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?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

No reason to stop a thread just because one person can’t handle a little heat.

You might like this hate back and forth but old time FReepers never were like this. We had it out but we didn't attack. When I see this I think of opposition tactics.

[Dog Gone]

This is the greatest thread of all time, ain’t it Charles? :D

If you like snuff videos, it's the best!

[Man50D]

My vote is my right to speak. To vote for a Liberal Republican takes away my right to speak up as a conservative.

Go ahead, Go for Rudy, if you lose, don't blame conservatives, blame the Republican Party.

You completely misinterpret my previous post to you. I'm all for Conservative core principles as I have stated many times. I did not say in that post I was for Rudy. I couldn't be more opposed to his socialist philosophy! My apologies for not conveying that message. My point is unfortunately the socialists have a significant influence in the Republican party to the extent Conservative core principles are being pushed aside for more socialist ideals. I hope that clarifies the matter.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Let’s just admit it that we are all jealous that we didn’t think to go grab that screen name a month ago.

:-)

[Sir Gawain]

What does Billy Mays have to do with anything?

[CharlesWayneCT]

She quit. Nobody killer her off. She posted an anti-Thompson piece that had already been posted twice before, and then didn’t even stay around to DISCUSS it, she just said she was posting it and leaving.

So I don’t know where you get that “killing off the intellectuals” statement from my post.

[Blackirish]

“I did not say in that post I was for Rudy. I couldn't’t be more opposed to his socialist philosophy!”

Rudy is discussing using the flat tax as a model to simplify the tax code. That is as anti-socialist as it gets. If you’r going to come to a forum to discuss politics you should get your terminology right. Words have meanings.

[upsdriver]

“One thing is for sure, Hillary and Obama do not get us closer to any ONE of the goals of this site.”

There is a certain amount of power in being in the opposition. We were able to defeat HillaryCare in 93, while in the minority, but failed to stop the Medicare Prescription Drug program when we were the majority.

It will be easier to for us to take on and defeat Democrat socialist policies than it will to defeat liberal Republican policies.

And we won’t have to sell out our pro-life principles in the process.

[GSlob]

"Why? Why even spend that much?" - As was stated in the first part of my sentence you truncated, I would rather not spend anything at all. But I am not a legislature - i.e. I do not have the authority to re-write the budgets, regulations and tax codes. Indeed, one could argue that if I and others like me were given that power, the tax load would shrink, and 'welfare state" will be found in history books only.

[68 grunt]

... Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish.,/i>

Orthodox Presbyterian, huh?

[FreeReign]

I defend Rudy's conservative accomplishments -- I criticize Rudy's liberal positions on abortion, 2A, immigration. I have stated numerous times that I will support a pro life conservative in the primaries such as Fred. I have also said numerous times that I would support Rudy in the General if that was the choice. Finally, I have said, that having a Rudy as our nominee will most likely cause conservatives to split resulting in a Hillary presidency.

In the end, you've made the decision to support a liberal named Rudy Giulaini to be the GOP standard bearer. You will support a liberal for POTUS. You're on record. Thanks.

Well if you think that "in the end", Rudy will be our nominee, then your statement applies. I however, don't think that will be the case. But I'm sorry to hear that you are on the record saying such a defeatist thing.

[jmc813]

For conservatives I guess the choice is between getting 75%-80% of what we want or getting nothing.

If you agree with Rudy 75%-80% of the time, you're a liberal.

[NewLand]

Sorry my view and I’m entitled

Entitled, yes. But a POV based on false allegations such as "the GOP as currently constituted believes that it their duty to impose “Judeo Christian” values" *and* "One of the reasons the GOP has been losing elections is exactly that" is a bunch of MSM hooey.

[dforest]

You completely misinterpret my previous post to you. I'm all for Conservative core principles as I have stated many times. I did not say in that post I was for Rudy. I couldn't be more opposed to his socialist philosophy! My apologies for not conveying that message. My point is unfortunately the socialists have a significant influence in the Republican party to the extent Conservative core principles are being pushed aside for more socialist ideals. I hope that clarifies the matter.

I'm sorry, guess I did misinterpret your post.

Part of the communist idea to infiltrate America was to get control of one or both parties. They have one of them, and I guess people like us want to keep them from getting both.

You clarified it and we are in agreement. I am sorry if I flamed you.

Passionate conservative, you know!

[FreeReign]

It turned out the reported got the story wrong...

No surprise.

[conservative in nyc]

So when another rudy supporter made reference to “freepers” who said they would VOTE for Hillary, I simply asked for names.;

There have been a handful of FReepers who said they would VOTE for Hillary! if Rudy is the nominee. For example:

To: pissant

If someone were to hold a gun to my head and say vote for Hillary or Rudy, I’d vote for Hillary. If we have to have evil in the WH, let it be of the other party.

I will never vote for turning the party over to the likes of Rudy Guliani.

26 posted on 04/20/2007 8:06:33 PM EDT by JRochelle (Al Sharpton: Its hard out here for a race pimp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1820904/posts?page=26#26

To: zarf

Actually, if Hillary! supported the war, I might vote for her. We KNOW she’s a ruthless b!tch - if she used that against our nation’s enemies like she does against her own, we might finish this war up with a total victory...

22 posted on 04/12/2007 9:54:32 AM EDT by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: if his wives can’t trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1816089/posts?page=22#22

Researching something like this is NOT easy, and requires wading through hundreds of Google search results.

Like the majority of FReepers who have largely been avoiding the [insert name of Republican Presidential candidate here] bash-a-palooza threads, I am sick and tired of the personal attacks coming from ALL sides. Unfortunately, they have been spilling over onto threads that have absolutely nothing to do with Rudy, Romney, McCain, Thompson, Hunter, etc.

It makes very little sense to me to cannibalize each other. I simply don’t get why people can’t disagree without descending into personal attacks.

[TommyDale]

"You might like this hate back and forth but old time FReepers never were like this. "

You are correct. I don't recall this sort of flaming even with the Buchanan or Keyes candidacies, only when the Rudy Giuliani group jumped in with an attempt to force everyone to go along with him "because only he can win", then promptly tried to redefine the meaning of "conservative" to include abortion, gun control and other issues that offend peoples' principles.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Caption: “How did I get stuck sitting next to this guy — and on his LEFT, for God’s sake”

[FreeReign]

That's for the detective work. I'll look it over later.

Gotta go out.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Click on his post or name; he’s banned.

Yeah like you! Goodbye toots!