Free Republic does not and will not support RINOS!! Not now!! Not ever!!

My day after Thanksgiving message | 11/26/200 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

Apparently there are still some posters on FR who are fast asleep. Wake up! Dammit! We are in the middle of a conservative rebellion! While you were sleeping we, along with millions of other freedom loving grassroots Americans have participated in hundreds of tea parties all across this great land and fully intend to keep it up until all of America is awake. We are fed up and mad as hell! We grassroots Americans are delivering a message to the ruling class: NO MORE!!

No more big government! No more high taxes! No more government bailouts! No more government takeovers! No government healthcare! No more corruption! No more global baloneyism!!

We're sick and tired of liberals and RINOs running roughshod over our God given Liberty!

We want our country back! We want our freedom back! We want it all back!!

No more socialism!!

Cut the taxes! Cut the spending! Cut the government!

Restore the constitutional limits on government! Restore our freedom!!

And not only no, but HELL NO to liberals and RINOS!!

Free Republic will not support RINOS!! Rudy McRomney, et al, can go straight to hell!!

The strategy is we win, they lose.

Any questions?

[af_vet_rr]

No, to add insult to injury, you get history wrong. The GOP and President Bush had SLIM majorities in the Senate for just over 4 years. Remember we had Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle for nearly 2 years...

When you have an agenda of increasing the size, cost, and scope of the federal government and everything else the RINOs did that appealed to the left, you don't need much of a majority since many Democrats in Congress were more than happy to support the RINOs' goals.

[hennie pennie]

Who wants to listen to Art Bell? He's the guy who quit broadcasting for the millionth time after an article was run about his abandoned son & daughter from his first of FOUR marriages.

Coast to Coast AM BLASTING 'Climate Gate' (I am shocked! - LVD)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2395282/posts

[ejonesie22]

It takes all types...

[bcsco]

It takes all types...

Yet they say we're intolerant. Sheesh...

[CharlesWayneCT]

What is “right” on life? What is “right enough”?

What if someone personally opposed abortion, and wanted to ban abortion by law, except for rape and incest?

What is someone personally opposed abortion, but wouldn’t ban it until after the 1st trimester?

What if someone personally opposed abortion, but was OK with contraceptives including the pill?

There are a lot of pro-life politicians who fall into one of those three categories — NONE of which are completely “pro-life”. We have a lot of pro-life politicians we have elected who are fine with rape/incest exceptions — and we’ve supported them here at FR.

Again, the Republican party is not the conservative party. If we eliminate everybody from the party who isn’t pro-life, that leaves us what, 50-60 percent of the population? And a lot of pro-life people are otherwise liberal, and would not be acceptable in the party, but that leaves us a permanent minority.

If we get enough pro-life democrats elected, we can afford to have a few pro-choice republicans. If we get enough pro-gun democrats elected, we can afford to have a few anti-gun republicans.

But I understand your point — I wouldn’t give money to a pro-abortion politician (if there were two running, I’d vote for the republican).

[Cedric]

Yes. Yes. Yes. No (no).

However, to enhance my already prodigious powers of persuasion, perhaps, I will incorporate stupid song lyrics, juvenile graphics and laxative references, in the future.

I'll take it under advisement.

[af_vet_rr]

I went into the voting booth and supported McCain over 0bama. Do I lose my Conservative creds now? Is the zot imminent?

Are you going to keep on supporting liberals with an (R) next to their name in the future? If so, then the answer is yes, you can't call yourself a Conservative if you fail to be a Conservative on the one day it counts the most.

If you are going to take a stand and only support Conservatives from here on out, then you are a Conservative.

Election day is where the rubber meets the road.

[rintense]

Aw, you disappoint me. Seems you’re scared of being banned now that Jim has come to play. Where’s all that bravado now?

[Darksheare]

Hey, I'm not the one who said that FR was totalitarian, then turned around and tried to kiss up.

MMmmm.. that'd be you.
Oh, she appreciates your support.

[Darksheare]

Yeah, he sure was full of bluster just a couple pages back.

[paulycy]

Are you going to keep on supporting liberals with an (R) next to their name in the future?

This is a very long thread so I don't blame you if you haven't read my previous posts.

I believe that every candidate in every election must be judged on a case-by-case basis based on the GOALS OF THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT and not simply on some definition of the Ideal Candidate.

We must fight with the army we have and, IMHO, do what we can to make sure that there is a growing number of true Conservatives to vote for.

I am *very* interested in Conservative principles winning in the long run. At the same time we can only vote for the people who are actually in the race. The bulk of our work needs to be in getting true Conservatives into the race. The Tea Party movement may help greatly in that.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Neither McCain nor Graham would fit in at all in the Democratic party. Even when they disagree with the conservatives on something, they rarely are on board with the liberal version of things.

We can do better in both states — so we should. But I’d hope that any of us would jump at the chance to replace a democrat with either of those two. Heck, we’d jump at the chance to replace the two Maine senators with these two.

individuals can be extremists. They can be absolutists. Everybody has that right. a party won’t survive if it is made up solely of extremists and purists. We should certainly rant against policies that are wrong, no matter who is pushing them, but if you can’t beat these guys in primaries, and you decide to turn their seats over to democrats, it won’t make things better.

[bcsco]

I am *very* interested in Conservative principles winning in the long run. At the same time we can only vote for the people who are actually in the race.

The question was "Are you going to keep on supporting liberals with an (R) next to their name in the future?". Support has connotations beyond our vote. So tell me, if a liberal Republican is running against a Democrat, would you support that liberal Republican monetarily? You've already stated you would vote for him/her. Would you actually support their liberal orthodoxy with your contributions? Or simply by your vote because they're the 'least offensive' and you feel obligated to vote?

[CharlesWayneCT]

You keep making the same mistake. FreeRepublic isn’t a Republican site. It’s a conservative site. Nobody can dictate what candidates are supported by a site; if someone wants to run a site where only sufficiently conservative candidate is acceptable, that’s a good thing.

Using Romney as an example, he gained enough traction in the party to be in the running for President. He won the republican nomination for Senator. He won election as a Republican Governor.

The fear among conservatives here is that he is gaining TOO much traction amongst republicans — and they fight to prevent it.

It scares me that you think that conservatives are “the fringe people”. We aren’t a majority, but we aren’t fringers. But I think that’s because of your confusion between “Republican party” and “conservative”.

[paulycy]

Would you actually support their liberal orthodoxy with your contributions? Or simply by your vote because they're the 'least offensive' and you feel obligated to vote?

You are defining the candidate as measured by some Ideal Candidate as opposed to choosing the candidate, regardless of party, which would best further the Conservative movement's cause. And that determination can only be made on a case-by-case basis.

If you don't vote you don't matter. After deciding to vote you must choose someone who is actually in the race (write-ins seldom matter.)

Putting some sort of vague, implied negative connotation on this real-life necessity is not useful. But the system is set up so that you can choose not to matter in any particular election or in every election if you want. That's up to you.

[bcsco]

You are defining the candidate as measured by some Ideal Candidate as opposed to choosing the candidate, regardless of party, which would best further the Conservative movement's cause. And that determination can only be made on a case-by-case basis.

I'm not defining anything. I'm saying the candidate was already defined by the primary process (choosing the candidate, as you put it). So, would you support the liberal Republican monetarily?

If you don't vote you don't matter. After deciding to vote you must choose someone who is actually in the race (write-ins seldom matter.)

Quite often, you don't matter even when you vote. Such as a vote for the McCain ticket this past election. Or a vote for Republican candidate for Governor in Illinois these past few election cycles. Simply saying you must vote because otherwise you have no say doesn't always ring true anymore.

Putting some sort of vague, implied negative connotation on this real-life necessity is not useful.

There's nothing vague about my question. If, after the primary, there is a liberal Republican running against a Democrat, would you support that Republican candidacy monetarily? The question is simple enough.

[nanetteclaret]

Thanks for everything, Jim Rob. My sis, boxlunch, and I can’t have a conversation without one of us saying, “Well, I read (fill in the blank) on FR...” Thank you for providing such an effective way for us to be informed. We really appreciate it!

P.S. We agree - no more RINOS!!

[BluesDuke]

We didn't end up with [His Excellency Al-Hashish Field Marshmallow Dr. Barack] Obama [Dada, COD, RIP, LSMFT, Would-Be Life President of the Republic Formerly Known as the United States, and Chairman of the Organisation of Halfrican Unity*] because Conservatives finally started taking a stand, we ended up with Obama because the Republicans had 6 years in which to shrink the size, cost, and scope of the government, and to show the American public that they are responsible caretakers of the government. Instead they expanded the government, made it more expensive and more powerful. They went against Conservative beliefs and the American public reacted appropriately.

We ended up with a Democratic Congress in the 2006 elections for the same reason. There were those who tried warning, before both the 2006 and 2008 elections, and did we listen?

I used to say it and get slammed for it: The road to Damnocratic hell is paved with Republican't good intentions.

(* - Fixed! ;) )

[kbennkc]

Well is wished . I like old JD . It was a mystery to me , why Keeping the Mav and ditching JD would happen in such a freedom loving state as Arizona .

[BlueStateBlues]

The mouse that roared, and kept on roaring, and then the RINO’s roared-—in retreat!