Posted on 02/01/2007 5:41:39 AM PST by areafiftyone
According to a source close to The Giuliani campaign, Rudy Giuliani is throwing his hat into the ring. The Hinzsight Report confirms, through a source close to the Giuliani campaign, that he is presently sending people out into all 50 states to secure his name on the primary ballots. "Despite Mayor Giuliani's public cautiousness, this is evidence that he is seriously pursuing the Presidency in 2008, and he should be taken very seriously. Critical state polls have shown Mayor Giuliani leading the pack, and it's about time that he start being considered what he is--the front-runner" a source tells The Hinzsight Report. Giuliani has lined up nearly 300 key Republican supporters in New Jersey for his bid for the 2008 presidential nomination, his campaign announced this week. In a recent Quinnipiac University poll of New Jersey voters, it showed Giuliani leading all Republican presidential candidates and ahead of Sen. Hillary Clinton, the leading Democratic contender, in a head-to-head matchup. The New Jersey primary, which is currently set for Feb. 26, is likely to move up to Feb. 5, placing it early in the campaign season and increasing its significance. As many as 15 states could hold their Republican presidential primaries Feb. 5, reports Gannett. |
You must realize that I am just about the worst when it comes to guessing at freepers genders. You're the latest in a LONG line of freepers who I've misassumed.
I didn't say anything about abandoning the items contained in the CWA. The CWA included fiscal, economic and social issues. The CWA was successful and helped to increase the number of seats the GOP ultimately gained. No one is talking about one issue here. If you look at Spiff`s chart, you'll see exactly where Rudy stands on ALL the issues. He is opposed to the vast majority of items contained in the GOP platform. Rudy opposes them because he is a liberal.
Whoa...talk about myopic.
If you do your research and look talk to anyone from the NRA you will see that in Mass, if Mitt had vetoed the assault weapons ban bill it would have been overturned and became law as the Dems wanted.
So he worked with the NRA and the Dems in the legislature to get the worst parts out of the bill. So yes he signed the bill, but it could have been much worse had he not worked with the NRA to craft it.
FWIW Romney actually took steps to protect the rights of gun owners as governor:
In 2006, Romney signed NRA-backed legislation creating exemptions for the makers of customized target pistols who had found it too expensive to sell their guns in Massachusetts because of a state regulation requiring them to test at least five examples of new products "until destruction."
You, too, bud: find and paste any post I've made supporting Rudy.
I can wait while you find one.
And, although it's subject for a different thread, as Lincoln helped advance the US goverment's atrocities upon the Indian, many tout "Honest Abe" as the black man's "rescuer", forgetting his helping enslave and murder a race of a different color.
Politically, on many issues, Clinton's policies were more conservative than GW's.
Bogey men don't work too well with me. ;-)
Can we debate it without it becoming personal or is the "personal" all we have to offer.
If it is, then it doesn't matter - the Dems are going to win because calling Obama "Hussein" is not going to win voters over to our side. And our arguments against a Hilliary presidency... calling her names and Hitlery is not going to do it either.
Oppose Rudy or favor Rudy.
Oppose Hunter or favor Hunter.
Let it rise and fall on where they stand and not belittling one because some Freeper did it to your candidate first.
I will say this... Spiff, Reagan Man, etc. are offering valid reasons to oppose a Rudy president. They are carrying heavy water and the response from most Rudy supporters is zip... nada...
(Not directed at you. Just ranting!)
Ah, so your slamming everyone on this thread daring to question his credentials is what? So clear up the matter, who is your primary choice for the GOP nomination? Here's your chance to set the record straight.
Are you saying Rudy got himself a college deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam so that he could be a lawyer. I wonder how that's going to play to the military vote...
Rudy was a pretty radical liberal at that point in time. Radical liberals were rioting in the streets against the war in Vietnam. I'm pretty sure he did no rioting or protesting, but I'll bet if someone did the right digging (that's what we do here) they could probably find him aligning himself with the wrong crowd (Fonda, Kerry, Clinton, etc) back then. Hmmmm....
Pardon me for shooting holes in the false image that has risen up around a liberal candidate. But, then again, that's what we do here on Free Republic. If liberal Rudy is one of your sacred cows, you're just going to have to learn to like ground beef.
Neither.
Anyone who thinks Mrs. Clinton is the be all, end all of the '08 election has already conceded defeat, believes the left wing media driven drivel, or has other motives. I do not believe the liars in the media or you...
I might has well vote for Bullwinkle.
Neither.
Anyone who thinks Mrs. Clinton is the be all, end all of the '08 election has already conceded defeat, believes the left wing media driven drivel, or has other motives. I do not believe the liars in the media or you...
I might has well vote for Bullwinkle.
Are you now into the strawman building business? Let me know how that works out.
And his vocal support of the 1994 AWB? He couldn't have forced the legislature to over turn his veto, but instead capitulated? And this is supposed to make us feel better about him as a POTUS candidate? That he'll roll over for expediencies sake?
Why? Why not just get behind a candidate that has no such baggage? Like Hunter or Gingrich. Why waste the effort on a RINO?
Sooooooo, why do you keep guessing? Worse, why do you invite people out and step in it?
Just let people be if you don't know them. Consider them numbers, like, 813? :-)
Oh, my, aren't WE full of ourselves here?
Frankly, I'm here more for the amusement than anything; I just love seeing you morally superior types try to laud it over those you believe are too stupid to be able to make their own decisions.
And like MOST PEOPLE here at FR, I don't have a candidate yet; I'm still trying to figure out the truth from fiction on these threads; you'll pardon me if I don't take some of you as the be all end all of truth.
What 'social' issues?
Lower taxes, legal/criminal reform, etc. All the issues in the CwA were about govt infrastructure.
Calling Rudy a 'liberal' is exactly what I mean. He's a political conservative, as I understand it. Lower taxes, strong on crime, efficient manager.
But you're completely rejecting him, and won't even allow that he's a conservative.
If you want that to be the R party, then the R party's majority status will be a memory, in my opinion. I'm a solid political C, and you'd label me a liberal. So I, and the many like me, won't be a part of your party.
Good luck with that.
As usual. You only show up to keep the flame war going. Thought so.
Not that I think you will, as it isn't your purpose here, but check out Hunter. So far, he seems to be the real deal.
How on EARTH is my own personal opinion a strawman, unless you've decided that nobody here except you and your little cabal has the right to form an opinion of their own.
And we'll all see how that works out, probably when you come around bashing Rudy about his non-military service.
I'm beginning to think you're a control freak, Spiffy.
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.