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?
“But I’m seeing it now.”
No your not. You’re seeing what you wanted to see before you came here. If you came here and read the thread you would see that NN is attacking EV with totally nonrelated things. Read the thread.
The tone was actually quite elevated until the personal attacks by the bitter resumed once again.
Yah. The Brave New Free Republic troops were having a big time last night. “Quite elevated” is as good a description as any, I guess.
“If that puts me in the crosshairs - go for it!”
There are no cross-hairs, it’s too late, you missed your opportunity to be eliminated if that’s your intention.
The way you're portraying FR is unseemly, and wrong.
I'm sure his two former wives (well, at least the first one) had no reason to not believe him when he we agreed to the "forsaking all others" part, too. I'm sure that will go into the "tearing my guy down" column also, but Spyder, that is not rumor or innuendo, that is history. And a history we saw before in 1992; a guy that had such low character and selfishness that he could'nt even keep his zipper up around women that were not his wife. The same criteria also disqualifies Gingrich in my book (plus the fascinating knack he has by semmingly offending people he says "Hello" to). If that sacred vow is broken, how can we trust him with the Oath of Office or any campaign promise? I had enough then. No more.
One last thing.
you can't convince me that a newly fertilized egg is the same as a baby.
Everyone you see walking around on your beautiful island paradise today started as a "newly fertilized egg" and in most cases were inside a woman that thought of it as "my baby" from the day they discovered they were pregnant.
By which standard, you could comfortably vote for Pol Pot and against Ronald Reagan. It is no standard at all.
The question is not whether the state can outlaw original sin. Of course it can't. The question is how we can use politics, election campaigns and elective office to teach and reinforce moral values. It isn't the electing that does any good, it's the teaching. Teddy Roosevelt called the presidency a "bully pulpit." When JFK was shot, Barry Goldwater knew he was doomed to lose badly. He nevertheless accepted his party's nomination in order to teach the then-new conservative philosophy and its goals.
The general problem with a Giuliani is that, having taken a pro-abortion position, he is morally unfitted to use his campaign to teach that it is wrong to kill babies. People always react badly to that kind of hypocrisy. In contrast, they respond most positively to a statement of principle by a candidate who has maintained higher standards and who speaks with personal conviction.
Geez. What a wild statement to make. Well, that's one opinion. An opinion I don't agree with.
Take out a handfull of malcontents and place some misfits on notice --- that is not a discredit to conservatism. That's called sweeping out the dirt.
OTOH. Promoting a liberal to be the GOP nominee, advancing liberal causes and liberal issues, NOW that is a discredit to conservatism.
How many throwaway FR accounts do you have, Mojodungbeetlehonsamillbarset? You just can't help but whore your Busch League blog here, can you? And some of your comments after the initial blog post are downright libel.
Truth be known, if President Reagan had a chance to read your posts in this thread..by God...I think he’d punch you in the nose.
I don’t have the heart to argue this much more, RB, but no matter what the context or relation of the attacks, EV is deserving of them after his conduct on this thread. I came on to this thread as a supporter of Alan Keyes, but somehow EV managed to cure me of that.
I’m only posting now because I see another good freeper being run down, in this case an especially good one, which is the only thing that has angered me at all about this site, which I once considered my home on the net, the last few days...packs of freepers running down other freepers, and then celebrating when their former FRiends went down.
And then patting themselves on the back for their patriotism.
I agree with your opinion of Rudy, but I have a higher opinion of Reagan than you do.
Right. And I’m the queen of England.
The spiral you’re talking about has been discussed from both sides over and over, and over and over - again.
People who liked them are p’sd.
People who did not like them are glad to see them go. It’s over. But ultimately they decided they were going.
And that's another problem a lot of the departed had. They would wail about the unfairness of someone's treatment. Of course, that person had started a fight and got the worst of it, but the choir wasn't honest enough to admit that, despite the clear posting history to the contrary.
If you were truly upset about the tone of this thread, you'd get after NautiNurse for picking a fight over hotlinking after the thread had calmed down. If you notice, her thread with an attack graphic against EV was removed as a personal attack.
But since you didn't, I'd say your real beef is something else.
This was after NN called the rest of us insane, hypocritical sociopaths.
Place mark.
Deer in the yard. Going to go shoot one.
...with a camera.
Dang me, England?? I thought you were queen of Rumania!
lol...
LOL I see you’re sdtill bothered by the truth. You’re not speaking for Reagan. You’re speaking for yourself. You’d like to punch me in the nose. If you’re ever in Colorado, look me up. I’m sure an opportunity can be arragned.
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.