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?
Then there is also the fact that a lot of us pro lifers just cannot hold our nose and vote for a pro death candidate. I can hold my nose and vote for a lot of things, probably even McCain if it comes to that, but I cannot vote for a pro-death candidate. It would violate my moral principles to an intolerable point. I will not with my vote support the holocaust of the late 20th and early 21st century.
I’m certainly not a single issue voter, I have lots of conservative issues I care about. But the deal breaker is the abortion issue. I don’t think I’m the only one
If rudy is nominated I haven’t decided whether to stay home or vote 3rd party, but I’m not naive. Either one will produce the same result.
Lets go back before Jim`s spring cleaning effort was fully underway and look at THE most rational post you ever made to me, its obvious Rudy was your guy then. You talked about your future vote for Rudy being akin to a sure thing. You also mentioned how you were coming to hate some Freepers. And if necessary, you'd vote for Rudy the liberal out of spite, as a statement against conservative forces on this forum who vehemently oppose him.
>>>>>However, over this Rudy thing, I'm coming to hate some of you here on FR so much, that voting for a candidate you support, each day becomes increasingly more difficult to contemplate. What was once a given, is now up in the air. To be honest, I've had some misgivings about Rudy of late, but if you guys are the alternative, I'd just as soon fall on the sword. ~~~ Melas, April.19th 2007
Calling you a liberal has an undeniable ring of truth to it.
And seeing how even Oregon voted down gay marriage, that's another force of nature that Rudy would have to overcome.
Any more, I'm wondering what kind of abject, deliberate obliviousness must possess his boosters. But, then again, as Howlin now famously said, pro-lifers and pro-gunners were a foot on their necks. So for those who approached Bush from the left of the GOP, it isn't that far to go to be willing to support and/or promote Rudy, and it would be a relief (although a deluded one) to think that those nutbar pro-lifers and pro-gunners don't need to be part of the power structure of the GOP any longer.
But they fail to realize just how long a journey, away from core values, such a trip would be for those to the right of Bush.
I know his voting record.
But, I’m going to choose not to discuss that here and now. You can look for my views in upcoming Thompson threads if you’re interested in what I think.
If I inderstand your post correctly, the vile behavior we have witnessed over the past week is justifiable retribution, and also to be expected in this forum because that is the norm elsewhere.
It is showing itself to be more potent with each passing day. After the GOP losses in 2006, I thought shamnest was a done deal. So did the Bush Admin and the Dems, who hired specialists to help them draft shamnesty legislation for later this year.
But a funny thing happened on the way to open borders nirvana - more and more voters are giving politicians an earful. Both McCain and Brownback are reversing themselves on their support of shamnesty. I think we're now at the point where there could be a filibuster of horrific immigration "reform", which would stop the runaway train.
We may still end up with bad reform, but that's still better than the alternative. And the movement just keeps getting stronger. IMO it will be the predominate force in 2008, especially with MS-13 and foreign gangs getting more and more publicity.
snip rest of rant.
Hooked on your own adrenaline or something? Y'all had your celebration last night.
Do you now consider that Brave New Free Republic requires thought policemen cutting and pasting 24/7 to keep "unsound opinion" beaten down?
You’re absolutely right.
You’re not the only one there on the pro-abortion issue. That is one bridge too far.
Unless you were lurking, I guess you weren't here in 1999. This is tame by comparision.
But part of the problem is, some folks starting making FR way too personal over the last two or three years. I heard talk of enemies and coordinated attacks, and saw a few of them myself. It used to be you could be engaged in a flame war one day and be buddies again the next. Unfortunately, FR drifted away from that approach and became factionalized. And this ain't the first faction to end up getting tossed because they tried to tell JimRob where the forum should be going and JimRob decided he didn't want to go there.
In the end, for many of those who got the boot, they lived by the zot. And then died by the zot. They helped create this environment, so they have no grounds to complain when they became victim to the Frankenstein monster they created. And the other factions who had been subject to their monster cheered when their creation turned on them. That's just human nature.
So things will settle down and anothe block of posters will probably eventually coalesce and create new factions and we'll do this all over again some day.
Every time there’s a big rally for rights for illegal immigrants, it sends more people to the other side...
You think they would learn. Fortunately for us, they don't.
bttt
Did they steal the strawberries?
No, but they sure both dragged down the tone of the forum and also did their best to drag it leftwards.
Your point about the party platform is one I hadn’t thought of before and is a good one. How can the GOP, which has a pro-life, pro-2A platform, nominate a candidate with a proven track record of being an abortion supporter and gun control supporter, even if he talks a good game about it now? That makes no sense.
Look, I’ve been one of those that’s said that I’d vote for Rudy if he ended up being the nominee, just because as bad as he might be, he wouldn’t be nearly as bad as Hillary or Obama. I still think that. (This means that Reagan Man will probably go Pharisee on me and start screaming “unclean! unclean!” any second now.) But now I’m not so sure. I really believe that a Rudy nomination WILL shear the right wing off of the GOP. If you thought people stupidly stayed home to “teach the GOP a lesson” in 2006, just wait if Rudy gets nominated. Even if I do end up voting for him (and that’s not a 100% given right now), I wouldn’t begrudge those people who choose not to.
Giuliani cannot gain enough votes from the squishy center to compensate for the loss of the bedrock right wing of the party. It’s that simple. I don’t see how they expect to out-moderate Hillary when she’s proven that she’s very good at juking toward the center to hide her radical-left views.
The Republican leadership frustrates the hell out of me right now. They have completely forgotten how to win an election. You don’t do it by pretending to be Democrats. You do it by selecting a conservative and then putting your heart and soul behind the candidate to convince the American people that your way is the best one. It’s worked in the past and it will work again.
}:-)4
They have completely forgotten how to win an election. You don’t do it by pretending to be Democrats.-—
That’s the thing. If there’s nothing to show you are different, if you don’t offer them anything as an alternative, why should they vote for you? All this moving to the left isn’t going to do anything.
—Giuliani cannot gain enough votes from the squishy center to compensate for the loss of the bedrock right wing of the party. It’s that simple.-—
Well said
My opinion is that the Rockefeller wing of the party has always resented that Reagan showed them how to win. They seemed content to be the perpetual minority party, and now seem driven to go back to that status - they would rather tell socons to pound sand than remain allied with them.
Except that pro-lifers transcend party. Pro-life Dems were a key component of the Reagan coalition. They got Santorum elected twice in a Dem state until the Dems finally ran a pro-lifer. And they were a key swing block for Bush in Ohio in 2004. Pro-life is probably the most potent and driven block in modern politics.
But the liberal pubbies see pro-lifers and pro-gunners as having a foot on their necks. They'd rather have it their way and be the minority party from what I can see.
Good post Moose4!
BTTT
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.