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?

[sauropod]

This thread, which briefly turned into a hugfest over the banning of numerous people who have been here many years and on our side on numerous conservatives issues, is now headed into the toilet again.

Oh puhleeze. There have been several banned as a result of this thread that needed to go in no small part b/c of their tactics during the '04 election cycle. They were no friends of conservatives.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

But he’s not talking, really about running a website, but how to do an anti-Rudy campaign, and that’s a different critter.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Still chugging away I see........ : )

[metmom]

Brain function is irrelevant and arbitrary. The only reason someone would question the humanity of that baby is so that they could kill it and justify it in their minds and absolve themseves of any (perceived) moral or ethical consequences. They may be able to do it leagally and avoid and human consequences but God knows and they will be answerable for that.

The *when does it become human* argument was originally brought up by the liberals and pro-abortionists who were trying to justify abortion.

That fertilized egg is growing, the cells are multiplying, it's respiring, taking in nourishment, it has a human set of DNA. It is simply a human being at a early stage of development, but human and living nevertheless. Deliberately stopping the process of living is murder. If it's not human it's not murder and that's the whole rational about questioning at what stage that baby becomes a human being. No murder, no guilt.

But it doesn't really work that way. Even thought the state may leagaize it, God does not condone murder and it is still wrong.

Abortion should be illegal, period. If we as a society won't, or don't, protect the most helpless of all, then it will not be long before we won't protect anyone. Euthanasia is just a natural result of that, and it will get worse.

I find it pretty ironic that those who are the most pro-abortion are often the most anti-death peanlty.

[Enosh]

Funny thing about New Mexico - Signs.

"This is a Safety Corridor"

"Warning - dust storms may exist next 30 miles"

"Lights on for safety"

"Zero visibility possible"

"We're serious about those dust storms!"

"Use Extreme Caution!"

"This is a Safety Corridor"

"Good luck!"

And then?

BLAM! A pounding thunderstorm out of nowhere.

[jedward]

With # 4, it’s my understanding that everyone can still see and reference any of the posts, just not add new ones. If that were not the case, I wouldn’t have suggested it. Those against our efforts want to see us make it “disappear”, which is something I’m personally not for. To me it’s a good reflection, but I’ve mentioned before, everyone see’s a reflection differently.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

LOL!

[Chena]

Therefore, we can confidently expect the WAs to prosper and flourish. These posters were the talent that made Free Republic what it is, you aver. Verily, now they shall make WA rise like Botticelli's Venus from the shell of a clam.

The scientists among us will be watching.

I said, "It’s not unusual for a new website to have some flaws in the format. I doubt FR had the same format it has today when it was a fledgling forum/website. Just think of all the good people that made FR as well known as it is today. Without their assistance in posting articles and comments, spreading the word, supporting it financially, this site would have gone nowhere. They deserve a lot of credit for the past success of this site."

Now what words in my comment inspired you to bring up WA? Amazing, absolutely amazing.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Yep, that’s what a locked thread is good for...

[sauropod]

I could vote third party as a way of protesting, but by doing so I would also be helping the Democrats and hurting the Republicans, our military men and women, and our country’s security and future.

I disagree with your premise. Having voted third party twice and holding my nose and voting for W in '04, I take a back seat to NO ONE when it comes to supporting our troops.

In fact, my job, that I have performed for the last 18 years, supports them directly (and no, I will not tell you precisely where I work).

Your premise, by voting 3rd party you hurt the troops, is offensive on its face. 'Pod.

[Chena]

LOL Actually, I keep saying I’m not going to say anymore but then another comment gets posted to me and I end up responding. I keep checking to see if the answers to my two questions have shown up yet. Now, pass the Windex, I’ve got some dirty windows here. ;)

[don-o]

You thought all that up in one night? Boy Howdy!

[dmw]

“When I as a newbie, I would never have taken it upon myself to suggest how this website should best be run.”

But now that you’re an “olbie” you have no problem suggesting how this website should be run. Funny, I didn’t know it was your place to tell JR how he should run this place. Guess I didn't get the memo.

[Chena]

Still, when I was new, I was very wary of putting myself front ‘n center, so to speak. I saw how newbies were treated. LOL I’m not saying it’s bad, just surprised is all and actually impressed with this person’s hootz-pah (sp?). :)

[Kevmo]

Thanks for posting this. Here’s my response...

1) I’ve been on that thread and posted some material. I agree and encourage other freepers to help with this effort.

In particular notice posts #263 and 266:

To: Spiff; Jim Robinson
WTH!!!?
I just went to the link that I provided you, one that I’d visited before because I’m the one who posted it here originally (months back) and I watched the beginning of it to get the times that I just posted (1:20 and 1:48). But now the video is GONE from YouTube. Down the memory hole.

Now, I wonder why that would have happened....

263 posted on 04/26/2007 12:50:02 PM PDT by Spiff (Rudy Giuliani Quote (NY Post, 1996) “Most of Clinton’s policies are very similar to most of mine.”)

To: Spiff
Guess we’re gonna have to start downloading and saving copies of that stuff on secure servers. No doubt Rudy’s people will be trying to destroy the evidence.
266 posted on 04/26/2007 1:21:02 PM PDT by Jim Robinson

2) Sounds good to me

3) Separate Entity for Strategic Effort. I will be dedicating my time and resources to the Duncan Hunter campaign and Free Republic. I would cooperate with such a venture but I’d need to limit my involvement due to family commitments. I’m already on the StopRudy ping list run by Napkin User, so please make sure the ping list gets updated with any activities we could help out with.

4) Yes, lock the thread. It appears to be heading back into ugliness again and all that reconciliation we generated might get lost in the noise.

[jedward]

As a newbie I boldy suggested the title of the thread be changed maybe 3 or 4 time. Well, it didn’t happen, but that didn’t stop me from speaking up as a newbie. I trust you’ll keep me in line too :)

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Probably because the message you replied to was talking about WA as being a mess.

I know you weren’t saying that all the good posters went there, but that new sites aren’t what they’ll turn into long term.

It’s the gestalt between users that make a site, a thread, a forum good or bad, though. If the right gestalt isn’t there, it’ll fall flat.

I would teach 5 sections of the same level of English comp, and some classes were outstandingly great to teach and fun to go to, and some, using the exact same material, was like pulling teeth.

But we have enough people here that are good that we have a great gestalt, blend, mix or what have you...don’t know what they will have, but I wish them well on most things outside of getting Rudy reelected...

[metmom]

If the GOP becomes as liberal as the Democratic party, why should FR not become anti-GOP? FR is against liberalism, if the GOP moves in that direction, then yes, FR will oppose the GOP, but it won’t be because it was FR that changed it’s position.

[sauropod]

But espousing liberalism? That profanity goes clear to the bone--to the utter marrow. That's filth of entirely different, far more befouling and destructive nature.

Very well written and I thank you for it.

[jedward]

Thanks for the feedback Kevmo!