BURNIN' DOWN THE TENT!!!
| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 01/12/2010 1:02:14 PM PST by Admin Moderator, reason:
flamewar |
Posted on 01/08/2010 6:18:55 AM PST by MestaMachine
BURNIN' DOWN THE TENT!!!
Do we want action? Yes, we do!!!
Are we willing to take a giant step forward and create a central action site that allows us to see at a glance every single state’s candidates for national office, House and Senate, to separate the wheat from the chaff? That is our hope. We want to spend our money, our time, and our votes wisely. Our time is JUST as valuable as the money we spend.
The goal is to take back and take over the GOP, or move it out of the way, and elect conservatives to every office we can affect whether the RNC likes it or not.
To do this, we need a clearinghouse and a plan of action that encompasses all 50 states in ONE place. That place is Free Republic. THIS is where we nationalize the 2010 election cycle and choose where our money and our time is spent. The genius of Free Republic is that it already has the 50 state message boards. We don’t have to “google” our way through hundreds of candidates in individual states to find out who is who doing what. It’s already here, just not out in the public eye. This will change that.
I, and others, have repeatedly asked Freepers to present workable ideas with this goal in mind, and there have been many, but the two I am going to post here are comprehensive, have been well thought out over a long period of time, and the magic of it is that it has never been tried before...and THAT is precisely why it will work.
Freeper blueyon, (the originator of RINO FREE AMERICA PROJECT on FaceBook,) and I have worked on the idea to have each state message board create individual STATE BY STATE threads on the forum which presents information ONLY about their national congressional candidates.
We need their candidates’ names, pictures, platforms, voting records, (if applicable,) backgrounds, opinions, newslinks, statements, and whatever other information might be available including links to candidate’s’ websites if they exist.
The state message boards are full of much of this information and no one knows local politics like the locals. It’s time to make local politics national, and here is where we do it. Fifty states, fifty threads, ALL politics will be Free Republic Local politics.
Freepers have the best researchers in the business. We need that right here, right now if we are going to burn down the RINO tent and do it effectively. They will NOT be allowed to silence us again.
Those threads will be information only. Conservative candidates will be flagged and RINOs will be tagged. Anyone who wishes to debate or discuss individual candidates can start a separate thread for that here, AND/OR on the RINO FREE discussion board on FaceBook as well.
I expect these threads to become lengthy, so be sure to add the state and candidate's name as keywords.
The SECOND part of this plan is a NATIONAL strategy for accomplishing our goal once we have singled out the candidates we choose to support and gather THOSE candidates on to ONE thread. It is our intent to coordinate efforts with the National Tea Party Movement and have them link to our information as well as share whatever info they might have that we don’t...although I find that next to impossible knowing Freepers. There just might be tidbits of inside information we might not have access to, so contributions from outside Freeperdom will be researched by us FOR us and we will do well not to post rumor or inuendo if we have no proof.
The National Action plan is the sole hard work of a longtime Freeper who has asked to remain anonymous. It is his work and since he first sent it to me, he has updated it several times for the better. I neither take, nor deserve, any credit for it whatsover, and only on that basis did I accept the invitation to present it as I saw fit.
I have opted to make only the smallest changes to his ideas as they seem to me to be the stepstones of the future. However he did specifically ask that any constructive criticisms or additional ideas be sought and wants it known that this is a foundation we can build on. He has added reasons, including some from Scripture, for these ideas which are included in the body of information presented below. Many of you will find them relevant. Those who don’t will still find the ideas themselves worth your time. I am awed by the effort put forth here which is why I have left it pretty much in tact with minimal edits. I think you will be as well.
With that said, and without further adieu, continue on and see what ideas suit you best.
I guess you are going to have to wait a while.
There is no more seditious document to all political structures than the scriptures. David saw this and wrote about this in Psalms 2:1-3, “Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.”
A recent example of this in our own government is the decision of the Washington D.C. council as reported “But in the conflict between gay rights and religious rights, the city favors gay rights. It argues that the church should not discriminate while it receives public funds.”
As long as our religious institutions continue to receive exemptions from income and property taxes and our children are required to attend government schools we are vulnerable to this preemption of the First Amendment.
If we voluntarily acquiesce in the violation of Islam's right to first amendment protection we set the precedent for the violation of our own.
Let truth prevail in the arena!
“FWIW every person in America, if they so much as buy a gallon of gas or turn on a light at home is a “taxpayer”. So if you try to limit the voting right to those who pay taxes, then what is meant by that? Income taxes? What if you don’t have an income or the money you earn is tax free? Should you then be prohibited from voting? Such a proposal should not even be suggested on a forum called FREE REPUBLIC!”
I agree with you about the taxpayer platform. As I repeatedly stated, this is a flesh out thread. There are taxes everyone pays whether we like it or not and money, or the lack thereof, should NOT be the deciding factor in who does or does not vote.
The author of those points has HIS opinion. I have mine. On this point, I have a somewhat different perspective.
I think it becomes difficult when we see people gaming the system because for those people, our taxes pay for the money they use to pay the taxes you spoke of. OTOH, there are many people who need and deserve the help they get. The abuses are so blatant and so in your face, we tend to forget the people in genuine need or the hardworking people whose salaries are below the poverty level, but they try so very hard to make ends meet.
It’s the squeaky wheel effect.
>What if you don’t have an income or the money you earn is
>tax free? Should you then be prohibited from voting? Such
>a proposal should not even be suggested on a forum called
>FREE REPUBLIC!
Producers, is a better word. Thank you. Could you not see that was the context? Why are you not offering better alternatives? Why see only the worst? Why scorn?
>This thread and this movement may be a “work in progress”
>but I don’t particularly like the direction it is headed.
>Is it our aim to overturn tyranny from the left only to
>replace it with a tyranny from the right? Some of these
>proposals appear to be leaning that direction.
What alternatives do you offer? Or are you just scorning to look smart?
>Rather than focusing on a platform that limits our
>freedoms of religion, our voting rights and our free
>speech rights, perhaps we should be focusing on how we can
>remove the power to regulate ANY aspect of our lives from
>the Central Government and returning that power to the
>States, the communities, and to the Individuals. That is
>the principle this nation was founded upon. That is the
>first principle of a FREE REPUBLIC.
Then do it. It just so happens, some people will actively oppose Islam in this effort.
There are no commands in this thread. If people want to step up to do something, then they can.
You can do what you want. Just because you find it distasteful to oppose Islam, it does not mean you are commanded to if you will help.
Just admit you were shortsighted, and move on. It’s the adult thing to do.
We had a woman come to our church, and testify that she was from Lebanon, and that the freedoms they gave to the Muslims were used by the Muslims to subjugate the Christian community. She warned us against this mistake her country had already made.
Again, you are under-informed, and naive about this.
You still have not responded to my questions in posts 76 and 77. This leads me to believe your position is extremely weak and indefensible. Beyond avoiding them, and speaking vaguely about freedom, you don’t have much.
You still have yet to answer nine questions in posts 76 and 77.
I guess you are going to have to wait a while.
***********************************
If you had answers, you would give them. Your position in this debate is proven exceedingly weak.
The whole scenario of not responding to someone for the sake of honor, is reserved for a longtime proven enemy. I am hardly that to you to not merit responses to questions.
Do you realize that you are arguing in a circle? Why are you doing this? Is is your intent to jam and halt this project before we can really achieve ANYTHING meaningful? This is about elections which are bearing down on us very quickly.
>There is no more seditious document to all political
>structures than the scriptures.
“Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake”
1 Peter 2:13
Only if your government is evil should they be disobeyed. Like in the matter of Christ. If a law of men says, “forsake Christ”, I will dis-obey.
>It argues that the church should not discriminate while it
>receives public funds.
Churches should not take “strings attached” money that forces it to forsake scripture.
Islam deliberately competes to subvert the established order. It is treason.
P-Marlowe and blue-duncan: You are speaking as if you know nothing about Islam. Read.
>There is no more seditious document to all political
>structures than the scriptures.
“Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake”
1 Peter 2:13
Only if your government is evil should they be disobeyed. Like in the matter of Christ. If a law of men says, “forsake Christ”, I will dis-obey.
>It argues that the church should not discriminate while it
>receives public funds.
Churches should not take “strings attached” money that forces it to forsake scripture.
Islam deliberately competes to subvert the established order. It is treason.
P-Marlowe and blue-duncan: You are speaking as if you know nothing about Islam. Read.
If you are not the author of post #4 (the one that I find sooooo disturbing) then where did it come from and why did you post it?
I concluded (since you posted it without attribution to any other source) that post #4 was the platform that YOU were proposing.
So, if you don't agree with the proposals in post #4, then why did you post it, and why are you so vigorously defending it when much of it is nothing more than a proposal for a tyrannical government exercising power from the right to replace the tyranny we now have coming from the left?
The tendency toward tyranny is not limited to just Commies and Socialists, but it is in the fallen nature of man. We are all tempted by power and we are all prone to tyranny as a measure of exercising that power.
It is the ability of men in leadership to resist the temptation to impose their agendas through tyrannical means that marks a heroic leader. But as Lincoln so aptly phrased it, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Whether the power comes from the right or the left it is a corrupting influence.
Hence the direction that we should be heading in any conservative movement is to take power away from our elected officials and not to trade a socialist power structure for one that pretends to be conservative.
You are not going to acheive ANYTHING meaningful if you are entertaining ideas to strip away the Liberties and replace them with tyranny.
Ideas to limit the vote to "taxpayers", to effectively outlaw certain religions, and to outlaw certain forms of speech and whatever other wild @$$ ideas you guys are coming up with to "win elections" is not going to "win elections", it is going to turn people away from your movement before it gets off the ground.
The TEA PARTY movement is about LIMITING GOVERNMENT, not going from one tyranny to another.
So what I am trying to do, is to focus your direction on the prize. The prize is LIMITING THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT power and not using the Central Government power to achieve the opposite of what the Liberals are using that power to acheive. The idea is to take power away from our elected officials, not to give them more.
Now, are the points of activism that are being called for posted someplace in bullet form? I can't seem to distill them out of so much verbage. Most people are like me; not enough time to distill so many points of action. Can we keep it simple and clear enough to implement on the spur of the moment?
Did you NOT read the introduction to this thread?
I posted this:
The National Action plan is the sole hard work of a longtime Freeper who has asked to remain anonymous. It is his work and since he first sent it to me, he has updated it several times for the better. I neither take, nor deserve, any credit for it whatsover, and only on that basis did I accept the invitation to present it as I saw fit.
I have opted to make only the smallest changes to his ideas as they seem to me to be the stepstones of the future. However he did specifically ask that any constructive criticisms or additional ideas be sought and wants it known that this is a foundation we can build on. He has added reasons, including some from Scripture, for these ideas which are included in the body of information presented below. Many of you will find them relevant. Those who don’t will still find the ideas themselves worth your time. I am awed by the effort put forth here which is why I have left it pretty much in tact with minimal edits. I think you will be as well.
With that said, and without further adieu, continue on and see what ideas suit you best.
**************************************
The INTENTION of this entire project was to garner HERE on Free Republic, an information central. Did you read ANYTHING except what you chose to argue over and over in this thread?
The rest was a plan of action OFF of Free Republicand the ideas expressed within that document were suggestions, not commands. You have no more right of free speech than he does. His concerns are valid. Islam is at war with us. Whether you accept that or not, it is the truth. Many people are concerned, and rightfully so, because islam is a politic all unto itself and it will never reconcile itself with the Judeo-Christian ethic this country was founded on. Rather, it will try to accomplish our demise by whatever means at their command. This is not good for any living thing, let alone for AMERICA. You are either American, or you are a muslim and never the twain shall meet. That is what they preach and that is their goal.
I had sent this to a previous poster privately because I did NOT want to turn this POLITICAL thread into a religious debate. I WANTED to concentrate on trying to organize the state boards and Tea Party Patriots and Freepers to do something worthwhile. It was a LOT of work and we tried to make it as narrow as we could for here, and as wide as we could for beyond here.
Instead, you have impeded almost any discussion outside this defense of a politic that seeks our destruction. So be it.
Here is what I wrote:
The religious freedom issue has really not been addressed to the full extent it should be. The bedrock of this country is that we are free to believe and practice whatever religion, (or non-religion,) we so choose without state mandates OR interference, so long as that religion does not infringe on the rights of others.
That is where it goes off the tracks. What actually qualifies as a religion? And where do you draw the line when it infringes on the rights of others? Does sheer numbers matter?
My personal opinion is no. Islam does not qualify and I will tell you why. In islam, NO ONE ELSE has rights. Their “religion” holds its adherants under penalty of death and any other religion must be wiped off the face of the earth or converted by the sword or whatever means necessary. It does not matter what YOU choose.
If you were born a muslim, and you want to leave, you are a target for death in the most horrible ways imaginable. Murder and rape is justified, and that includes the rape of young boys. Rapes of non-muslim women is justified. Murder of children, especially female children, in the name of a god is barbaric at best, but they call it honor.
When they decide to build a mosque, it must have minarets that are higher than any church anywhere in the area to show the superiority of islam. It must overshadow and dwarf all other houses of worship. In some areas, they consider it a right, (which has been granted,) to broadcast their prayers as loudly as they can whether the neighborhood is mixed, whether they are a minority or not. This is blatant infringement. If Christians or Jews or even Native Americans did this, they would be hauled into court and ordered to cease and desist.
They have declared outright war on this, the United States of America. They were throughout history, are, and will be at war with anyone who does not submit to their religion and they will never stop.
It is a HUGE part of their religious practice to befriend infidels and LIE to disarm and lull them into acceptance and “tolerance” until they have sufficient numbers to defeat the infidels. They are ORDERED to hate you and always hold this in their hearts even as they smile in your face.
If muslim children attending a PUBLIC school do not wish to be touched, why then does the school mandate that NO ONE in the school can be touched, muslim or not? No handshake. No hug. No holding hands. NO TOUCHING period, and the excuses for this are insane. The REASON is islam. Period. THAT is infringement.
When Britain passed a LAW, a government LAW, that no one could show the soles of their shoes in public, saying it was for cleanliness reasons, it was sharia and nothing less. Showing the soles of your shoes to a muslim is an insult of the highest order. But a LAW for ALL of Britain?
At what point do we say that medievil barbarism is NOT religion? That their rights do not trump ours?
Every time they go to court or go to a city council or a schoolboard to advance their rights by limiting ours, we have lost a battle. This is how they will win a war if we do nothing.
*****************************
Now. You want to argue the fine points of the religion of peace, go to it. Tell me why their rights trump mine. Go ahead. You have decided you will not go past this so jump in and explain to ME why I should grant a sworn enemy of this country rights it would NEVER grant to me or my children.
“P-Marlowe and blue-duncan: You are speaking as if you know nothing about Islam. Read.”
I’m honored to spoken of in the same company as P-Marlowe. Now, if you know, what was the ruling body and how humane was it when Peter and Paul wrote these statements?
“Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake”
1 Peter 2:13
“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:”
Rom. 13:3
Notice the statements were not qualified. There is no exeption for “evil” governments, withinn the sphere of their appointed powers.
Going to do exactly that, Nan. Wanted to get thoughts, and maybe wisdom from other Freepers before we settled on a bullet point plan. Have been asking people for help from the state boards to get the info threads going.
New thread will be very focussed and very concise. I promise.
We are all anonymous here. If this Freeper is not willing to post this stuff under his own Freeper Handle, then I don't see why anyone should suffer his opinions on this forum.
However he did specifically ask that any constructive criticisms or additional ideas be sought and wants it known that this is a foundation we can build on.
I have posted my "constructive criticism", specifically my objection to the idea that we can replace liberal tyranny with our own brand of conservative tyranny. Outlawing religions and preventing people from voting and restricting free speech and some of the other proposals that are being made here are not going to win elections. Those kind of idiotic (yes IDIOTIC) proposals run counter to the idea of LIBERTY that the TEA PARTY stands for. Those proposals simply allow conservative tyrants to replace liberal tyrants.
I WANTED to concentrate on trying to organize the state boards and Tea Party Patriots and Freepers to do something worthwhile.
Tyranny, no matter which side it comes from is not "worthwhile". Our mission is to promote LIBERTY not to squelch it under the idea that WE as conservatives know best what is good for the American People, and as such WE are going to ram our ideas down the throats of those who do not agree with our idea of what a true American ought to think.
He has added reasons, including some from Scripture, for these ideas which are included in the body of information presented below.
You specifically chastized me for allegedly hijacking this thread on a religious issue, and then you call me out by saying that these proposals are somehow "scriptural"??? Are you not being hypocritical by telling me to stop making religious arguments when YOU are making them on the same thread??
Now. You want to argue the fine points of the religion of peace, go to it.
you have missed the point of my arguments entirely. It matters not one whit whether or not the "religion of peace" has any "fine points". I think the "religion of peace" is the product of Satan himself and that it is a religion of Satan and not of God. So what? That's my opinion and as an American I am entitled to that opinion. But as a lover of Liberty I am constrained to suffer Satanic religions the same liberty that I enjoy in my own worship of God. To suggest that we should take away the liberty of Muslims in order to promote Christianity, is nothing more than Christian Tyranny. If you don't think such a thing could exist, then I would suggest you read the 10,000+ page "History of the Christian Religion" by Phillip Schaff and you will see that Christians are as prone to tyranny as any other fallen man.
Again, my point on this thread has nothing to do with religion, it has to do with LIBERTY. Some of the suggestions for "winning elections" fly in the face of the principles of LIBERTY, and as such I cannot support them at all.
If you want to win elections, go for the one thing that Independents and Conservatives and even some Liberals will be drawn to, and that, my FRiend is INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY.
Fine. Then don’t support it. That is your prerogative. You support satan and call it liberty. I think that about does it for me.
No discussion whatsoever of the declaration of war by islam against us, but I suppose they are “free” to do such according to your interpretation of liberty. And when they follow through with this edict, which they have repeatedly, why, I suppose we should just bow and say thank you for showing us the TRUE meaning of “liberty” because they justify it as a religious calling.
You are ranting ridiculousness and your thinking is circular. What Christians did or did not do at some time in the past is irrelevant to what islam is doing NOW and moral equivalency with islam in 2010 is assinine.
In ancient times these very same people were called Amalek. They have not changed in 6000 years. One does NOT grant the blessings of LIBERTY to a sworn enemy who will then use it to murder us.
I loved that someone (might have been you) used the illustration of stones in a jar and adding rice. I used that illustration for children's time during worship one Sunday. After the rice, I put in sand, thus teaching that there is always room for improvement, even after you think you have done all you are supposed to do.
1) In post 108 I said: “Given Islam competes with the Constitution for allegiance and supremacy, it is treason.”
2) In response, in post 122, you said, “There is no more seditious document to all political structures than the scriptures.”
3) In response to to 122, I said in 127: ““Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake” 1 Peter 2:13 Only if your government is evil should they be disobeyed. Like in the matter of Christ. If a law of men says, “forsake Christ”, I will dis-obey.”
4) Finally, in post 133 you re-emphasize the half-truth that we must obey the government by re-quoting 1 Peter 2:13 and quoting Romans 13:3.
I oppose Islamic Fascism in that it competes with the Constitution, and you respond trying to make me out as a hypocrite in post 122 talking about the “seditious” character of scripture, and by post 133 you cite the commands of scripture to obey the authorities. Which is it?
The answer is, we are given context for obeying authorities in Acts 4:19 and 5:29 we are given an example of the Apostles disobeying the unrighteous command to be silent about Jesus Christ. Moses’ parents disobeyed the government, and put their child on the Nile, and their disobeying of the unrighteous, ungodly command to kill their son came back as Moses.
Observe:
A) Did you never learn to properly apply Acts 4:19 and 5:29 and the example of Moses, or did you forget about them, or do you simply have an agenda?
B) You forget that in this country, we elect Caesar, and the Caesars we have are incompetent and/or treasonous. Rulers are told to rule with dilligence per Romans 12:8. Since we know Islam is treason and it aims to exterminate and subjugate all else including the Christian faith, is it not “dilligent” to expel or neuter it?
C) There are 100+ million Christians in China. In the governent sanctioned churches, they are not allowed to say Jesus is coming back. Therefore, to avoid tampering with scripture, Chinese Christians meet in secret. What would you tell those Christians to do?
blue-duncan: Maybe you can answer my questions from posts 76 and 77. P-Marlowe is unable to acknowledge the substance of them, and continue to maintain plausible deniability of his culbability in the propagation of evil.
P-Marlowe: One of the many points that instantly dismantle your whole shtick is from John Adams, saying, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” The substance of posts 76 and 77 are that there is nothing moral or religious about Islam. It’s all about control.
P-Marlowe and blue-duncan: Keep posting half-truths, red-herrings, and handwavings. It is certainly error for observers to watch you using deception and half-truths, and then observe you two being out-pointed, and then you two not conceding, and then for these observers to illogically assume that your case is merit-less. That is error. But is definitely fun to watch both of you type out new half-truths and deceptions, and then for me to expose them as the deceptions and half truths that they are.
Keep it coming. Don’t stop.
blue-duncan: Your first tactic in post 122 was to contradict post 108 by making scripture out to be seditious. Then you settle in post 133 on citing scripture to back up the authorities. Why the sudden change of heart? Seems like you are opposing for the sake of opposing.
P-Marlowe: You still have not answered posts 76 and 77. Why the handwaving? What are you hiding?
“The answer is, we are given context for obeying authorities in Acts 4:19 and 5:29”
Context says that Peter and John were addressing the Jewish Sanhedrin for proclaiming salvation in Jesus while preaching on the temple grounds. The limit of the Sanhedrin’s authority was the Temple and its grounds. The Roman governor controlled all else in Judea. Rome had not yet spoken on the subject.
In fact, later, while in Corinth Gallio, the Roman Deputy, ruled that Paul’s preaching was not a concern of Rome and that was one of the reasons for Peter’s and Paul’s admonition to pray for those in power and obey the rulers.
At the time the decision gave political legitimacy for the proclamation of the gospel in all the Roman provinces. However it did not change the fact that the proclamation of Jesus as Lord was a direct attack on the principalities, powers and rulers of this world. This all changed after the fire in Rome when christians became Nero’s scapegoats.
As to the seditious nature of the scripture, in the opening passage of Romans, Paul proclaims Jesus to be The Son of God and Lord, both titles claimed by the Emperors Claudius and Nero through the deified Julius Caesar, and Peter in the face of Nero’s hostility in his letter proclaims Jesus as Lord and Rome as Babylon. Both of these letters assert that the real Lord was Jesus and thus Claudius and Nero were just temporal usurpers.
It would appear that whatever movement you are proposing on this forum it is clear that a fundamental tenet of that movement is to deny religious liberty to Muslims in the United States. You seem to have taken this thread in a dangerous direction and are proposing a society in which religious liberty will take a back seat to your own imposition of some kind of Christian Tyranny.
I’m sure you will find a lot of people willing to subscribe to your political philosophy, however, since your stated objective is to win elections, I doubt very seriously that if you run a candidate on that platform that he will garner more than about 10% of the vote.
Personally I am not willing to throw the first amendment under the bus to suit my own religious prejudices. While I detest Islam, I believe that if we throw out the first amendment to take liberty from one religion that someone in the future will take the opportunity to steal that liberty from me or my children.
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.