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?
Where is that liberal forum? I want to see it!
If you keep this up, you may wanna put a cup on, boys... ;-)
Hi CW,
I see the show-that-never-ends is now in its 17th hour....
Are there any still standing among the bloody combatants?
And you probably never will either.
Jim, with all due respect that sounds a lot like the attaboy principal we used to joke about the in the Navy. I'm sure you heard it, 1,000 attaboys and you get a free discharge, but one "oh crap" and you have to start all the way over.
Quite simply, the preponderance of one's beliefs are going to place them in either the conservative or the liberal camp. (WARNING THE FOLLOWING IS JUST AN EXAMPLE) The card carrying NRA member who voted for Reagan, supports a flat tax, sends care packages to the troops, but still invites his sister and her lesbian partner over for dinner on Sunday is a conservative. Sorry Jim, but supporting his sister's lifestyle does NOT cancel everything else out. If this individual were placed in a room full of hard-core liberals, they'd lynch him in under an hour.
Likewise, you can be a conservative and still be against the war we're currently engaged in. I support the war, however I can fully appreciate the Washingtonian stance against ANY foreign entanglement that some conservatives have taken. I don't agree with it, I believe it's misguided, but it most certainly has conservative merit.
So Jim, I'm appealing to your common sense. Stop this drive for conservative purity. No good can come of it. Worse, you've emboldened some of the more juvenile posters who now post little more than, "Nyayayayayaya Jim's gonna ban ban you, nyayayayayaya." Jim, have faith, if Rudy Giuliani is truly the liberal that you and others seem to believe, then it will come out on it's own and he'll lose supporters all by himself. If he's not the liberal you seem to believe, then that will bear itself out as well.
What I do know is that current atmosphere of complete hostility and antagonism isn't benefitting anyone. It's not benefitting you, it's not benefitting Free Republic, and it's not benefitting the denziens thereof.
By "run the gauntlet" I assume that you mean "evaded America's defenses and illegally broken and entered into the country." And you want to welcome them and give them jobs and citizenship?! So, how does your view on this differ from Hillary's?
You seem quite impressed with the media. Conservatives aren’t.
I think he is saying, and I agree with my interpretation, that the rule about not posting profane personal attacks on others is a good one, one that deserves to be reinforced, even if the founder finds himself breaking it from time to time (as many people do).
It may make people feel good to hurl an invective at someone, but the important thing was the banning, not the comment (which quidnunc may not have seen, being banned and all).
I doubt he’s calling for a banning.
One phrase stands out... "health of the mother". In 1967, what Ronald Reagan meant by "health" was "genuine physical endangerment to the health of the mother". In 2007, what Liberals mean by "health" is "mental health, economic health, financial health, stress, unhappiness, inability to get a date on Friday Night... et cetera." They can -- and do -- drive a truck through the Exception made by Reagan in 1967.
Thanks for the quote.
Clearly, Ronal Reagan was a good pro life president. What is also clear, assuming that the cite you give is correct, is that it was a mistake for the Gov. Reagan to sign the '67 law.
Ron Paul seeks to overturn Roe vs. Wade and return Lawmaking over Abortion-murder to the proper Authority of the States.
Ron Paul is correct about Roe v. Wade and returning abortion(the killing of a human life) to the states.
You've placed a dollar value on a human life then?
These people are loco.
He was a great President, as is George W. Bush, but he was not a god, and he was not conservative perfection.
What I want to know, is whether or not posting accurate historical information about Ronald Reagan will get me banned from this forum.
It's important for me to know that.
Fierce Allegiance definitely wasn’t a RINO lover. He took on the RINO lovers with vigor.
Later.
Cheers!
I was responding to a Poster who seemed to object to the very use of the word "ass" as though it were "Profanity" (his accusation). In several posts, I pointed out to him that the mere usage thereof can't be "Profanity", because it does not Profane the Holy -- i.e., Violate the Third Commandment.
Why you're being so pissy about my response, I don't know.
But to each his own... perhaps you haven't had your coffee yet.
Thanks Jim for presenting your personal position....
I am a Christian First, and Conservative Second and a Republican Third....
Even if Rudy gets the nomination, I will not vote for him....even if that means that the dems win the White House.
Us conservatives will not be responsible for the demise of America....
The communist agenda went underground in the 50s and 60s and reemerged as the ACLU, NEA, and it infiltrated the Democratic Party....in fact that mind set is everywhere....the media is infected too.
I am afraid that someday soon, conservatives will be persecuted just as the Christians will.
Sooo...how much manure are you willing to tolerate in a batch of brownies? Oh, they look like brownies, and they smell like brownies, and they're certainly brown. But if you know there's an ounce or two of manure in the batch, are you still going to eat one of the brownies? Purity is a good thing, not a bad thing.
But it is not so much about purity that has driven the recent bloody fighting here on this forum. When we're fighting from the trenches and we see that some of the people in the trenches are firing on us and fighting for the other side, we have to turn and return fire and clear the trenches of the enemy. We have to shore up what they've undermined in order to invade the trenches.
Why not just fund a $1 bullet, and shoot the kid right after it’s born?
Excellent post. Bump for later reference on rudy & immigration.
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.