Skip to comments.
Is Free Republic too "Republican?"
Jim Robinson
Posted on 06/13/2003 1:55:59 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Is Free Republic too "Republican?" I've been receiving a lot of complaints lately that FR is not really conservative, it's Republican. Is that a bad thing?
When I started FR (see the wayback machine) I don't think I even used the labels conservative or Republican. But, even though I was a registered Democrat at the time (I registered when I was very young), I was definitely anti-Democrat. And definitely anti-big government, anti-government corruption, anti-government abuse, anti-liberalism, etc. And I still am.
As FR became more and more popular, people started referring to it as a "conservative" web site and so eventually I posted the label to the front page. If it no longer applies, big deal. What's in a label? I'll change it to "Republican" if demand warrants.
I'm still anti-big government, anti-government corruption, anti-Democrat and anti-liberalism. I just happen to believe that in the current political environment we stand a better chance of defeating the left (liberalism/socialism/marxism, etc) by using the Republican Party to defeat the Democrats. The organization is there. The platform is there. The winning candidates are there. The dollars to run winning campaigns are there. The momentum is there. And the vast majority of the conservative voters are there.
Makes perfect sense to me. I want to defeat the left, and I want to do it as quickly as possible. I'll go with the organization that can get the job done.
My current goal is to defeat liberalism by defeating the Democrat Party. If that labels me a Republican, then so be it. If the vast majority of the FReepers want it so, then Free Republic will officially become the newest "Republican wing" of the Republican Party.
Long live Republicanism. Long live the Republic!'
What say you, FReepers?
TOPICS: Announcements; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: adminlectureseries; banglist; faq; history; jimrobinson; norinos
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580, 581-600, 601-620 ... 1,001-1,015 next last
To: Deb
" ... so our president didn't have to compromise with the enemies of the Constitution." -- Deb
Ain't that a hoot! The same president that swore in his presidential campaign to not sign any issue concerning CFR. I guess he just forgot what he said, hey?
To: Buckeroo
"The two major political parties are destroying our nation. "
But IMO the way to change that is to move the Republican Party slowly to the right, I think there has already been a shift in that direction under Bush.
By being a third separate "conservative" party/group/whatever and attacking Republicans every time they aren't conservative enough, the net result is to help the Democrats.
"Divide and conquer" was not said for nothing. The Democrats like nothing more than to see the conservatives turning against Republicans and having them cut off their nose to spite their face.
As I sometimes point out, and the "non-Republican conservatives" don't like it, nevertheless it's fact: Clinton was NOT elected by stupid liberals, Clinton was elected by exactly the conservative wing, who "was going to show Bush I" their displeasure by voting for Ross Perot, instead of Bush, and they did. Well, they showed him all right, the net result was 8 years of Clinton, and I don't need to explain what that did to the country.
Now wouldn't it have made more sense to be more tolerant of Republicans and unite against Democrats?
To: Jim Robinson
"I didn't pose a problem about my own ideals. I posed one about yours and people like you who are complaining that when FR uses the "conservative" label, we are falsely advertising our position." -- Jim Robinson
I never complained about this point of view anywhere upon the internet either in front of open forums or behind closed forum doors.
I suggest, you re-examine your own words about characterizing me on a personal basis; my whole impetus upon a "conservative grassroot's website" is to base dialog upon the Constitution as it was founded a few hundred years ago .... not love a political party (of any name or banner) that mocks it, even when in power of our government.
To: Buckeroo
I don't give a shit about CFR. The Supremes will toss it and Bush knew it. He was smarter than all of you.
If you really cared about Campaign Finance Reform being defeated you wouldn't care how it was done. And if you weren't just a garden variety malcontent, you'd give him credit for taking away the issue from the Democrats and bashing McCain in the head with it.
584
posted on
06/13/2003 11:38:50 PM PDT
by
Deb
(My tag line is in the wash.)
To: Bob J
Sorry if I'm jumping into a conversation I'm not wanted in but here's an answer from me.
**I have a question. What exactly is the definition of a politician "taking my vote for granted" (tmvg)? Does that mean of they don't vote or govern exactly as I would if I were in their place, they are TMVG? Where's the line? 50%? 75%?**
TMVG is when they run on a certain campaign platform that grabs my attention and makes me want to vote for them then turn around and behave differently in office.
Assault Weapons Ban: While not ideal is not that big a deal cause Bush said he would renew it when he was campaigning.
Pro-life: I have no real beef with. He took a stand on Stem Cell Research it could have been stricter but it's more than we've gotten in a long time. Would like to see something on cloning in the future ^_^.
Partial-Birth Abortion: They did good. I've heard some people say the ban has changed nothing as they can still kill the baby in the womb then take it out. Guess this is what an example of Incrementalism would look like.
Santorum gave a stellar performance ^_^.
Patriot Act: Frightening in the hands of Hillary ~_~* I shudder at the thought. Especially if all those FBI file rumors are true. What should we do about this? I know they need to be able to do better surveillance but orm in his campaign and I thought he would take a stronger stand for him. Still I think this was more the RINO Racicot than anybody else. I've still foamed at the mouth though. I'll probably get over it ~_^.
Israel/Pali: Eeesh! I'm really hoping for the Unfolding of the Bush Doctrine. Watching this as Bush while campaigning did say that Israel is our friend and that he doesn't desert friends which we've seen that before and I think there is more going on behind the scenes than we know.
As long as you don't lie to me on the campaign trial I don't bite to bad. BUT I WON'T EVER VOTE FOR BUD SHUSTER!! JUST FORGET THAT RIGHT NOW!
I'm an Independent ^_^.
585
posted on
06/13/2003 11:38:59 PM PDT
by
kuma
To: Jim Robinson
Hey, I'd be the first to welcome some conservative Democrats.
Ain't no such animal.
586
posted on
06/13/2003 11:41:30 PM PDT
by
ppaul
To: FairOpinion
"Now wouldn't it have made more sense to be more tolerant of Republicans and unite against Democrats?" -- FairOpinion
No. I say, damn the whole lot of them as they swear upon the Bible to uphold the US Constitution with their right hand while they wave a "King's X" using their fore and middle fingers on their backside using their left hand.
To: HAL9000
Keep the "independent" label - and the Republican spirit. AMEN! I've been a FReeper since '98, met JimRob, etc. Although I _DETEST_ RATs, and usually agree with Repub positions, affiliating with ANY party means selling out. Political parties need to be kept honest. Various Repub politicians go brain dead quite often.
The #1 goal is what JimRob has stated - to defeat liberalism. Unfortunately, liberalism also exists within the Republican party.
INDEPENDENCE!!!!! (from a registered Repub)
588
posted on
06/13/2003 11:49:53 PM PDT
by
MCH
To: Buckeroo
And I say I don't care about party, never did. However, at this particular moment in time, the Republican Party is preferable over the Democrat Party. Since the Democrat Party is THE official party of liberalism/socialism/marxism, etc, and THE official party pushing abortion, homosexualism, gun control, nationalized health-care, income tax, social security tax, medicare, welfare, racism, the removal of God from the public square, etc, etc, etc, they equate to the domestic enemy of the Constitution and the enemy of Liberty itself and must be defeated. Whether or not the Republican Party is perfectly conservative is not the question. They are the only existing party that is equipped to defeat liberalism (ie, the Democrat Party) and they are in the process of getting the job done. And I am enjoying every moment of watching Clinton/Gore/Daschle/Gephardt/Dixon/Pixie and company going down in flames. Long live the Republic!
589
posted on
06/13/2003 11:50:14 PM PDT
by
Jim Robinson
(Conservative by nature... Republican by spirit... Patriot by heart... AND... ANTI-Liberal by GOD!)
To: Deb
CFR could have been handled by both Senate and House Rules committees without affecting the People. But, go ahead and figure that there is some gigantic plot to free Americans from government chains while government adds more links to the chains and weight about our freedoms.
How come I don't feel free with more laws?
To: Consort
Do you know whom I'm speaking of?
He's a conservative.
If you live in CA and read the board there you would know. Otherwise....
To: ppaul
Again, you're not in CA and don't read the board. He votes CONSERVATIVE.
Please be civil.
To: Buckeroo
So I guess you prefer 8 years of Hillary, instead of supporting a Republican candidate, because that is the net result if conservatives do not support the Republican candidate in the elections that tend to be narrow because the population is fairly evenly split.
So conservatives hate the Republicans so much, that they rather have socialist leftists run the country instead.
As I said, talking about cutting off your nose to spite your face, the only problem is that it's all the rest of us have to suffer, because some "purist conservatives" are not willing to face reality.
To: FairOpinion
But IMO the way to change that is to move the Republican Party slowly to the right,...Yes, the parties do respond to their constituancies and will slowly move towards what the majority of people they hear from want them to do. For example, if most of the feedback comes from "moderates", then the party will tend to not move towards the more Conservative or more Liberal Republican sides. And if any of the three factions hold back their support, then the whole party and the whole country suffers under Democrat control.
594
posted on
06/14/2003 12:00:25 AM PDT
by
Consort
To: Jim Robinson
"Since the Democrat Party is THE official party of liberalism/socialism/marxism, etc, and THE official party pushing abortion, homosexualism, gun control, nationalized health-care, income tax, social security tax, medicare, welfare, racism, the removal of God from the public square, etc, etc, etc, they equate to the domestic enemy of the Constitution and the enemy of Liberty itself and must be defeated." -- Jim Robinson
I think you need to wake up and see the horror show that the Republican Party has duplicated. Again, neither of these political parties discuss America as a republic; it is all a democracy, anymore for brain-dead tax-payers that must be spoon fed some cheap dollars via the federal government.
Our national government was not intended to be built upon these gigantic powers; in fact, these are the types of oppressive powers that fostered the revolution to begin with. Jim, you have fallen for the big_weenie.
To: FairOpinion
"As I said, talking about cutting off your nose to spite your face, the only problem is that it's all the rest of us have to suffer, because some "purist conservatives" are not willing to face reality. " -- FairOpinion
The reason why you suffer is simple. You don't vote your heart; this is the reason why I suffer.
To: jpl
In absolute terms, maybe. In relative terms, no way.
597
posted on
06/14/2003 12:08:20 AM PDT
by
rightofrush
(Not only Rush, but Buchanan as well.)
To: FairOpinion
As I sometimes point out, and the "non-Republican conservatives" don't like it, nevertheless it's fact: Clinton was NOT elected by stupid liberals, Clinton was elected by exactly the conservative wing, who "was going to show Bush I" their displeasure by voting for Ross Perot, instead of Bush, and they did. Well, they showed him all right, the net result was 8 years of Clinton, and I don't need to explain what that did to the country. At the time, Perot came across as much more conservative than Bush I. Bush I had just spent an entire term caving into the Democrat's every demand, letting them set the agenda, letting them veto everything he tried to do without any fighting back, letting them get away with saying whatever they wanted without rebutting them, etc. Except for Gulf War I, he was a limp, pathetic rag, and a poor excuse for a non-Democrat.
In retrospect, the term "lesser of the evils" was a major understatement for that election. A dishrag, an evil, traitorous, lying, perjorous rapist dixie mafioso, or a delusional, paranoid egomaniac. Who knew? Hindsight is 20-20. At that time, the only clear characterization was that Bush I was a dishrag, and anything BUT a conservative.
Klintoon actually followed the conservative economic menu for the most part - despite the fact that he was also an evil, morally bankrupt sack of sh*t. Who knew he was going to be that bad, given the media/press coverage, if you didn't live in Arkansas? What's more, who knew that the American sheeple would be stupid enough to reelect him once they found out the truth? I see it all as an extremely painful but necessary lesson that wouldn't have been learned had a scumbag like Klintoon not corrupted the office for as long as he did. The pendulum has to swing whether we like it or not, or people get lazy and complacent. In the long run, the destructive reign of Klintigula may turn out to have been a major motivator behind the rise in strength of conservatism.
598
posted on
06/14/2003 12:10:07 AM PDT
by
MCH
To: Buckeroo
Hah! Whatever. My eyes are wide open. I see what's happening and I'm enjoying every minute of it. The liberals are seeing their world collapse around them and they are in a panic. God help me, I do love it so.
(plagiarized from Patton, the movie)
599
posted on
06/14/2003 12:11:37 AM PDT
by
Jim Robinson
(Conservative by nature... Republican by spirit... Patriot by heart... AND... ANTI-Liberal by GOD!)
To: I_Love_My_Husband
Again, you're not in CA and don't read the board. He votes CONSERVATIVE.I believe you, but who is this Conservative Democrat?
600
posted on
06/14/2003 12:15:15 AM PDT
by
Consort
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580, 581-600, 601-620 ... 1,001-1,015 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson