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?

[EternalVigilance]

...a bug-eating frog--after we were treated to the bug zapper for nine days.

Either you weren't thinking at all, or you were once again slipping the long knife into the backs of the dearly departed. Anyone with a conscience and two brain cell synapses could see the analogy. Either that, or you were posting mindlessly.

If anyone is "posting mindlessly," it is you. As anyone who cares about such silly things can easily see if they go back to the post, my allegedly "infamous" frog was posted in response to dirtboy's post 17,205, two posts prior:

The deeper issue was the effort to incrementally drag FR leftwards. Unfortunately for that bunch, Rud's candidacy and their promotion of such turned the heat up high enough under the frog for the frog to notice. - dirtboy

Context, perspective and proportion are critical. I'm afraid you're lacking in all three at the moment. A bit of a sense of humor would be helpful to you along about now, too.

[dmw]

It’s like the spirit of Howlin, Peach and Hildy (all put together) has possessed “someone”. Chilling!

[Chena]

As many of you know, I am a Fred Thompson supporter. I am a conservative Republican and I will actively do my part to support and endorse Mr. Thompson should he declare his candidacy. If he doesn’t, I will support the next best conservative candidate. At this point, I’m not sure who that will be yet, but I was leaning towards Duncan Hunter.

Earlier on this thread, several thousand posts ago, I made the comment that IF Giuliani ends becoming the candidate the Republican candidate I will support him then and vote for him in the ballot box. I will vote Republican. I will do my part in seeing that Hillary, or Obama, or any other Democrat candidate will not become the next President of the United States of America. I fear for the future of our country, our military, my children and grandchildren, if the Democrats are allowed to control this country.

I am also on the record as saying that I do not believe in “not voting” nor voting “third party”.

Ever since I voiced my opinion on this matter, Reagan Man has been insulting me, calling me a Rudy Booster, Rudy Supporter, etc., and neither Jim Robinson, nor the moderators have stepped in to tell him to “knock it off” in spite of my requests.

So now I must ask this question. Are those of us who believe that we must all actively support the best conservative candidate now, but when the day comes to vote, we will vote Republican no matter whose name is on the ballot, no longer welcome here? Is Jim Robinson going to continue to allow people like Reagan Man continue his attacks on us?

I am quite confident that I am not the only one who would like answers to these questions.

[metmom]

The tone had settled down considerably. If it *took over* it would still be here. Why do you still act like it’s still here?

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>Ever since I voiced my opinion on this matter, Reagan Man has been insulting me, calling me a Rudy Booster, Rudy Supporter, etc., and neither Jim Robinson, nor the moderators have stepped in to tell him to “knock it off” in spite of my requests.

Control your emotions. After you admitted to being a "future" RudyBooster --- should he win the nomination --- I backed off. You decided to not let go. That was your choice, not mine. I can't stop you from whining over my posting your remarks earlier. At this point you can't seem to help yourself. So, unless you really want me to, I have no intention of posting your remarks again. Remarks in which you clearly state a preference for Rudy, should he gain the nomination. Btw, Rudy gaining the nomination is an outcome, in my opinion, I don't see happening. We are 18 months out from the election. Anyone who runs around promoting a liberal to become the next POTUS, on this conservative forum, is fair game.

Bottom line. This is your obsession and your welcome to it.

[metmom]

*we*? Where’d that come from?

I didn’t see that in my post.

[don-o]

Read 17,383 for starters. I'm just curious hear the answer and more importantly see what happens.

I have been on record on many other threads that I cannot, and I will not vote for Rudolph. Nor will I vote for a Democrat. But, I can allow that well intentioned people can have a different view of the thing and somehow see their way to voting for him.

I appreciate with the work that many have done and continue to do in exposing Giuliani. It took me about 5 seconds to make up my mind.

[presently no screen name]

talking to God and myself

Beats talking to anyone else. Blessings to you, also.

[Kevmo]

This thread has been the most contentious I’ve ever seen on Free Republic. I signed off the thread a while back, only responding to posts to me like yours was. I don’t know what else to do.

Maybe this thread will never be turned off. Maybe it will become a brawling arena where people can air their grievances to each other and have it out, where the rules are less strict than the world at large like a sporting contest or boxing/karate match. In the USA we used to allow duels with pistols. In the wild, wild west there were gunfights but over on the other side of the tracks, on the “good side”, the streets were quiet and order was kept sternly.

If anyone steps over the line and starts arguing with the owner, or tearing down a good conservative to build up their own candidate or outright lying or whatever nonsense it is that gets posted in the rules, they get zapped. Who knows?

[Oliver Optic]

You didn't ask my opinion, but I'll bless you with it anyway. :-)

No real conservative should be supporting Rudy now ... in the primaries.

If, God forbid, it's Rudy vs. Hillary/Obama/Edwards in November, I think good conservatives could disagree on whether the right approach is damage control by voting for Rudy or a vote of principle for a third party.

If you conclude a vote for Rudy will cause less harm to the nation than a vote for the Dem, I don't think you should be persecuted for that.

But it goes both ways. Neither should those who cannot in good conscience vote for Rudy be lambasted on a conservative forum ... called "unappeasables," "nutjobs" and various other flattering epithets.

And quite frankly, that's the kind of haughty disdain for principled conservatives, especially social conservatives, that characterized many of the departed posters.

[don-o]

*we*? Where’d that come from?

Thanks for the correction. You said "us" and "they". I just made up the "we" part.

Thanks.

signed,

They

[Chena]

Anyone who runs around promoting a liberal to become the next POTUS, on this conservative forum, is fair game.

There you go again. Your last comment to me is exactly why I posted the questions. I have not been running around promoting a liberal to become the next POTUS. Anyone who knows me and my posting history knows that. I am controlling my emotions, and asking questions is not "whining". Both of our posting histories are there for everyone to read. I'm very thankful for that. End of disussion.

[Abundy]

However, if he wins the party nomination, which I find likely, I'm not only voting for him, but I promise heaps of derision and abuse on anyone who breaks ranks and goes 3rd party. I'm a loyal Republican.

At what point does being "a loyal Republican" require someone to vote against their principles?

At what point does being "a loyal Republican" require one to vote for someone who is more aligned ideologically with Hillary Clinton?

With all due respect, your focus is wrong. If the Republican Party powers that be force a liberal candidate upon the party it is they who are disloyal Republicans, not those who vote 3rd Party to send a message to those same powers that be that our Party does not stand for gun control, abortion, big spending, less individual liberty, open borders, etc...or candidates with an "R" after their name and a "D" in their heart.

Any Republican that casts a vote of conscience for a thrid party candidate and against Rudy is being a loyal Republican.

Unless I missed the RNC memo that stated that the Republican Party was no longer a party of conservatives and was morphing into a more moderate Democratic Party in response to the DNC shift to the Dark Side of the Moon...

[Reagan Man]

ROTFLMAO

[Chena]

I realize that other people feel that way, including yourself. I may encourage them to think about the ramifications of their choice (not voting, or 3rd party votes), but I certainly won’t flame them for it.

[Chena]

I understand and thank you for your comments. :)

[Reagan Man]

>>>>If, God forbid, it's Rudy vs. Hillary/Obama/Edwards in November, I think good conservatives could disagree on whether the right approach is damage control by voting for Rudy or a vote of principle for a third party.

I agree. God forbid Rudy becomes the nominee ---- I may not like it, however, if certain Republicans choose to vote for Rudy in 18 months, there is little I can do about it. If people post TODAY, that one of their options is voting for Rudy should he win the nomination, then there is plenty I can say about it. Last resorts are meant to be just that.

On this conservative forum, talking about voting for a liberal at any time, is not a wise decision. A vote for Rudy --- yesterday, today or tomorrow --- remains a vote for liberalism.

[metmom]

The thread took a dramatic turn for the better around post 16,301 and it lasted until about 17,150. It was doing pretty well for a while. People were willing and able to mend fences, or at least tried. But that was criticized, too.

Once the cookie recipes started getting traded, it was on it’s way to dying out. (BTW, thanks for the great recipes, T’wit) Why couldn’t some have just left it well enough alone instead of criticizing it? All that happened was that the pot got stirred again and now we’re back to pre-post 16,301, sort of.

[Oliver Optic]

You're welcome, Chena, and if I had to decide this very moment, I would probably join you in pulling the Rudy lever against Hillary/Obama/Edwards.

If a third party movement of any credibility rose out of the rubble, I would reconsider.

I won't stay home. And I won't lambast sincere conservatives for coming to other conclusions.

Now ... let's make sure that scenario doesn't come to pass!

[From many - one.]

Thanks. Sounds interesting.