FreeRepublic: A place for "grass-roots conservatism on the web" or not?

Me

[San Jacinto]

In the interest of bi-partianship, I will quote the part of your post with which I heartily agree:

"President Bush is smarter than his critics."

[thepitts]

You ARE either for the constitution or against it.

[Malcolm]

There's more anti-Bush, anti-GOP posts on Freep than not. Most Libertarians frequent this site, yet the Libertarians are not really a conservative party. I wish intolerant conservatives and Libertarians would form their own websites. Or that a site like that could be formed by Jim Robinson, and reserve the Freep site for pro-GOP discussions, so that true Republicans can debate important issues, and the fringe elements can spend all their time on their site lambasting the GOP, complaining and bellyaching to the Nth power, instead of doing it on what I consider a "Republican" site.....

[LiberteeBell]

Here's a list of some of the things Bush has done/endorsed during his presidency. All of these issues have been discussed at length on this forum, and still, some are taking a "wait and see" attitude:

Stem cell research

Faith Based Initiative

No attempt to prosecute Clinton crimes

EO to keep Clinton documents from release

No congressional declaration of war

MFN status to China

Back dues paid to the UN

Airline bailout

Patriot Act (pretty good rape of the 4th amendment)

Office of Homeland Security

Payoffs to families of victims of 9-11

Federalization of airport security

Education bill and lovefest with Ted "The Swimmer"

Shadow government (who are these people? did we elect them?)

Volunteer corps

Steel tariffs

50% increase in foreign aid??

Amnesty for illegals???

I guess we're supposed to be happy because we got a tax refund.

[Protagoras]

Nobody would ever confuse you with the real Thomas Jefferson.

No one but an imbecile would think that anyone was expected to.

[Harrison Bergeron]

"Shredding the Constitution.... sheesh."

Your words, not mine. I never used the word "shred" or any variant thereof. I likened CFR as a kneecapping - a "hobbling," if you will - of the Constitution. Political speech has been proscribed by act of congress and duly signed by the president. This isn't demagogery, this is public record.

[NittanyLion]

Or that a site like that could be formed by Jim Robinson, and reserve the Freep site for pro-GOP discussions, so that true Republicans can debate important issues, and the fringe elements can spend all their time on their site lambasting the GOP, complaining and bellyaching to the Nth power, instead of doing it on what I consider a "Republican" site.....

In case you missed it, this is not the "Premier Republican Forum", it is a conservative forum.

[hobbes1]

And As I pointed out, that is not quite correct. Aristotle, for all his wisdom had never observed this grand expirement in self governance. There is no Solace, in losing Nobly, because the cause you believe in, also loses.

In American Politics more than any other, winning, is the important thing, because without it winning, and doing what it takes to get there, you would have a government like Clintons First two years, only worse.

[Landru]

OK...but first?
Let's answer the first question, first:

"FreeRepublic: A place for "grass-roots conservatism on the web" or not?"

Well.
Maybe; maybe not.
Depends.

What day is it? :o)

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with you 1000%.

In Brewster's Millions, a movie from 1985, Richard Pryor launched a political campaign for mayor.  It was an attempt to spend as much money as possible.  Pryor had been willed hundreds of millions of dollars with one stipulation.  He had to spend $30 million dollars in 30 days in order to inherit around $300 million total.

His political campaign turned into an effort to encourage people to vote for, "None of the above."  Now there's an idea!

It goes without saying that most of us couldn't vote for a Democrat on a dare.  What is less accepted is that most of us are finding it impossible to vote for the lesser of two evils.  What this has found us doing in the past, is voting for a man that would by all intents and purposes be called a liberal if he wasn't run against someone like Walter Mondale, Bill Clinton or Al Gore.

Was George Bush Senior a Conservative?  Was Bob Dole a Conservative?  Is George Bush, our current President a Conservative?  My requirements for qualification to be a Conservative aren't all that high.  Here they are:

1. This person must not do anything that doesn't adhere to the Constitution of the United States.
2. This person must not do anything that doesn't protect the United States above all comers.
3. This person must not do anything that doesn't protect the citizens of the United States against all dangers.

There you have it.  It's not what I'd call an extensive list of requirements.  I consider them to be rather simple.  However, I have found that I am in a minority with regard to this opinion.  You'd be surprised how many people find these requirements to be unreasonable.  Well, screw 'em!

I have come to a place in my life where I will no longer vote for someone that doesn't recognize the validity of me requiring that they adhere to these three tenets.

Think about this for a moment.  In the spectrum of far left to far right, where would the above three requirements come in?  Are they really Conservative?  In my opinion they're about as middle of the road as you can get.  What's Conservative about asking someone to adhere to them?  In reality all I'm asking is that people love this nation and it's citizens.  Run even a middle of the road (a moderate) candidate and I'll vote for him.  Is that too much to ask?  Evidently it is when it comes to Democrat and Republican leadership.

CFR violates rule one, two and three.  It's unConstitutional.  It doesn't protect the United States against sheister politicians.  It doesn't protect the citizens of the United States from their evil effects.

Illegal Immigration is another such issue.  The President swears an oath to faithfully protect the borders of the United States.  An effectual disolution of our borders does not adhere to the Constitution, protect the sanctity of the United States or protect the citizens of the United States from all dangers related to illegal immigration.  It does not protect this nation from the subversive and corrosive effects of illegal immigration.

For this reason, I say that our current President doesn't even qualify as a moderate, let alone a Conservative.

Until the Republicans run someone who will adhere to the above three requirements, I will not vote for their candidate.  Frankly a vote for None of the Above is exactly what is called for.  If the Republicans didn't recieve one single vote for an election cycle or two, it would be good for the United States.  It would send a message that the days are over when we'll vote for a liberal and canonize them as a Conservative to pacify our requirements.  Then the party would swing back to obatin our votes.  Otherwise, they NEVER will.  Is that what we want?  Evidently so, because that's the message we send every time we vote for a liberal in sheep's clothing.

Anyone that can't see this is damning this nation to the ash heap of history.  If the Republicans don't swing back toward the middle, and soon, we're damned.
 

[Roscoe]

I wish intolerant conservatives and Libertarians would form their own websites.

They have. Failures all.

[Hillary Ridem Clinton]

I want to have his baby!!

[Protagoras]

I guess we're supposed to be happy because we got a tax refund.

Great list, but it won't make a whit of difference to these people. He ain't Clinton, is all they can see. No wonder they call it the stupid party. It's not because of their elected officals like everyone assumed, it's because of their members.

[FreeTally]

Most Libertarians frequent this site....

What a profoundly stupid comment.

[thepitts]

He could have not signed it, it would have become law anyways.

[hobbes1]

Actually, it has not ben proscribed, that is a poor use of the word.

Political speech, in this bill, is curtailed in a certain period of time.No speech has been outlawed. There is a difference, and were it not for the hysteria induced myopia, you would see that.

[monday]

"America doesn't have a chance when both sides act like each other. "

I know, I keep voting Republican, because at least they talk like they know what is right, but when they get in office, they usually act just like the Democrats:(

[Harrison Bergeron]

"...what I consider a "Republican" site....."

Here's a splash of cold water for you... FR isn't a "Republican" site.

[Liberal Classic]

Then Bush gets the best of both worlds: CFR is deader than it could have been any other way, and he can say to the voters, "Hey, I did everything I could. I signed it into law, but it didn't stick. What more do you want?"

This is a very dangerous game. Better, in my opinion, that if he opposed it that he should have vetoed it, and forced an overturn of his veto. If the courts then strike it down, Bush can say "See, I told you it was unconstitutional" and if they uphold it he can truthfully maintain he was against it from the start.

Unless he actually supports it, then bully for him.

[Protagoras]

That is correct, I keep mine to use, not for experimentation.

It seems like a carpenter using the wrong side of the saw. Good tool if you know how to use it.