Posted on 11/13/2006 2:25:17 PM PST by tsmith130
Edited on 11/13/2006 4:48:30 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Giuliani Takes Steps to Prep for Presidential Bid in 2008
WASHINGTON — Former New York City mayor , a moderate Republican best known for his stewardship of the city after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has taken the first step in a 2008 presidential bid, GOP officials said Monday.
The former mayor filed papers to create the , creating a panel that would allow him to raise money for a White House run and travel the country.
What you were attempting to do, was to say that since Reagan flipped on the abortion issue, it was okay for Rudy Giuliani to flip his abortion position too. I said you were wrong about Reagan flipping on abortion and proved it. I pointed out that Reagan and Bush43 both have opposed 95% of all abortions performed. Giuliani on the other hand, supports all abortions, 100% of the time. Including partial birth abortion. That won't sell with most conservatives and that means Rudy has no chance of winning enough GOP primaries to secure the nomination.
BECAUSE THEY WOULDN"T TALK ABOUT IT!
" If you DON'T KNOW ANY OF THE PARTICULARS, please don't then post "PARTICULARS!
I DIDN"T and I TOLD YOU SO! WHAT I SAID IS THAT THEY WEREN"T BOTHERED BY IT ENOUGH TO SHOW IT. I ALSO POSTED OTHER THINGS THEY HAD WHICH ARE MUCH WORSE WHICH THEY IGNORED AND WENT ON WITH LIFE AS IF THEY WEREN'T EFFECTED!
" OTOH, I actually DID post "particulars" and in detail."
No you didn't. There are no details there and your claim of a big deal recovery process doesn't apply generally. If I wanted to know the details, I'd look them up myself.
"Profanity is NOT permitted in replies and it says so, quite clearly"
YOUR REPLY TO ME WAS BEYOND PROFANE! YOU CLAIMED I LIED TO YOU ABOUT MY FATHER AND THE OTHERS I MENTIONED HAVING LITTLE EFFECT FROM THE PROSTATE CANCER AND NOT SHOWING EFFECT FROM THE MAJOR CANCER TREATMENTS, UNTIL THE LAST DAYS. YOU'RE COMMENTS ARE DESPICABLE!
LOL, Emperor of the world?? need a running mate? my exploratory committee is telling me i don't have much of a chance with the whole presidency thing. but Vice Emperor KOZ. has a nice ring to it.
And after he was president, Reagan did send in taped speeches, couched in such a way, as to make one think that he was against ALL abortions, to pro-life groups. So that really is a change in stances.
You pointed out a fact that many here would deny......that Reagan was EVER for some form of abortion.
But go ahead, keep on playing games....it is your wont.
Romney's double-talk on abortion tells me all I need to know for a primary. He's not acceptable.
And, seriously, in less than 20 years we've had Dukakis and Kerry as presidential nominees. Do we *really* need another from Taxachusetts?
Hey, there's 50 states!
Double-talk from politicians is a concern in two ways.
One it makes the base and voters unsure of him. That's not what you want 'going into' a campaign.
Two it leads to Kerry-style waffles. I was before it before I was against it. -_-
I don't want to run a candidate that has the potential of messing up the whole election with that kind of nonsense.
I'm also concerned about Guilliani for that same reason. He's said positive things about Ginsburg and then positive things about Scalia.
Which is Rudy for? Ginsburg who quotes the EU Constitution when writing opinions or Scalia who makes strict constructionist arguments based on the U.S. Constitution?
We need someone solid who won't fall apart on the campaign trail and screw it up for the rest of us.
Speaking of Eisenhower, how about Tommy Frank. He was impressive on Veteran's Day on Laura Ingraham's show.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm.....let's see, I explained that Rudy did NOT have surgery, I also explained what kind of treatment he did have, with some detail, and told you the time span of such treatment. Would you have liked more details? If you want to know how many time he threw up and had diarrhea, I am afraid that I am unable to tell you that. What I can tell you, is that he suffered from both of those things, as well as the fact that that kind of cancer treatment is actually less safe than the surgery and should a recurrence happen, it is then NOT treatable.
And since his cancer was found and treated DURING the actual run-up to the Senatorial election, taking time off, in the middle of same, was NOT feasible.
Did your father try to run for a Senate seat, from N.Y., during his cancer surgery? How about from ANY state? NO? Then WHERE is the analogy?
First you said that you did not ASK for the particulars, Now, you say that your father and other male relatives REFUSED to tell you any of them. Yet, with alacrity, you posted that this is a "small" operation and other such tidbits of fallaciousness.
You should be angry with yourself; not with me. You posted as an "EXPERT", but you know almost nothing about what your father and other relatives went through. They may have been up and about, doing a few things; however, they were NOT out on the hustings running for a Senate seat, which requires flying all over a largish state, shaking hands and making endless speeches, during their cancer treatments. It's NOT the same thing and neither do you actually know what their recuperation time was like, because they didn't tell you and you weren't there with them, all day and all night.
What's despicable, is you lying and when caught, throwing an highly emotional hissy fit.
Now calm down, take several a deep breaths, and try to concentrate on the facts of the matter.
A bit misleading.
1% for rape or incest (planned parenthood says .5% cite rape).
4% for "health" of the pregnant female which can have all manner of interpretations.
Still, that means about 65,000 abortions are for those "exceptions" the equivalent of about half-a-day's worth of the 1.3 million per year in the U.S.
>>>>And after he was president, Reagan did send in taped speeches, couched in such a way, as to make one think that he was against ALL abortions, to pro-life groups. So that really is a change in stances.
Another nopardons fabricated crapola. LMAO Reagan never said he was against all abortions. Reagan was the first President to speak to annual Right to Life March in WashDC on the anniversary of Roe V Wade, and did so every year of his Presidency. Everyone knew where Reagan stood on the abortion issue.
Steele would be an awesome president.
You've got the stakes of 2008 down. I agree with you that Hillary would try her level best to reduce what the best minds of this millenium built to rubble. Dust.
Islamic UK would look like the American Frontier compared to what she would leave behind.
We do need to think of the generations to come, in the same way our own greatest generation thought of us. They fought and bled and died and sacrificed on our behalf. We MUST do the same for our children. I guess it really *is* for the children, but for real this time.
Vice Emperor KOZ does have a certain flair to it.
I suppose I do need a running mate. In the beginning you'll have to attend a lot of funerals, especially if we get opposition.
But once they see that my way is so much better, I'll be able to set the expectation that the Office of the Emperor simply sends flowers and issues statements, and focuses on life rather than death. Then you'll be free to focus on managing a third world continent or two.
You can bring the third world into economic prosperity without shifting resources from the West, and manage the necessary culture shifts, while I fine tune the Western and scientific world for stellar expansion and conquest.
It will be a very glorious future.
You can spin like a dervish, but it's still just spin; as usual, from you. :-)
Also please reply to the specifics in my posts to you.
I've been reading posts on FR for years, and I've been debating you for years. Nothing has changed. You're still FOS.
Ditto for YOU; pet. :-)
Thats interesting about prejudice against Mormons in the West. I thought there would be none since there are so many there. Even though I did have a friend that lived in a Mormon area of Arizona and said it got old after a while. Nothing against Mormons but he said he thought they were awefully clanish.
That being said currently I am supporting in this order Huckabee, Brownback(if he runs), Romney, or McCain. I shall support whole heartly whoever wins the Republican nomination
I really dont have a huge problem with MCCain. His age I think though will be a negative factor
"Reagan has now been elevated to godlike proportions, having never done nor said what he actually did and said."
My main problem is that people dont listen to all of what Reagan said. You know the part about how getting 60 or 70 percent of what you want is a win. A good philosophy that is often forgotten. Also many folks forget he had his own radical John Birchers to fight
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.