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?

[Knitting A Conundrum]

that quote was actually Cesare Beccaria, quoted by Thomas Jefferson...

[tiredoflaundry]

LOL!

[muleskinner]

Want a little cheese with that whine?

That's the first time I've seen THAT one...........TODAY.

[ohioWfan]

Correct.

Back to lurking. Don't post back to me.

I've made my very consistent position clear in hundreds of posts. Nothing new to add. If you're curious, read them.

[Jim Robinson]

As you wish.

[pissant]

Frankly, I don’t give a damn. ;o)

[Gelato]

That abortion is like slavery.

No, it's much worse:

GONZALES v. CARHART
Opinion of the Court

Here is another description from a nurse who witnessed the same method performed on a 26½-week fetus and who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee:

"Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms— everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. . . .

"The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall.

"The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a highpowered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. . . .

"He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta.

"He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used."

Thankfully, toleration of this evil is coming to an end.

[pissant]

I had to keep it brief. I could go on and on, but it would just be a reason for people to skip it. LOL

[Dominic Harr]

I don’t know you very well, though we have posted to each other a few times.

I've never told you this, but you're one of the funniest people I've ever read. :-D You've made me roflmao on many, many occasions.

Anyway, I know folks like me aren't being banned. JimRob is very fair about that.

The concern I have is, JimRob use to stop people from flaming folks for just having a different opinion. Apparently no more. Lately, I've been ripped a new one several times just for saying I don't think Rudy's as bad as all that. And I've seen others given the same treatment.

FR's greatness, in my opinion, came from it being an open discussion forum where the best ideas prevailed.

But the mob seems to be taking over here, now. I don't find much of that open discussion I use to love. Every single political thread boils down to a flame fest.

[Fiddlstix]

LOL. No apology necessary.......
That would be.....
Well....
Kinda trivial.....

[Getsmart64]

Well, there was a time, we were considered a serious political discussion site.

Since I've been lurking here...it's never been a pro liberal site...it's a pro conservative site..Rudy is not a conservative.....you seem to be misinformed on the purpose of FR..... Have a nice day...

[NinoFan]

LOL!

[Redcloak]

I wonder if he’s any relation to Don “No Soul” Simmons.

[presently no screen name]

You have gone to great lengths to defend a former Freeper who threatened both JimRob AND myself

No, I have NOT gone to great lengths. I asked why she was called a crazy liberal. IMO, you are a distruptor to this site and, you are doing it great harm. And you are most giddy about it. Your 'GREAT LENGTHS' is on you, not me.

but you can't refute what we posted to each other, nor can you spin the context into something it isn't.

a little CYA going on, eh?

You have no idea what is in my heart, because you don't know me

What's in one's heart, comes out of the mouth. Your posts speak for you. Strange, how you seem to "know' M. Thatcher" - have you met her?

You don't know a damn thing about my 'traits' pal, and as for disruption?

There is only one way NOT to know, by not reading your post.

but you're all talk, and you got nothing.

Another 'Whew - CYA' time for you. YOUR posts are doing the talking - not me.

[JamesP81]

No such thing. They don't go hand in hand. It's like some liberals here who claim to be conservative.

I don't claim to know what's in every man's heart. OTOH, any Christian he leads a lifestyle to make the devil smile without shame clearly has something wrong. When I make mistakes, I do at least know that I've made mistakes. Some people think that their evil is good and that true good is evil.

Going back to the earlier point. There are a depressing number of Christians, however, who are theologically conservative but have no clue about the consequences of the goings on in government. One of the most devoted folks I go to church with definitely has his reward laid up in heaven, but the man couldn't tell you who the vice president of the US was if you asked him.

[ex-snook]

"I think this sight is changing from an open discussion political forum where the best idea wins. Now it's becoming a 'social conservative action site' where dissenters are treated like something akin to slaveholders."

Your joking right? You can't have been here since 98 and never read Jim's introduction about his site.

[processing please hold]

1000 0011 1001 0110 1001 0110 1001 0011

[politicalwit]

Hell, Giuliani isn’t even close to being Zell Miller!

[Knitting A Conundrum]

The name of peace is sweet, and the thing itself is beneficial, but there is a great difference between peace and servitude. Peace is freedom in tranquility, servitude is the worst of all evils, to be resisted not only by war, but even by death.

Cicero

[CharlesWayneCT]

I was seriously asking a serious question, which you ignored. In this response, you say it's ok to respond to annoying posts with an "UYA."

So I ask again, what part of Knitting A Conundrum's post did you find "annoying"?

Knitting A Conundrum said: Freedom is a possession of inestimable value.

What annoys you about that? Freedom? value? posessions? or inestimable?

What in that comment annoyed you so much that you felt necessary to respond with profanity?

You say it annoyed you, so tell us why? Because I see nothing annoying there, and can't imagine why and conservative, or for that matter any american, would find that statement annoying.