Posted on 01/29/2007 1:36:27 PM PST by Dark Skies
Many skeptics continue to question whether Rudy Giuliani is serious about making a run for the White House, but it was abundantly clear on Saturday that he had come to Manchester for more than the sub-freezing temperatures.
Addressing over 500 activists at the New Hampshire Republican Party's annual meeting as part of a two-day swing through the state, Giuliani sketched the broad outlines of what looks like a presidential run. Sounding at times like a motivational speaker, Giuliani cautioned against cynicism and pessimism in the wake of November's election results and challenges in the ongoing War on Terror. The message especially resonated with the audience in this critical primary state, where the Republican Party just lost control of both chambers of the legislature for the first time since the 1870s.
"The best way we remain safe and we retain our freedom...is remaining on offense, remaining strong and not becoming weak in a time of pressure," Giuliani said in a line that drew the biggest applause from the crowd at the Palace Theater.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
He's definitely no favorite on FR:
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=166;results=1
But, of course, McCaine is even worse;
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=165;results=1
I didn't throw it in and I resent not being called a Conservative. You will find more and more conservatives supporting Rudy and probably McCain because we know how dangerous 8 more years of a Clinton would be and how many hard left judges would be appointed.
People forget that if she wins she will bring along more Senators and Reps and our Conservative agenda is dead. We don't stand a chance. Look at the number of DemocRAT Governors compared to 1998 and you will find the Dems are systematically taking back the Governorships one by one. Why? Because we are running candidates that cannot win and don't stick to issues that matter most to the average voter.
My State of Oklahoma was burning every where last year when our rural fire fighters ran out of money and had ancient equipment which a lot was lost in the fire. They came to the Capitol, sat in the balconey, and waited for the House to pass their legislation. Not our Republican social conservatives -- they debated where gay library books should be located in the library (that is a community problem IMO as well as others) -- didn't vote for several days on money for our rural fire departments. We had a woman killed on I-35 when a portion of bridge where I live fell on her car. Our bridges and roads are in horrible condition but they spent days on feel good resolutions and couldn't pass a budget on time so they came back in special session and spent money like it was going out of style. Did you know that our wonderful social conservatives sponsored in-state tuition for illegals and that the Mormons and evangelicals have joined to support illegals and help them adjust?
I am a rock ribbed conservative but I will not support a candidate that cannot win, spends all their time on social issues when infrastructe is in horrible shape, and wastes my tax dollars on illegals.
Do you know who opposed all the feel good issues here including illegals? Conservatives who do not put social issues above all other Conservative issues.
Do I throw in the towel as a Conservative -- no way. I go back to being a Goldwater bell ringer as a teenager. Do I believe in beating Hillary, I sure do and will work for whoever the nominee is to send her packing once and for all.
This campaign cycle is going to cost more than most of us can imagine and it is going to take someone who can raise the big bucks and get a ton of support. I was called a liberal in 2000 when I supported then Gov Bush on here. Some things never change but anyone can call me anything they want but it doesn't change that I am a conservative Republican that doesn't believe in losing so I will support the candidate that can win. I would support Rudy/Newt in a heartbeat. I just put Steele on there to bug DemocRATs that read here because Steele being nominated would drive them nuts.
Read my latest -- I was told in email that I was not a conservative as someone had read my post on here so my reply back to you is meant to the whole bunch.
Makes me think that one Freeper is back when they read what I post and send me an email. Remember those days?
Do you remember when I was one of the few on here supporting then Governor Bush? He received less votes then Rudy.
Do you know how hard it is for me to say I would support McCain? I am part of the original group that used McClones to describe McCain supporters.
I heard Rudy speak here at the spring OU Convocation the other year and frankly was very impressed. Only speaker we have had in my memory that had everyone from the Faculty Senate to parents, grandparents, students, community members from all over the state standing and applauding. Our Faculty Senate even stood and applauded Pres Bush for his stand against the terrorist. Never thought I would see everyone on the same page. I sat down the row from the leaders of the Southern Baptist here and they were applauding like crazy for Rudy. It was amazing.
"You will find more and more conservatives supporting Rudy and probably McCain...
Hell, the primary season is just beginning. I'd hate for the media to call the Republican front runners in advance and see the conservatives jumping onto the moderate/liberal/traitor bandwagon before the battle has even begun.
Over the primary season, I will bet you will see it happen in state after state because they are afraid of Hillary and Bill getting near the WH. If Hillary or Obama were not running, then I would say Rudy or McCain didn't have a chance, but then we still don't have good conservative candidates to run.
Truthfully speaking, I have looked at candidate after candidate that is out there and studied it for six weeks after Sen Allen was defeated with some other consultants and we cannot come up with one that can come up with major bucks, win and draw in the indy and dem votes we need in the general. I keep coming back to the same conclusion. We have some of the weakest conservative candidates right now that I have seen. This primary season has launched early, going to need big bucks with big donors. Reason I am so convinced is that T. Boone Pickens and Tom Ricks owner of the TX Rangers are Rudy's major fundraisers in TX.
If you can find me a Conservative candidate other then the ones running including Newt that can raise money hand over fist and has charisma to win, I will support them in a minute. I think it is a sad state of affairs that we have not groomed a conservative candidate for 2008. Where are they?
Sheesh, you really are throwing in the towel, aren't you.
Can you find a good conservative that can win? I will give you my reasons why they won't win:
Romney -- waffles on issues; Mormon factor of the Church appeasing illegals
Hunter -- cannot raise the money necessary, 30 years in the House and would have made a good candidate in 2000
Tancredo -- not a chance -- too polarizing
Tommy Thompson -- no charm or ability to get votes
Sen Brownback -- heard him speak, put you to sleep don't agree with him on Iraq -- too wishy washy
Cong Paul -- doesn't stand a prayer of winning -- doesn't support a lot of Republican issues
Newt -- too polarizing to win as President could be okay as VP if he decided to take that but he quit as Speaker
J.C. Watts -- too much baggage not running
Gov Keating -- pulled out of the race -- would make a very good Attorney General
George Allen -- lost the Senate race and ran a louzy campaign
Cong Pence -- lost the election for Minority Leader
Gov Sanford -- lost a lot of ground not getting in the race so looks like he won't run
Jeb Bush -- not another Bush running for the WH
Bill Frist -- too wishy washy and was in charge when we lost the Senate
I don't like it and in fact, it makes me mad that we don't have a bunch of great conservative candidates falling all over themselves running so we can pick and choose. This is an odd election where the primary has already started. Keep this up and the primary will be starting before the other election ends.
Like I said -- Where is the good conservative candidate that can win and push Ms. Clinton back to the stone ages? I don't want want to spend another election night not knowing who won.
If Sen Inhofe runs, I will be joining his campaign so no I haven't thrown in the Conservative towel -- have to help get my Senator elected since we took such a bath in OK in 2006 and have to get some voters back to our side.
After typing that list of candidates to you, makes me madder still that we are not grooming Conservatives who can win, who stand on principle, and have a spine.
This has been fun! Have to get to bed so I can get up early to get everything ready for a Republican Executive Committee Meeting tomorow night to plan our County Convention. Been spending too much time on FR and haven't got my ducks in order! :)
Good luck. Sen Inhofe is a good man.
Inhofe is great, I'd love to support him for Pres.
Ed
see post 209.
Bookmarking post 706!
Thank God!
thank you for returning sanity to the debate!
Ping to save Rudy/Shrillery comparison table.
Just a reminder: Free Republic is a conservative site
Posted on 04/11/2006 by Jim Robinson
We fight for conservative principles, values and causes. We defend the Constitution. We defend our borders. We defend our God-given rights. We are opposed to the liberal/socialist/Marxist agenda for America. We do not willingly give up ground to the Marxists.
We fight on. We hold the majority. We continue working as hard as we possibly can to elect as many conservatives as we possibly can. We build a conservative majority that can overcome the Democrats and the RINOs.
We do not willingly give up any seats to Democrats. We add seats. Preferably, conservative seats. I would also like to remind everyone, that Free Republic does not condone racism and does not advocate violence. We exercise our first amendment rights to free speech and peaceable assembly.
We do not condemn people because of their race, religion, ethnicity, skin color, etc. We do not advocate civil war, anarchy, or an overthrow of the government.
And, yes, we are at war. And we do support our troops and their mission. We also respect our commander-in-chief and are mindful that when people disrespect him, it hurts troop morale.
We do not appreciate the mainstream media's attempts to destroy America's will to fight and we do not do anything to assist the Democrats and their accomplices in the media in their treasonous mission of undermining the war effort by providing aid and comfort to the enemy.
I'll list a few issues (by no means and exhaustive list) that will be adversely affected by Marxist/Democrats in power:
The Supreme Court
The federal judiciary
The legislative agenda
The right to life Marriage between one man, one woman
The family
Education
Health care
Private property
Taxation Oil/energy The right to keep and bear arms
The right to freedom of religion
The right to self-governance
All of our God-given rights
The Constitution
The Republic
Liberty itself
Do not get so discouraged that we give it all up. It could take generations to get it back. If ever.
"Securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" is our duty.
Well...that makes it perfectly OK then. It doesn't show any egregious lapse of judgement or failure to properly vett someone before appointing him to your highest law enforcement position and then to push him in to be head of the entire Department of Homeland Security. Not only that, but Giuliani had him as a business partner (see Giuliani-Kerik LLC) for a SECURITY company, and STILL didn't vett him.
The point of all of this about Kerik is to demonstrate that the myth that has risen up about Giuliani's superiority on law enforcement, homeland security, and military matters is just that - a myth.
Giuliani, recently, lost his campaign's most critical "playbook". That who situation was a farce too. He ended up blaming the "opposition" and wanting us to believe that an airport employee knew precisely in which bag and in which binder the critical documents were, sneaked them out of the bag, copied them, and then stealthily returned them to the bag without anyone knowing it. He had a leak in his organization and he did not deal with the leaker. He just placed blame on "someone" at the airport. If he was so sure it was an airport employee, then did he demand an investigation? File charges? No. That's because he knew that his story was bogus and he, the current owner and operator of a multi-million dollar security company (the company formerly known as Giuliani-Kerik LLC) just wanted the whole thing to go away because it made him look bad.
Thank you. It's holding up very well. The Rudy-Rooters HATE it because it truly demonstrates what a poor Republican candidate Rudy makes and how is views are more representative of the Democrats'.
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.