FR is pro-God, pro-Life, pro-family, pro-constitution, pro-limited government. Period!!

February 3, 2014 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

FR is pro-God, pro-Life, pro-family, pro-constitution, pro-limited government and will remain that way. Regardless of any consequences!!

You're either with us on this or against us.

Moderation is not the solution, it is the problem!!

We do not surrender, we do not retreat, we do not negotiate or compromise on our unalienable rights to Life and Liberty or our sovereignty!!

Karl Rove and the GOP-e moderates and all like them can KMA!!

You cannot moderate evil, you fight it!!

[betty boop]

How you can say it is not a political site when over half of the threads posted on FR are, is beyond me.

Let me try to explain it this way:

The "political discourse" we get on FR has a commonly shared root that ultimately has nothing to do with political labels. It has to do with the great fear of We the People that we are losing control of our Constitution, therefore of our Republic and our daily lives.

Hard-Left Progressivism as manifested by the Obama Administration is not the "soft" Liberalism of the past, as exemplified by, say, Tip O'Neill or Teddy Kennedy.

People generally do not realize that this is an attack on American culture, so to take a wrecking ball to the American middle class. Meanwhile, the poor get poorer, and the rich — increasingly defined as "Friends of Obama" — get richer.

I am apoplectic over the idea that FR will repeat the same mistakes it made in the last presidential election. We definitely reaped what we sowed back there: the return to office of a satanically-disposed president, who as a natural-born anarchist thinks he has to "wipe the slate clean" before he can build his own monument on the razed ground, as the Ozymandias of his Own (narcissistic) Age. He will be the new god....

Obviously, he cannot be stopped by the regular institutional measures built into our rule of law. For one thing, no one will impeach him — even though as a person who routinely lies — that is to say, his "deeds" do not live up to his "words" — and violates his constitutional oath with every breath he takes — is eminently deserving of Impeachment, as a faithless public executive who does not faithfully execute the Constitutional duties of his office.

So: How do you STOP him — not to mention his ilk??? "They are Legion."

Do you really think there is a "political solution" here???

[Tammy8]

I was amazed that more than one poster on that thread seemed to think abortion was a losing issue, we should give up or at least settle for limits.

[RKBA Democrat]

“Had to ban another long-term FReeper today who suddenly decides we should moderate our position on Life.”

Looked like suicide by mod. A real shame and darn depressing. :-(

[papertyger]

Perhaps you have a link to that "dictum" you can share?

Unfortunately due to his voluminous writing about not only evolution, but the arguments used by evolutionists, finding a "favorite riff" written by Dembski is a challenge, even with the help of google. (Like finding a particular "Jones" in a major metropolitan phone book)

If I recall correctly, Dembski laments the fact that nearly all argumentation with modern evolutionists is largely futile, because when challenged by an evolutionarily problematic mechanism in the natural world the evolutionist considers himself the "winner" if he can even conceive of a possible evolutionary pathway to explain the mechanism under discussion...quite apart from any actual evidence for, or consideration of, the plausibility of his explanation.

You may think it a useless endeavor, but I don't recall Christ ever telling Christians to stand down in the defense of Truth, do you? In fact I remember reading something in Ephesians 6 that says quite the opposite.

I don't recall Christ ever telling Christians to conflate promulgation of the Gospel with correcting every error in the thinking of man, particularly when said error is functionally irrefutable.

A perpetual argument with "invincible ignorance" is no different than perpetually tending a tree that gives no fruit.

[RKBA Democrat]

“Why do so many people have a hard time understanding that?”

Because the urge to rationalize one’s own misbehavior is so strong.

[Blue Collar Christian]

“While I agree with the idea that there are many shades of grey”

Grey is black with many whitewashings to make it appear sort of right. It is still wrong.

That’s just the way some of us are wired.

[sport]

Mark post 75

[flaglady47]

“Do you really think there is a “political solution” here???”

Yes, another revolution, and I mean it.

[Alex Murphy]

I am apoplectic over the idea that FR will repeat the same mistakes it made in the last presidential election. We definitely reaped what we sowed back there

What mistakes would those be? How would you have FR act differently?

[betty boop]

Yes, another revolution, and I mean it.

I guess we will have to quibble about terms here.

To me, a "revolution" is never "merely" a political event. It is the mass revulsion of an already culturally-empowered [and in the unique American case, personally armed] civil order against the deadly invasion/infection of a "foreign" cultural order that seeks the former's destruction as a matter of principle, that it may gain absolute dominion over it (i.e., over us).

I really do think that is the bottom line here. I have strong doubts that political parties and the candidates of our choice can do much about any of that, all by themselves....

The truth is reposed in We the People. Thus it follows that if the people themselves are untruthful, then there is no truth in the society they constitute. And so they deserve what they get.

IMHO, this is fundamentally a cultural problem.

And yet, maybe We the People might want to have a free and open conversation about such subjects, in the run-up to the Midterms and the Presidential primaries.

If so, would such folks be welcome here?

[betty boop]

Failure to see "the big picture." It seemed that there were too many exercises in personal vanity and narrowly-defined political concerns to have added up to anything more than a "get-out the-vote" campaign for Virgil Goode, and the "stay-at-home-and-not-vote" crowd who protested the very candidacy of Mitt Romney because they detested his theology.

Forgive me, but I doubt that such people are even serious when it comes to political matters. They just want to have "their own way" as quickly as possible, and they are not patient. To me, I cannot see how such a thing is NOT an exercise in personal vanity pure and simple, with a fan club joined to it....

How would you have FR act differently [next time]?

Really do try to see the big picture. Otherwise, we'll just be fools again, the next time out. And have no one to blame for our failure to effectively defend our cherished Constitutional Republic — for ourselves, and our Posterity.

[Gil4]

“Moderation is not the solution, it is the problem!!”

When I first read this, I wondered what your moderators did to tick you off.

Slow on the uptake, but agree 100%.

[Agamemnon]

Unfortunately due to his voluminous writing about not only evolution, but the arguments used by evolutionists, finding a "favorite riff" written by Dembski is a challenge, even with the help of google.

Yeah, I didn't recall that there was any "dictum" either.

I don't recall Christ ever telling Christians to conflate promulgation of the Gospel with correcting every error in the thinking of man, particularly when said error is functionally irrefutable.

Error may collapse of its weight on the basis of internal contradiction, in which case the thing refutes itself, but no error is "functionally irrefutable." Error is always refutable by Truth.

Jesus is the ... Truth, ... (John 14:16); Paul writes that we are to put on the whole armor of God and to stand (Ephesians 6:13); "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for reproof, for correction, ...." (2 Timothy 3:16).

Stand for Truth. Correct error.

Do you agree?

Mastering the skill of rebuking logical fallacy and poor argumentation begins with having ready access to those sources from which one intends to quote in order to make their point.

FReegards!

[Springfield Reformer]

Ping for later

[ansel12]

You made that up about Romney and FR, the GOP has never come close to running such a hard left, pro-abortion whack case as Romey is.

Abortion, the gay agenda, Romneycare, guns, his personal life of leaving the party because of Reagan and becoming a democrat fund raiser, the Boy Scout issue, trying to homosexualize the military, draft evasion, Planned parenthood, etc, etc, etc.......

What “big picture” do you want us to see in 2016?

[papertyger]

...no error is "functionally irrefutable."

You obviously don't understand the modifier, nor the concept of "invincible ignorance."

That's the only explanation available for such a doctrinaire statement.

Jesus is the ... Truth, ... (John 14:16); Paul writes that we are to put on the whole armor of God and to stand (Ephesians 6:13); "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for reproof, for correction, ...." (2 Timothy 3:16).

None of which addresses the question of whether Christ commanded you to engage in fallacious argumentation (switching the meaning of terms in mid stream) for the aggrandizement of your religious self-esteem.

Mastering the skill of rebuking logical fallacy and poor argumentation begins with having ready access to those sources from which one intends to quote in order to make their point.

Pot, meet the kettle.

I'm not familiar with the official ranking authority that found not having a quote handy, of lesser rhetorical value than engaging in sophomoric non sequiturs.

For myself...I've been in enough ID/evolution debates to know exactly what Dembski was referring to; it is utterly asinine to try to discuss Algebra with a student who knows only Arithmetics, and so "knows" you can't do sums with "letters."

The whole thing invariably devolves into "my science is bigger than your science" match.

[Alamo-Girl]

Indeed. Thanks for the ping!

[Alamo-Girl]

Hard-Left Progressivism as manifested by the Obama Administration is not the "soft" Liberalism of the past, as exemplified by, say, Tip O'Neill or Teddy Kennedy.

People generally do not realize that this is an attack on American culture, so to take a wrecking ball to the American middle class. Meanwhile, the poor get poorer, and the rich — increasingly defined as "Friends of Obama" — get richer.

Precisely so, dearest sister in Christ!

And he's not really trying to hide much these days - he acts like he thinks he is a king.

[Kevmo]

What mistakes would those be?
***The mistake was JimRob endorsing a man he had said before that he would not endorse because he was a gun-grabbing, babykilling statist.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2920626/posts?page=1551#1551

How would you have FR act differently?
***I would focus on the primaries. That is how the GOPe gets their candidates in front while pretending to be conservative. From my home page...

________________________________________________________________

Here’s how I think primaries should be organized:

My suggestion is basically to hold the first primary in the state that has the highest percentage of GOP votes in the last election, the 2nd primary in the 2nd highest, and so on. 2 primaries a week for 25 weeks, with the last primaries being the suckup-to-the-democrats. And the democrats could easily have their primary schedule the same way, if they wanted.

This way, if a state is 60% republican, there is still incentive for them to get out the vote for 61% republican so they can bump up their state in the primary schedule.

Also: Rotate all the states (even the big ones) through an early schedule so that everyone gets access at some point to the front line.

OR

Let each state bid when they want their primary to take place. The earlier the primary, the fewer the delegates they control according to some logarithmic or steep curve formula.

18 posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:55:08 AM by Kevmo (We need to get rid of the Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. ~Duncan Hunter) http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1962610/posts?page=18#18

Second thing is the order of the primaries should be determined by the percentage of republicans in the last vote. The higher the %pubbie, the sooner the state appears on the primary schedule, with a mix of big & little states and our staunchest republican states get to go FIRST. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1965735/posts?page=862#862

24 posted on Friday, September 04, 2009 8:52:29 PM by Kevmo (So America gets what America deserves - the destruction of its Constitution. ~Leo Donofrio, 6/1/09)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse] http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2332420/posts?page=24#24

___________________________________________________________________

[Kevmo]

there are some things that are simply ‘non-negotiable’ under any circumstances, period.
***And those things are... pro-God, pro-Life, pro-family, pro-constitution, pro-limited government. Period!!,
But does FR really operate that way? Do we allow trinitarian heretics to operate openly on FR? Yes. Is there a pro-choice contingent on FR? Yes Are there anti-constitutionalists (hint: look through Certifigate threads)? Yes. Are there BigGuvmint RINOS openly operating on FR? Yes.

If we can’t properly corral those anticonservatives here on FR, we won’t do it in the GOP.

From my homepage:

___________________________________________________________________

I would like to see a VOLUNTARY idealogy litmus matrix here on Free Republic, but when I proposed it to Jimrob, he called me a newbie.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2145065/posts?page=130#130
To: babygene I don’t think he’s all that interested.
To: MHGinTN It doesn’t matter what a FReeper thinks. It’s just a list that they tell us what they think. That way we can tell who we’re dealing with.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2145065/posts?page=130#130
To: Jim Robinson Hah hah, that’s great. I signed up 2 months after you and I’m a newbie. Back then no one even said, “Welcome to FR”. But yeah, I do think that there are tons of RINOs. To be more accurate, the term would be CINOs.
I’ve been pushing for an idealogical litmus matrix here on FR, not to get rid of RINOs but to expose them.
THE GOP DOESN’T WANT US- SO WHAT’S NEXT?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1965735/posts?page=762#762
***It simply takes too long. Look at this thread alone. I see evidence of RINOism in some of the FReepers on this thread. It takes 700 posts to drill down. We need the matrix posted and available so that we don’t have to drill down on every FReeping thread. They’re wasting our time. Deliberately.

Agreed to a large degree. Perhaps a way to rate members by other members???
762 posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:43:23 PM by roamer_1
130 posted on Monday, December 08, 2008 2:39:20 PM by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
49 posted on Monday, December 22, 2008 7:29:27 PM by Kevmo ( It’s all over for this Country as a Constitutional Republic. ~Leo Donofrio, 12/14/08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies] 48 posted on Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:25:08 PM by Kevmo (So America gets what America deserves - the destruction of its Constitution. ~Leo Donofrio, 6/1/09)

___________________________________________________________________