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?
Noted, and bedtime for one more cookie monster. ‘night, BB.
THAT is a good question...!!
Got That Rite,,,And,,,Niters...
To: Kevmo
“Heavenly Father, I pray for Barset. I don’t know what You want done here, but it strikes me as a kind of opportunity, maybe You can do something good here even though some intended it for evil, like Joseph and his brothers. Please take care of this soul and help {her?} to find her way, shine Your light on her and give her the warmth of Your love and peace. Make something good happen from all this rancor that happened on this thread. I ask in Jesus’ Name.”
No sarcastic remarks.
BUMP
sjb
Another nutty poster who professes not to support Rudy now, and only if he's the nominee 18 months from today! LOL A vote for Rudy is a vote for liberalism, yesterday, today and tomorrow. You maybe a Republican, a liberal Republican. If you haven't noticed, over 40% of FReepers will be voting third party should Rudy somehow secure the nomination. Include write-in, stay home or leave blank and that numbers jumps to 70%. You 'll be fighting the vast majority of this forum by supporting Rudy.
Obviously this thread taught you nothing!
That certainly is your perogative with which I won't argue. Every individual's vote is a prescious franchise and everyone should feel free and inspired to cast their vote as they see fit.
... but I promise heaps of derision and abuse on anyone who breaks ranks and goes 3rd party. I'm a loyal Republican...
This, I have a problem with this. First, if one is to respect your right to direct your vote as you see fit, then why shouldn't you respect theirs?
Second, and most importantly, I found the term "break rank" really offensive. I have been registered Republican all my life and voted accordingly. My conservative beliefs line up pretty much with the party platform. But the GOP does not own my vote, nor do I owe them my vote. The onus is on the Party to present a candidate who supports the platform and principles of that Party. If not, there is little reason to be a member of that Party at all, let alone vote for whichever candidate they may back. When that candidate neither resembles my acceptable-candidate* nor supports the majority of the party platform, they will not get my vote. It's pretty simple, really.
*An "acceptable-candidate" is not to be construed with an "ideal candidate" or a "pure candidate", but one who meets approximately 75% of my expectations.
Buy her a new one for Valentine's Day. It will be sure to earn you points! :-)
[Warning! Dangerous action suggested in jest. Do not, I repeat do NOT, do this!]
I think that’s a very good assessment.. as a moderator on a couple tech forums years ago, I saw this very same pattern take place a few times.. a clique of folks would try to force their own direction upon the forum, when this met strong opposition with it’s owner and other members it would play out as you described above..
Their exodus was premeditated, the ring leaders would try to pull as many as they can with them, and for some, end up trying to destroy what they helped build.
Some people are just hell bent on running the show and will not accept when they can’t, they really aren't team players and ultimately they do no one any service.
FR will prevail, that is my sincerest hope. Thank you Jim for your courage and dedication to conservatism.
I was speaking more in a rhetorical sense about the people on the thread that feel they have to lie about Giuliani (that is where the whole 16,000 plus posts started). He is not a socialist. He cleaned up NYC, and by all appearances was the only mayor who has ever been able to do this. NYC is the equivalent population and problem level of most countries in the world. He’s law and order and tough on terror, and if you think he and Hillary are alike in that area, then you’re deluded. If you like what the Clintons did to the CIA before, you’ll like it even better when they get the chance to do it again.
By all means, try to get your candidate popular to the majority. But you’ll also have to convince people that your priorities trump that of terror, crime, and other issues where Giuliani has a proven record.
“Heavenly Father, I pray for Barset. I don’t know what You want done here, but it strikes me as a kind of opportunity, maybe You can do something good here even though some intended it for evil, like Joseph and his brothers. Please take care of this soul and help {her?} to find her way, shine Your light on her and give her the warmth of Your love and peace. Make something good happen from all this rancor that happened on this thread. I ask in Jesus’ Name.”
AMEN...
Mat 18:19-20 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Above all, conservatives feel impelled to make clear distinctions between right and wrong.
We reject all notions of moral relativism. Though we’re obviously imperfect, and (like all human beings) often fail to do the right thing, we try to draw lines between the beneficial and the dysfunctional, between productive and destructive.
In policy as well as personal life, we seek to differentiate between good and bad behavior, and we want all of society (not just government) to encourage the good and discourage the bad.
In other words, conservatives insist on making distinctions, giving the individual broad latitude to choose, and then recognizing that choices must carry consequences.
A decent society supports and rewards good choices and discourages bad ones.
[...] Since nearly everyone (including Hillary Clinton and other top Democrats) believes that abortion is at least unfortunate, 'tragic,' and morally questionable, we want to block or discourage the choice to abort a baby. In most cases, the desire to 'terminate a pregnancy' amounts to an effort to erase the consequences of previous bad choices (like unprotected sex outside a marital relationship). The pro-life consensus among most conservatives stems not only from religious commitment but from a logical desire to avoid facilitating irresponsible behavior – in both snuffing out potential life and encouraging reckless sexuality.
The conservative focus on making distinctions makes it easy to defend traditional definitions of marriage. The difference between a same-sex relationship and the union of a man and a woman isn’t subtle, or slight or inconsequential. Aside from the brutally obvious fact that no love between two men or between two women will produce its own progeny, it’s the union of profoundly contrasting male and female elements that gives marriage its unique and permanent power. The insistence that marriage apply only to this joining of opposite genders doesn’t require the conviction that homosexual relationships are wrong, but it does arise from the clear-eyed recognition that they’re profoundly, irreducibly different from male-female coupling.
Also, Mr. Barset has left the building - ppzzzzzzzzzzzzt
Marker 9
That is so important;)
Then we should have a photo of Hillary Clinton with a pancake pecan on her head.
Thank you.
Thanks Melas...for articulating what many of us feel.
Is that a suggestion or a requirement on Brave New Free Republic?
Bring it on. If Giuliani either fools the Party and they nominate him, or the Party knowingly elects someone who opposes the majority of their platform, then the Party has become a completely different Party than the one that I signed up for. I'm a loyal Republican. If that's a sin on FR, so be it. That much is immutable, I will not budge.
I'm a loyal Republican too. That's why I support the Party Platform. Giuliani is NOT a loyal Republican, does not support the Platform, and his candidacy will do more harm to the Party than you can possibly imagine. His nomination and subsequent hijacking of the Party will destroy it, necessitating a 3rd Party. The Party will have abandoned its own values and betrayed those who hold those values. Why should anyone respect or support a party which changes its values to a set of values which that person opposes. If the GOP adopted the Democrat Party platform, or something close to it, would you still remain a "loyal" Republican? Why? What's the point?
Those are the facts. And FR needs to be at the forefront of preserving the Party by deep-sixing Giuliani's campaign. The trouble is, too many FReepers have been fooled into supporting the liberal who will hijack and destroy the party and we couldn't become the cohesive force necessary to have any effect on Giuliani's campaign. We had too many here promoting someone who is in almost total opposition to the mission and values of this site, disrupting or discouraging any efforts to mount any opposition against him and his campaign.
You know what is at stake and you now know Free Republic's mission as it pertains to Giuliani. Get with the program, get out of the way, or get lost.
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.