Sorry, does this one cheer you up?
Posted on 05/03/2009 12:32:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
I'm going to try one more time to explain what FR is all about.
Free Republic is a conservative site. That does not necessarily mean it is a Republican site. In fact there may be many Republicans we don't support and some Republican issues we cannot agree with.
I'll throw in Arlen Specter as a prime example of a Republican we cannot support. Should be obvious to all why not. Should also be just as obvious to all that we cannot support Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain and his lap dog Lindsay Graham, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, et al.
Some of the issues we cannot support as conservatives even though sometimes initiated by so-called Republicans include TARP, or any kind of government bailout of private enterprise, federal intrusion into free markets, federalized education systems, government provided or controlled health care systems, abortion, gay marriage, amnesty, global warming, gun control, etc.
I guess there is more than one definition of conservatism floating around out there, and this won't be text book, but the one we use involves defending, preserving and protecting our constitution, our unalienable rights, our traditional family values, our American heritage, our nation, our borders and our sovereignty.
We aggressively defend our rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness!
We aggressively defend our rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to keep and bear arms, right to due process, right to equality under the law, right to be governed under the rule of law, right to constitutionally limited government, right to corruption free government, right to self-government and our private property rights, etc.
We also aggressively defend our right to state and local government for all issues not expressly delegated to the central government by the constitution.
We aggressively defend our rights to free markets and our rights to live our lives free of government intrusion, interference, coercion, force, or abuse of any kind.
We aggressively defend our rights to national sovereignty, state sovereignty and individual sovereignty!
And this definition also includes aggressively fighting against all enemies foreign and domestic who may try to deprive us of our rights or sovereignty. This would obviously include all foreign enemies, but also we defend against RINOS, Democrats, liberals, socialists, Marxists, communists, militant feminists or homosexualists, radical environmentalists, etc, etc, etc.
And we expect our elected representatives to also aggressively defend our rights and fight against all enemies foreign and domestic. We do not elect people and send them to DC or our state capitals, etc, to reach across the aisles or to be bipartisan or to negotiate or compromise away our rights. If you're not going to aggressively fight for us, and for our rights, STAY OUT!!
We bow to no king but God!
Our God-given unalienable rights are NOT negotiable!
Do NOT Tread on US!
Thank you very much!
One can easily say the same about Duncan Hunter. He’s a good man without question, but I don’t believe his heart was in the race either. He could have done what Huckabee did at Ames and he didn’t take the opportunity.
I wish people would quit posting that picture.
I get all choked up every time I see it.
Like you, I see Mr. Romney as someone with some negative things in his past and too much of a tendency to try to find common ground with those who would take us in the wrong direction. On the other hand, he has nearly perfect executive experience to be the president. Fred Thompson also had some negatives, but somehow, he was forgiven for all of them while Mitt Romney was not. While I'd like to see the GOP find another leader for the future, I'll support Mr. Romney if I think he's our best chance to rid the country of Barak Obama. He may not take us exactly in the direction that I think we should go, but he might start the process of making the turn.
I have my qualms about Mr. Romney, but I thought the same thing about George W. Bush in 2000. I was against his nomination, and as a resident of a state that I knew was safe, I was happy voting against him to try to send a message. He was a disappointment in some important ways, but Alan Keyes would not have beaten Algore in the general election. I'm glad that Algore wasn't in the White House when the planes hit the towers, so I'm happy that then-Governor Bush was nominated.
I'm angry but maybe also a bit amused. The anti-Romney rants of today are similar to the same rants that caused many good FReepers to be banned in 2000 because the site decided that we were going to support George Bush regardless of anything. I was careful back then not to say too often that I would vote for Pat Buchanan in the general election. I have no doubt that a few people were trying to have me banned. I wonder whether any of those banned Buchanan or Keyes people still lurk enough to see what is happening. Maybe Free Republic will even open its arms once again to all of those Pat Buchanan supporters who were banned in the past.
All the best,
Bill
Well, I shouldn’t be as busy as now. It’s part of the job to pass things off on the vp [don’t I know..].
Considering the way that they've been treated, I wouldn't blame them from dropping out entirely.
Although General Matis is dirtied by his involvement or by his command position during the Haditha propaganda win by our enemy lovers, he is a natural born fighter.
I’d vote for him for POTUS just for the quotes that would be generated and the wails and moans of misery it would cause the betrayer class to have a USMC General in charge.
Well said!
Sorry, does this one cheer you up?
Part of the problem is allowing RINO states to choose our candidates...thus ensuring we’re stuck with RINO McLame.
Since when has Iowa or New Hampshire voted for a conservative?
I will crawl over broken glass to vote for Sarah Palin and there are 3 votes in this family for her!!!!!
Now you're just making them face reality again. You'll never be popular on here doing that.
Well, I wish we had someone better than Steele handling those problems.
Honestly, I’m not optimistic about the ability of the party to get it’s act together in time for 2010 or 2012.
Where is that ‘reality’?
Please, show us where Sarah ‘voted’ for Slick Willard.
Yeah amnesty that’s a deal breaker for me. In terms of current issues, if we could only prevail on a few issues it would be illegal immigration, abortion, guns, and capitalism. Wow I can’t believe its come to this capitalism is a current political issue we hope to prevail on. Hx though the core issues of liberty are always under attack by the powers of this present darkness.
I can only add my hearty “Amen!”
Amen to that. I believe that legal limitations prevent Free Republic from making endorsements, but as individuals, we need to recruit, encourage, and support good candidates to the greatest degree possible.
On Mitt world silly.
On Mitt World everyone votes for Mitt...
Ah Pancake suppers...
You’ll enjoy being president, I guess each club is different, ours it seems the President does a lot of work...
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.