Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?

vanity | April 21, 2007 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

We've got some real challenges facing us. FR was established to fight against government corruption, overstepping, and abuse and to fight for a return to the limited constitutional government as envisioned and set forth by our founding fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and other founding documents.

One of the biggest cases of government corruption, overstepping and abuse that I know of is its disgraceful headlong slide into a socialist hell. Our founders never intended for abortion to be the law of the land. And they never intended the Supreme Court to be a legislative body. They never intended God or religion to be written out of public life. They never intended government to be used to deny God's existence or for government to be used to force sexual perversions onto our society or into our children's education curriculum. They never intend for government to disarm the people. They never intended for government to set up sanctuary cities for illegals. They never intended government to “rule” over the people and or to take their earnings or private property or to deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech, free religion, private property, due process, etc. They never intended government to seize the private property of private citizens through draconian asset forfeiture laws or laws allowing government to take private property from lawful owners to give to developers. Or to seize wealth and redistribute it to others. Or to provide government forced health insurance or government forced retirement systems.

All of the above are examples of ever expanding socialism and tyranny brought to us by liberals/liberalism.

FR fights against the liberals/Democrats in all of these areas and always will. Now if liberalism infiltrates into the Republican party and Republicans start promoting all this socialist garbage, do you think that I or FR will suddenly stop fighting against it? Do you think I'm going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?

Do you really expect me to do that?

[Skywarner]

You're good at asking questions. Let's see how good you are at answering them succinctly and honestly:"

Thank you for the compliment. At least that's how I'll take it in the interest of constructive dialog.

"If there were a general election between Alan Keyes, Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton, who would you vote for? A two-word response will suffice."

Sorry, but my response is already over two words. ;-)

In all honesty, it would depend. If Clinton and Giuliani are neck and neck, then I'd likely vote for Rudy. If the race isn't even close - for either major party - then Keyes gets my vote without question.

Replace Clinton with Zell Miller and I'd vote for Zell.

I'm sure this isn't the answer you were looking for as it's not concise. It is pragmatic, however, and helps to illustrate my simple one-issue platform of who will best fight the global war against Islamofascism. Within the next few years, we are likely to be at war with Iran and Syria and may need to rebuild one of more major American cities. To me and many of us that were directly impacted by the events of 9/11, no other issue is more important than the survival of our civilization. If we don't survive, all other issues are moot.

[Skywarner]

Patience.

I did answer it.

[Sam Cree]

I like Alan Keyes, and all politicians, Reagan being the top example, who lean towards the libertarian ideals of individual freedom.

However I in no way agree with your assertion that the departed despise conservatives or conservatism. I see that as a rationalization to feel OK about driving Rudy supporters out.

When I say “conservatism” I mean something like Jim Robinson’s definition of conservatism on the “clueless” thread, although I don’t agree with him that a conservative must be “religious,” since I don’t know what he means by that (are you allowed to accept the theory of evolution, for instance?) and since many totalitarian governments over the years have been religious, while many non religious people like myself cherish freedom and the founding ideals of our country.

[EternalVigilance]

"Though a good motive cannot sanctify a bad action, a bad motive will always vitiate a good action. In common and trivial matters we may act without motive, but in momentous ones the most careful deliberation is wisdom." W. Jay

[DCPatriot]

Of course I do. I LOVE 'you' Christians...whatever your comment was supposed to mean.

They are a critical part of the Republican Party and we need their support to win elections.

They probably make much better parents than athiests and produce the leaders of tomorrow.

From this Freeper's eyes, this country is in serious peril.

The ever-present encroachment of socialism and liberalism and appeasement of our enemies has us at DEFCON 5.

We were wandering the political desert for forty years until the Contract with America gave us a victory.

Because of a traitorous LEFTIST Democratic party and mainstream media, we're back to minority status after twelve years...with effin Hillary Clinton about to become POTUS and her impeached husband, 'Ambassador to the World'.

We just witnessed good conservatives lose this past November...ones who ran on strong conservative principles.

While I may have been successfully 're-trained' regarding Giuliani, I still want compromise with power than to be a victim of the LEFT as a minority.

[La Enchiladita]

Sure, you can have it... it’s perfect for you.
It was created by LadyJag and she gave it to me....

[sodpoodle]

“”””Well aren’t you proud of yourself! You should be ashamed, but OOPS wait a minute—That would require common decency!”””

Stalking huh?

You are good!

[La Enchiladita]

Hello, is this your new home?

:)

[EternalVigilance]

However I in no way agree with your assertion that the departed despise conservatives or conservatism.

Well, for whatever reasons you're oblivious to the realities of the actions of a great many of them here for years.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Your rights are your security. When you, ‘give up your rights for security”, it’s not security you get, but slavery.’

Author unknown

[1COUNTER-MORTER-68]

BWAAhahahahaha,,,He’s Dancin’,,,Hi Ya’ll...;0)

Roooty is gitin’ “Whupped On” in Louisiana...;0)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxIg3tgryKM

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Seems to have been for this week at least!

[EternalVigilance]

Well, be warned. There are millions of us who will never vote for Giuliani under any circumstances. The supposed lesser of two evils remains evil, and we will not be party to evil. Period. End of story.

I know that to some my speaking on behalf of millions of people sounds arrogant. But, I don’t believe it is. I believe that I’m simply describing an objective reality.

[conservative in nyc]

Instead, you provoke anyone who doesn't embrace your ideas.

I guess you've kinda missed the point of this whole thread.

And what is the "point of this whole thread", according to EternalVigilance?

For a handful of posters to goad and bully FReepers who don't 100% tow the party line until they say something that will get them banned? Or is it to scare off FReepers who would dare correct incorrect or incomplete information posted about Giuliani?

[EternalVigilance]

One more thing. We might win. Something very similar happened once before in this country in 1860.

[Nick Danger]

To whatever extent Alan Keyes is "not respected here," most of that was to a great degree caused by a number of the now-dearly-departed... They truly do despise conservatives and conservatism, and that is an objective fact.

That's nonsense. To pick one example, I am not departed, I have joined no anti-Freeper sites, I bow to no one in defense of conservative values, and I think that Alan Keyes is a crook.

I think he preys on noobs with the aid of slick-talking minions who tout his speeches without ever discussing what happens to all the money his many-headed contribution-sucking hydra collects. Alan Keyes is to conservative politics what Jim Bakker was to TV Preachers. Boy, can he talk.

So there.

P.S. If this has anything to do with a second coming of Tammy Faye, don't bet that you know how it ends.

[EternalVigilance]

Your post is a crock.

[don-o]

I said, the Religious Right should get in the back seat, please buckle up and to 'keep quiet'. Okay...I admit I may have used an acronym.

But, the RR is not going to keep quiet and anyone who thinks so is just deluding themselves. The RR is not a monolith, awaiting a wink, nod and knowing glance on what they need to do.

My opinion is that there is a certain portion of the electorate that the Republicans have had in their pocket for years now, that is up for grabs if Giuliani is indeed the nominee.

I cannot see any way that Rudy can be dressed up to appeal to the basic requirements of Christian conservatives. It is a remarkable gamble to expect a Republican victory without us. I just do not believe Rudy is going to win the primary.

Who will? damfino (to close with my favorite acronym.)

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

Hiya Count. Howz Harley?

[La Enchiladita]

Viguerie’s been around since the Nixon era, I believe.

I think he started the VRWC.... lol...