then I suppose I’ll get to take an active role in its re-building efforts, seeing as I just got here. Why are you not hammering old-timer? Breaktime is over.
I wasn’t under any misperceptions. But thanks anyway.
You are one sick guy
You can read my posts from the last 9 years and see if you find any evidence that I hate FR...I can tell you right now though, if you are JR's spokesman,Im outta here...and Jim , is this really what you want?
We survived the Clintons once if it comes to that. If the Republicans don’t want to get hit in their right flank then they should not leave it open.
Excellent post and I agree with you 100%.
“Social conservatism is all the rage and the heck with national security and fiscal restraint.”
Fiscal restraint? Rudy?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1812568/posts
“But what Forbes failed to point out is that in Rudy’s second term, when the economy was booming, he abandoned fiscal restraint and became a big-spending liberal. City budget expenditures jumped 25 percent – twice the inflation rate – and Giuliani left his successor a projected operating deficit of $4.5 billion and New York’s citizens with the highest tax burden in any major municipality in America.”
So the fiscal conservatism spin is just myth - all you have left is “national security”. Well, rudy is soft on illegals, that’s the truth. So we have to narrow “national security” down to the WOT.
And rudy’s actual credentials on that are...?????
Talk about “single issue” voters. Ignore everything else, because rudy has talked tough on the WOT!!!! Oh boy!
Rudy is cool.
Most folks know that, I have no prob with him being president.
I do have problems with others applying a litmus test to those who support him. Its a free country last I looked, I’m not gonna change my support just to fit in.
It's the owner's prerogative. Conservatism 101 :)
LOL. A few post back you were playing an aggrieved goody two shoes...
“Ditto with mentioning that Reagan used to be a Democrat and signed what at the time was the most liberal abortion legislation in the nation.”
Reagan was a Roosevelt Democrat, meaning back in history he actually voted for Roosevelt, becoming a Republican in 1962, which puts him as a Republican since before the “60s” as we know them.
As the Governor of California in 1968 at the height of the sixties he signed the abortion bill sent to him, a decision that he quickly regretted. This was years before Roe vs Wade and before the great abortion wars that followed that 1973 decision, to continually use that to justify pro abortion activities by politicians during those intense abortion battles of the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and the first decade of the 21st century is misleading and besmirches Reagan’s reputation by throwing him into the current (or any) pro abortion crowd, it would be more honest to make your argument without using President Reagan’s name, unless of course you use it in a way that accurately supports his beliefs.
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.