BUMP !!
Posted on 05/03/2009 12:32:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
I'm going to try one more time to explain what FR is all about.
Free Republic is a conservative site. That does not necessarily mean it is a Republican site. In fact there may be many Republicans we don't support and some Republican issues we cannot agree with.
I'll throw in Arlen Specter as a prime example of a Republican we cannot support. Should be obvious to all why not. Should also be just as obvious to all that we cannot support Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain and his lap dog Lindsay Graham, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, et al.
Some of the issues we cannot support as conservatives even though sometimes initiated by so-called Republicans include TARP, or any kind of government bailout of private enterprise, federal intrusion into free markets, federalized education systems, government provided or controlled health care systems, abortion, gay marriage, amnesty, global warming, gun control, etc.
I guess there is more than one definition of conservatism floating around out there, and this won't be text book, but the one we use involves defending, preserving and protecting our constitution, our unalienable rights, our traditional family values, our American heritage, our nation, our borders and our sovereignty.
We aggressively defend our rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness!
We aggressively defend our rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to keep and bear arms, right to due process, right to equality under the law, right to be governed under the rule of law, right to constitutionally limited government, right to corruption free government, right to self-government and our private property rights, etc.
We also aggressively defend our right to state and local government for all issues not expressly delegated to the central government by the constitution.
We aggressively defend our rights to free markets and our rights to live our lives free of government intrusion, interference, coercion, force, or abuse of any kind.
We aggressively defend our rights to national sovereignty, state sovereignty and individual sovereignty!
And this definition also includes aggressively fighting against all enemies foreign and domestic who may try to deprive us of our rights or sovereignty. This would obviously include all foreign enemies, but also we defend against RINOS, Democrats, liberals, socialists, Marxists, communists, militant feminists or homosexualists, radical environmentalists, etc, etc, etc.
And we expect our elected representatives to also aggressively defend our rights and fight against all enemies foreign and domestic. We do not elect people and send them to DC or our state capitals, etc, to reach across the aisles or to be bipartisan or to negotiate or compromise away our rights. If you're not going to aggressively fight for us, and for our rights, STAY OUT!!
We bow to no king but God!
Our God-given unalienable rights are NOT negotiable!
Do NOT Tread on US!
Thank you very much!
This is my favorite site on the internet, and even your weirdness and obsessiveness won’t keep me from supporting it. Romney is a flaming RHINO who should not represent true conservatives in any form, but I did not see Huckabee, McCain, or Pawlenty on your list of ‘one’. Also, I don’t think it is nice to call people ‘wankers’.
Yes Laura Ingraham has it right.
Well said. Thank you, JR!
(snicker)
My apoligies to Howard, Finch. :^)
Yeah - the WAnkers include some with fake pictures on their profile pages to match their fake conservative ideals.... ;^)
That reminds me of a great line in "Throw Momma From the Train,":
"One little murder and I'm Jack the Ripper!"
BUMP !!
The government’s job is not to make us happy. If we decide to be happy, its job is to not screw that up.
A few years ago, it was “Barack who”, so your premise falls flat. Those who refuse to learn from the past are just intellectually lazy and will accept who ever the media annoints as our “acceptable” candidate due to “electability” or what ever other media-created kool-aid the public will swallow.
Those who insist on a Governorship before a nomination also didn’t vote for the only governors in the race, FLIP Romney and Huckleberry from Hope.
We’ll end up with another “maverick” RINO if that’s what we allow to be the method for choosing the RIGHT candidate.
Even McCain, open border philosophy and all, would have scarcely endeavored to go on a worldwide “apologize for America” trip. His patriotism is in neon colors compared to Obama.
So what does this mean? That, for example, anyone who might be pro-Romney (and, for the record, I’m not pro-Romney) is not welcome and/or subject to banning if he or she posts something supportive of Mitt?
I do not know what upcoming Republican I will support, but one that is serious about less government, can call me.
In fact outside of California it would have been “Ronald who” until the middle of the Carter term.
What’s a wanker?
I’m with you Jim!
Be Ever Vigilant!
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.