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?
Oh, please. If you consider mentioning that Reagan signed an amnesty bill trashing him, then you’ll just be “forced” to ban me. Ditto with mentioning that Reagan used to be a Democrat and signed what at the time was the most liberal abortion legislation in the nation.
He cut taxes like crazy in NY....plus he’s currently talking about a flat tax! No else will has even touched that!!!
1. he kicked arafat out of a concert
2. He turned down a check from saudi arabia
3. He said he’d like to kill OBL with his bare hands.
impressive resume
Explain to me how electing ANY liberal advances the conservative movement.
Jim, take a look around more often. The rudy-liberals are trashing every conservative they can to try to make their pro-abort, gun grabbing, homo rights liberal look good. It’s sickening.
“President Keyes?”
Ambassador Keyes will be speaking in Denver on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Still a fine speaker, and no compromiser on the issue of abortion.
Sheesh, if you believe any of that crap you’re not being honest. Get over it. He’s a blooming liberal. There’s no way you can defend his liberalness. It’s indefensible.
A good next step would be to post a series of messages defining (in historical and philosophical terms) just what Conservatism is. For example, Russell Kirk's definition:
Conservatism is not a fixed and immutable body of dogmata; conservatives inherit from Burke a talent for re-expressing their convictions to fit the time. As a working premise, nevertheless, one can observe here that the essence of social conservatism is preservation of the ancient moral traditions of humanity. Conservatives respect the wisdom of their ancestors . . .; they are dubious of wholesale alteration. They think society is a spiritual reality, possessing an eternal life but a delicate constitution: it cannot be scrapped and recast as if it were a machine. . . .Shall we compromise and define ourselves primarily by our desire to be on the winning team, or define ourselves by our principles and stick by them, win or lose? I can't speak for the rest of FR, but I choose the latter.I think that there are six canons of conservative thought--
(1) Belief in a transcendent order, or body of natural law, which rules society as well as conscience. Political problems, at bottom, are religious and moral problems. A narrow rationality . . . cannot of itself satisfy human needs. . . . True politics is the art of apprehending and applying the Justice which ought to prevail in a community of souls.
(2) Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of human existence, as opposed to the narrowing uniformity, egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems; conservatives resist what Robert Graves calls "Logicalism" in society. . . .
(3) Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes, as against the notion of a "classless society." With reason, conservatives have often been called "the party of order." If natural distinctions are effaced among men, oligarchs fill the vacuum. Ultimate equality in the judgment of God, and equality before courts of law, are recognized by conservatives; but equality of condition, they think, means equality in servitude and boredom. (4) Persuasion that freedom and property are closely linked: separate property from private possession, and Leviathan becomes master of all. Economic levelling, they maintain, is not progress.
(5) Faith in prescription and distrust of "sophisters, calculators, and economists" who would reconstruct society upon abstract desings. Custom, convention, and old prescription are checks both upon man's anarchic impulse and upon the innovator's lust for power.
(6) Recognition that change may not be salutory reform: hasty innovation may be a devouring conflagration, rather than a torch of progress. Society must alter, for prudent change is the means of social preservation; but a statesman must take Providence into his calculations, and a statesman's chief virtue, according to Plato and Burke, is prudence. . . .
In a revolutionary epoch, sometimes men taste every novelty, sicken of them all, and return to ancient principles so long disused that they seem refreshingly hearty when they are rediscovered. . . . The true conservative thinks of this process [of historical change and conflagration], which looks like chance or fate, as, rather, the providential operation of a moral law of polarity. And Burke, could he see our century, never would concede that a consumption-society, so near to suicide, is the end for which Providence has prepared man. If a conservative order is indeed to return, we ought to know the tradition which is attached to it, so that we may rebuild society; if it is not to be restored, still we ought to understand conservative ideas so that we may rake from the ashes what scorched fragments of civilization escape the conflagration of unchecked will and appetite.
The Conservative Mind, (pp. 7-9, 10) Source
“Do you really expect me to do that?”
I will never vote for rudie. I will always vote against him.
He refused some cash from a Saudi prince after 9/11.
He says he will fight terrorism. (Does not every candidate?)
“Do you really expect me to do that?”
I will never vote for rudie. I will always vote against him.
Where the heck did you get that idea from?
“We had one guy trashing the founding fathers today in his support for the abortionist, gay/illegal loving gun grabber. He’s no longer with us.”
Liberals/Marxists will do anything to win. Trashing our founders means nothing to them. Just another arm and hammer means to the end.
JRob for Pres! We’re with you, man!
ping
Jim, isn't that EXACTLY what folks around here were saying about Hillary's chances, several years ago?
Mention Hillary as the presidential candidate, and folks would be laughing.
Perhaps they still are. But the laughter is dying down....
- John
We also lost governorships, state assemblies, state senate, state treasurers, minimum wage initiatives, in Ohio we lost every statewide office including attorney general, auditor, governor and sec of state.
I have no sources but I suspect we even lost dog catchers.
That being said, I would rather vote for someone who I thought held my views consistantly, not just someone who sometimes said the right things when he needed to. I would like to vote with confidence for a change instead of with a hopeful grimmace.
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.