That's downright blunt, baby.
Posted on 04/21/2007 6:42:25 PM PDT by 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?
They come here and push for hour, after hour, after hour, yet I don’t think that a one of them has admitted that Rudy is their man.
My guess is that Thompson is the one most often named as their fantasy (sigh) favorite, if it were only possible, but of course it isn’t so they must spend countless hours passionately promoting Rudy Giuliani.
Aye. That's it in a nutshell.
Like I said. Howlin was probably the most abusive poster in the history of FR. Deny it all you want. But her history is there for all to see.
The liberalism I'm most concerned about is the too frequent support for porn and drugs under the auspices of libertarianism. It is a cancer in society and FR is not immune.
I won't defend Howlin's overall demeanor in the forum.
But IMO, the post that everybody is outraged about has been overbolown.
Taken in strict context, she says the Republican Party will definitely NOT be DNC-Lite, but will have to move a lot more to the center if it expects to win elections.
And the conservatives that are strident on abortion and gun laws are going to have to become 'average catholics'...in analogical parlance.
Good catholics who practice birth control. Divorced ones that still go to church and give up sweets for Lent.
We're looking for religious right members that could...IF HE BECOMES THE NOMINEE...hold their noses and vote for him rather than allow a Clinton to run this nation again.
He’s great.
:-)
Some of’em got zapped on other threads, though. Behavior counts.
Sorry. Can’t do it.
Civil rights advocates warned that Giuliani’s promise to deprive the squeegee men of their $40–100 weekly shakedown might drive them to more violent crime; in effect, they endorsed a lesser form of criminality, hoping that it would forestall more serious crime. The city’s newspapers were happy to print threats from squeegee men, like this one: “I feel like if I can’t hustle honestly, I’ve got to go back to doing what I used to do . . . robbing and stealing.” But the squeegee-men campaign provided Giuliani with his first significant victory, showing a beleaguered citizenry that government actually could bring about change for the better. Within months, the squeegee men disappeared.
Your author is full of pure unadulterated bullship! He doesn't know what he is talking about.
Giuliani's Legacy: Taking Credit For Things He Didn't Do
By Wayne Barrett
Rudy Giuliani's legacy is that he was the luckiest mayor we have had in a long time. He was blessed by being mayor when we had a great national upsurge in the economy. He was blessed by being mayor when we had a national downturn in crime. He was blessed because he had very little to do with either phenomenon in New York, but most New Yorkers and most tourists will think he did.
Most celebrants of Rudy Giuliani seem mesmerized by the disappearance of the squeegee men. As I wrote in my book "Rudy," the issue of the squeegees is where the hocus pocus started:
Candidate Rudy promised to wash them out of our hair. While they seemed everywhere, an NYPD report found that there were only 75 of them in 1993, planted like Calvin Klein billboards in unavoidable locations. So Ray Kelly, the police commissioner who worked for Dinkins, heard Giuliani's campaign cry and drove the squeegees off the streets before Rudy raised his own Windex-free right hand on inaugural day. The whole world, years later, thinks Rudy did it -- the predictable result of endless repetition. But Bill Bratton himself conceded in his 1998 book that by the time he arrived at police headquarters, the squeegees were gone, noting that, "ironically, Giuliani and I got credit for the initiative." Only politics, Bratton concluded, prevented David Dinkins and Ray Kelly from receiving their due.
You and the writer you cite don't know what you're talking about. You need to go back to the W A site for more intensive indoctrination.
"For the time being, there can be no peace process in the Middle East. There can be none, no. People say, "Well, that's harsh. We need peace! We want peace!" Of course we want peace. I want peace just as much as anybody else! But the first thing we have to recognize is a fundamental truth that I think we talk around, and deal around, and in other ways get around, but peace doesn't start until it has been introduced into the heart and conscience of everybody at the table. You cannot have a discussion of peace with those who remain committed to, not only war, but to the most illegitimate and evil and immoral form of warfare known to humankind."
"Since our aim in the war with terrorism is not peace, it makes no sense to negotiate peace with terrorists. Terrorists have taken up the instruments of war in a way that suggests that their consciences are immune to the usual categories of persuasion."
"I think that in the Middle East and all over the world it's time we made it clear: we do not want peace with terror! We want the destruction of terrorism!"
"When engaged in a war, particularly a war forced upon you by those who will not stop their acts of terrorism or aggression, peace cannot be the objective of your war. Peace is a secondary objective that will hopefully be produced as the byproduct of achieving that which must in such a war be your main objective, and that is to defeat the enemy."
"We are at war. The proper objective in war is not peace but victory."
"In this war, there is no substitute for victory. We shall win it or we shall be destroyed."
You just told me to do mortal sin. Do you realize that?
Hey, even the choir enjoys a good sermon! :-)
Gracias amigo.
I just want to interrupt to say that if a person is gone, they’re gone. After several hundred posts, we can leave Howlin behind now, I think.
Did you bother reading quidnunc’s posts?
Or are you just shooting from the hip with out any aim or purpose other than to jump in without looking.
Get back to me when you’ve educated yourself as what went on.
I missed his announcement that he's running again or is this simply a fund raising drive?
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.