Posted on 02/08/2007 9:16:33 PM PST by Reagan Man
WASHINGTON -- Eager to head off Rudolph Giuliani's recent gains in the polls, conservative activists this week strengthened their attacks, with some promising to step up their efforts on the Internet, talk radio and "below-the-radar" to discredit him going forward.
They are taking direct aim at one of Giuliani's strongest selling points, at least to some backers -- that he is the Republicans' best hope of stopping Hillary Rodham Clinton.
These critics argue that his nomination would prompt a conservative third-party candidate to join the race and split the GOP vote, clearing the way for Clinton's election.
"There's no way conservatives could stand for Giuliani becoming the Republican nominee," said Richard Viguerie, one of the founders of the modern conservative movement. "I guarantee whoever the Democrats nominate would be the next president."
~ship~
He backed off his earlier opposition to a ban on the medical procedure referred to as partial-birth abortion, and expressed support for gun owners' Second Amendment rights, even though as New York mayor he sued gun manufacturers and argued that more guns lead to more crime.
~snip~
So social conservatives -- for whom Giuliani's support for abortion rights, gun control and gay unions are anathema -- are speaking out. Some say they would use the tools at their disposal to tell voters about Giuliani's social stances.
Viguerie, a direct-mail pioneer, argued it no longer takes millions of mailings to make the case, thanks to talk radio, the Internet and other "below-the-radar" media.
Tony Perkins, head of the conservative Family Research Council, told a conservative radio host that Giuliani's positions are "far outside the mainstream of conservative thought ... Once people focus on this election and the candidates, Giuliani's lead will diminish."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
But other conservatives say Giuliani's strong poll standing is mainly driven by his popularity after 9/11. A recent Gallup Poll showed that nearly three-fourths of Republicans didn't know he favors civil unions for same-sex couples, and two-thirds didn't know he supports abortion rights.
PING
What did Rudy actually DO after 9-11 that makes him so qualified to run the executive branch of the federal government?
Not doubting, just curious.
1. After eight years as Mayor, NY remained a high tax socialist hellhole. There goes his "fiscal conservative" bonafides.
2. Has a long history of questionable friends (Bernie Kerick, Ray Harding). There goes the "honesty" card.
3. Has a history of abandoning women when a new gal catches his eye. At least BC remained married. There goes the "moral integrity" card.
4. Lived with two gay roomates after divorce. Not that there's anything wrong with it.
5. Is on the record CONDEMNING the 1996 immigration reforms and Prop 187, stating that "NY thrives because of immigrants, documented and UNdocumented. There goes the "securing our borders card."
6. Has a history of being vehemently anti-gun, claiming that the 2nd amendment allows for "reasonable regulation." Of course, this is fitting for a law and order fetishist.
7. The last point illustrates that he has little understanding of "original intent."
8. Pro-abortion.
9. Governed a city where the majority of inhabitants are either effete yuppies, third world immigrants, or the children of the latter. There goes the "I am an American" card.
10. Has said NOTHING about foreign policy, other than superficial sound bites and Likud Party talking points (plagiarist!). So much for "Mr. National Security."
12. Had VERY low approval ratings until 9/11 happenned, due to a lack of ethics, and clumsy handling of police shootings. There goes the "competance" card.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Guiliani can NOT beat Hillary. Conservatives will prefer their liberal president to be a Democrat, and will sit home if offered nothing but a choice between two liberals.
What happened to #11. Otherwise its a good start.
I think #1 is critcal.
If you're right, that is supremely dumb of "conservatives".
P.S. I don't think you're right.
That's something worth saying Reagan Man!
Or at least won't "get out" the vote; aka work hard for him, which is what the Republican nominee needs..
I can't vote for him because his wife spells her name with an "i"...Judi.
I'm not shocked at all so many republicans are ignorant of Giuliani's leftist political views. When the primaries really get going, and it moves beyond the name part of the race, a lot of Giuliani fans are in for a surprise when their sure winner sinks like the titanic in the republican primary.
Giuliani is the most left-wing viable republican candidate ever. And now Sean Hannity is cheerleading for him. It's going to be tough, but I feel much more confident in "the field" than Giuliani.
Any republican but Giuliani or Hagel in 2008!
"Any republican but Giuliani or Hagel in 2008!"
I have to add McCain to your list.
How's that cabin in the hills doin' for you? Kill any Mexicans lately?
The best way to fight off Rudy is for the conservatives to put up a candidate that can beat the leading democrat. If they can't, then someone worse than Rudy, will become president. This is the reality of the situation.
Rudy should be honest and run as a Democrat.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
"Most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine." - Rudy Giuliani
Giuliani
Clinton
Dem Platform
GOP Platform
Abortion on Demand
Supports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Partial Birth Abortion
Supports
Opposed
NY banSupports
Supports
Opposes
Roe v. Wade
Supports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Taxpayer Funded Abortions
Supports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Supports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Federal Marriage Amendment
Opposes
Opposes
Opposes
Defined at
state levelSupports
Gay Domestic Partnership/
Civil UnionsSupports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Openly Gay Military
Supports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Defense of Marriage Act
Opposes
Opposes
Opposes
Supports
Amnesty for Illegal Aliens
Supports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Special Path to Citizenship
for Illegal AliensSupports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Tough Penalties for
Employers of Illegal AliensOpposes
Opposes
Opposes
Supports
Sanctuary Cities/
Ignoring Immigration LawSupports
Supports
Supports
Opposes
Protecting 2nd Amendment
Opposes
Opposes
Opposes
Supports bansSupports
Confiscating Guns
Supports
Confiscated
as mayor.
Even bragged.Supports
Supports
Supports bansOpposes
'Assault' Weapons Ban
Supports
Supports
Supports
Frivolous Lawsuits
Against Gun MakersSupports
Filed One
HimselfSupports
Opposes
Gun Registration/Licenses
Supports
Supports
Opposes
War in Afghanistan
Supports
Supports
Voted for itSupports
Supports
War in Iraq
Supports
Supports
Voted for itSupports
Weak supportSupports
Patriot Act
Supports
Supports
Voted for it
2001 & 2006Opposes
Supports
Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do and how you do it.
Rudy Giuliani
"There you go again."
...while making NY a sanctuary city, which enables the flow of illegals aliens, which provides cover for terrorists crossing the border, which endangers everyone but in particular the group he was pandering to while plagiarizing the talking points!
and we inch closer and closer to prez hillary
I'm rather weary of these so called "conservatives"....who couldn't be bothered enough to vote in the last election.
Hope they are proud of themselves now.
I saw on another thread that Michael Savage may be interested.
With all the "great Americans" on this thread threatening to sit out the election, you're right.
"I support the right-ward most candidate who has a legitimate chance to win." -- W.F. Buckley"
I don't think Rudi even leans slightly right unless hes from Jersey then thats just a geographical leaning.
My pleasure. Have a great weekend.
Here comes the latest attack from the scumbags at Newsday, who, like me, see Rudy as the next President of the United States unless they can help stoke some fires and stop him. You have to be an idiot not to see through this tactic.
Rudy opposes Roe v. Wade and said so the other night on Hannity.
He clearly said that abortion laws should be left to the legislatures and the states.
So, your graph is bogus. Who gave it to you? McCain? Romney? Duncan Heinz?
"Conservatives will prefer their liberal president to be a Democrat, and will sit home if offered nothing but a choice between two liberals."
Amen to that. Fed up with the lesser of 2 evils dance. If this is the best the Republican Party comes up with then there will be a dummie in the White House.
See http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/1778466/posts?page=126 then comment please.
"I'm not shocked at all so many republicans are ignorant of Giuliani's leftist political views."
Thanks for the ping....My question would by WHY are they suddenly being so tolerant of his leftist political views? I think there is a LOT behing that WHY!
Personally, I believe it has everything to do with the same reason they are tolerant (and rabidly supportive) of Bush's leftist push for amnesty, all under the guise of declaring that Guiliani is the only candidate who can beat Hillary.
Every time I see one of those polls like Hanity put out last night I also have to question WHY they are determined to keep Hunter out of sight. My guess, for the same reason I stated above. Hunter does not support Bush's amnesty. And the GOP is going to do everything in it's power to keep the good man down.
That's pretty much what I will do if Rudy is nominated. I promised myself long ago that I would never, ever, under any circumstances vote for a candidate with a character so despicable and lacking in basic humanity that he or she would approve and support the abomination known as partial birth abortion.
Some on this forum try to tell us that a president has no role to play in either overturning Roe v Wade or confirming it's validity. That is simply not true. While it may be true that a pro-life president has only the power to appoint pro-life judicial nominees, he or she also has the "bully pulpit" to campaign against such outrages as legalized abortion and homosexual "marriage". If GHW Bush had not been there to appoint Justice Thomas, and if his son had not been there to appoint Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, today there would not be even a glimmer of hope that the USSC will someday reverse Roe v Wade and allow the states to enact laws concerning abortion either pro or con.
The court must now decide regarding the partial birth abortion ban. The facts of that grisly procedure are, one second a baby in the birthing process is legally a fetus and therefore fair game for an abortionist to kill by stabbing it in the back of it's head and vacuuming out it's brains. A few more seconds and an inch or two of movement and the fetus would legally have been a live human child with all the rights that any other American has, and killing him or her would have been murder. Can someone please explain how that outrageous travesty makes anything even remotely akin to common sense? Abortion at any stage of human life is a crime against the laws of God and nature, and has been recognized as such for thousands of years by Christians and Jews alike.
Hitler only managed to slaughter 6 million Jews and other "undesirables", but America's abortionists and the judges and politicians who enable them have so far slaughtered almost 8 times that many unborn and partially born baby humans since 1973. If politicians such as Rudy and Justices such as the 5 pro-abortion USSC Justices now on the court have their way, the death count will continue to rise until I believe the God of heaven and earth will have had enough and brings the USA down to the place where nazi Germany was in the summer of 1945. IOW, defeated and in ruins with it's people in despair and disbelief that it could all have happened so fast.
I watched Hannity and Colmes tonight and Sean seems to have fallen in love with Rudy.
2001? I presume that was a campaign appearance (for mayor of New York City)?
Anyway, he has never denied being "pro choice" and has never flip-flopped on the issue. I think that he was using the term "right to choose" in the vernacular rather than in a strict Constitutional sense. Again, he said the other night that he likes and would appoint judges like Alito and Roberts, and he thinks that laws regarding abortion should be left to the states and their legislatures. And THAT is anti-Roe v. Wade.
I agree. But Rudy has far more problems with the voters than just one issue. His views on abortion, queers, and guns is a hill no Republican can climb in the Red states that elect Republicans.
That's encouraging, but I won't rest easy until it capsizes and sinks to the bottom.
I would dearly love to vote for a conservative, pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, anti-illegal immigration Republican nominee, but that doesn't come anywhere close to describing Rudy, in fact it describes his exact opposite.
Hello! I pinged you to Rudy's address to NARAL. Your comments please!
While he was the Republican Mayor of New York City he appointed more than 60 men and women to the Civil, Criminal, and Family Court benchs. In all of those judicial appointment only two were Republican.
All of his other judical appointments were either registered Liberals or registered Democrats. As the Republican Mayor he had appointment power over more than 70 full commissioners in more than 50 City agencies, yet at no time during his administration did REPUBLICANS account for more than 10% of those appointments.
He even appointed Chuck Schumers wife as the Citys Department of Transportation Commissioner.
________________________________________________________________
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9054.html
Look what I just found in the FEC database. Giuliani accepted $1,000 from NARAL in 1999.
Committees Who Gave To This Candidate
GIULIANI, RUDOLPH W
THE CANDIDATE
NEW YORK STATE NARAL INC WOMEN'S HEALTH POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE 04/24/1999 1000.00 99990065875
In 1999, NARAL gave only $250 to Hillary Rodham Clinton and 4 times as much to pro-abortion Giuliani.
Let's look at the other candidates that NARAL NY supports:
Arcuri for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Tim Bishop for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Tim Bishop for Congress - Democrat - $2,000
Tim Bishop for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Tim Bishop for Congress - Democrat - $500
Hillary Clinton for Senate - Democrat - $250
Hillary Clinton for Senate - Democrat - $1,000
Hillary Clinton for Senate - Democrat - $2,100
Hillary Clinton for Senate - Democrat - $1,000
Kirsten Killibrand for Congress - Democrat - $2,500
Giuliani for Senate - Republican - $1,000
Brian Higgins for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Nita Lowey for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Daniel Maffei for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Carolyn McCarthy for Congress - Democrat - $500
David Mejias for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Jerrold Nadler for Congress - Democrat - $500
Jerrold Nadler for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Regina Seltzer for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
Louise Slaughter for Congress - Democrat - $1,000
That's it. These are the ONLY federal candidates that NARAL NY has ever donated to according to the FEC database. And every single one, except for liberal Rudy Giuliani, is a Democrat. What a stunning endorsement for Giuliani's..ahem..."Republican" views.
Well, I'm not a scumbag for posting it.
The article contained some fair opposition to Rudy from conservatives Richard Viguerie, Tony Perkins and David Bossie. Who I happen to agree with. It also contained supportive items from George Will and Michigan Rep. Candice Miller.
This wasn't a hit piece. Far from it.
Btw, do you think RINO-Rudy is presidential material? You think he represents conservatism? I think Rudy is another in a long line of big government Republicans, who also happens to be pro-abort, pro-gun control, pro-amnesty and pro-homo rights. Kind of goes against everything FR stands for. Wouldn't you agree?
So you're not a conservative. What are you doing here? This is a conservative forum, says so right on the home page.
But since you snuck in, how about a source conservatives did not vote in the last election?
Whoa...! I never inferred that.
Kind of goes against everything FR stands for. Wouldn't you agree?
Sure, if you believe all the spin, exaggeration, and caricatures about Rudy's positions. I do not.
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.