Posted on 03/04/2007 4:46:35 PM PST by johniegrad
Even though we are still almost two years out from the presidential election, it is clear that the candidates are campaigning in earnest. This has led to some acromonious discussions with accusations flying about posters' motives and dedication to the principles of conservatism. While these frank discussions could be healthy for pounding out the details in a primary, some here are indicating their unequivocal refusal to support some candidates if they are nominated after the primaries. Furthermore, valuable posters have discussed their disatisfaction with the website as a forum for discussing conservatism and some have threatened to leave.
Given these observations, I'd like to republish the posting of the website owner from a few years ago.
Statement by the founder of Free Republic:
In our continuing fight for freedom, for America and our constitution and against totalitarianism, socialism, tyranny, terrorism, etc., Free Republic stands firmly on the side of right, i.e., the conservative side. Believing that the best defense is a strong offense, we (myself and those whom I'm trying to attract to FR) support the strategy of taking the fight to the enemy as opposed to allowing the enemy the luxury of conducting their attacks on us at home on their terms and on their schedule.
Therefore, we wholeheartedly support the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes on known terrorist states and organizations that are believed to present a clear threat to our freedom or national security. We support our military, our troops and our Commander-in-Chief and we oppose turning control of our government back over to the liberals and socialists who favor appeasement, weakness, and subserviency. We do not believe in surrendering to the terrorists as France, Germany, Russia and Spain have done and as Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton and the Democrats, et al, are proposing.
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.
Free Republic is private property. It is not a government project, nor is it funded by government or taxpayer money. We are not a publicly owned entity nor are we an IRS tax-free non-profit organization. We pay all applicable taxes on our income. We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. We sell no merchandise, product or service, and we offer no subscriptions or paid memberships. We accept no paid advertising or promotions. We are funded solely by donations (non tax deductible gifts) from our readers and participants.
We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.
Our God-given liberty and freedoms are not negotiable.
May God bless and protect our men and women in uniform fighting for our freedom and may God continue to bless America.
Jim Robinson
What was rude?
Those folks who've been taking Ann to task, well....they're principled, you see.
By extension, those who don't take issue with Ann are unprincipled.
There.....isn't that easy to understand?
/ sarc
This calls for my new tagline...
:-)
I didn't--I was addressing the thoughts in the post to you to others as well, some of whom have definitely done so.
Cheers.
You feel? You feel? Didn't you just say only RINOS "think with emotion?"
Stick a sock in it, newbie.
...okay...I'm in the pool....
More so by the lack of use of a reference thesaurus/dictionary.
BTW, do tell about the "dramatic experience".
< snicker >
Well, you've just told me something I didn't know.
I did know that Barry got a lot more liberal as he aged, but that was usually attributed to his new wife.
I've often thought about what might have changed had Reagan won the '68 nomination. On the one hand, we might have been spared the second Lyndon Baines Johnson and the first Jimmuh Cahtah terms.
But it is more probable that he would have been impaled on the Johnson "Little girl and the atomic bomb" ad in the same way Goldwater was.
Anyway it's fun to speculate.
Puppy killer!
We can hope, can't we?
They are suppose to be meeting sometime early this week.
I'm praying he hears us.
I have no idea what a "dramatic experience" is in this guy's view.
For all I know, it's porn.
I gather most of us would.
It had to have been something, because it is definitely different.
Glad to see you posting. ;o)
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.