Skip to comments.
MIKE HINTS AT RUDY AS CONVENTION KEYNOTE SPEAKER
New York Post ^
| David Seifman
Posted on 02/03/2004 1:53:59 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:19:22 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
February 3, 2004 -- The keynote speaker at the Republican presidential convention has yet to be selected, but Mayor Bloomberg hinted yesterday that it's going to be Rudy Giuliani.
"For those of you that want to know whether I am going to be the keynote speaker at the RNC convention . . . 'probably not' is the answer," the mayor said during a breakfast sponsored by the Association for a Better New York in Midtown.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: giuliani; gwb2004; keynotespeaker; nyc; rncconvention; rudy
1
posted on
02/03/2004 1:54:00 AM PST
by
kattracks
To: kattracks
Wouldn't it be a pip if the former mayor in question turned out to be Ed Koch?
2
posted on
02/03/2004 2:43:49 AM PST
by
Salman
(Mickey Akbar)
To: kattracks
Three that I would have on the top of my list would be Ed Koch, Zell Miller, and Rudy Guilani.
3
posted on
02/03/2004 3:09:27 AM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(All Our Base Are Belong To Dubya)
To: BigSkyFreeper
It's gotta be Rudy for the unspoken symbolism that tapping him to be the keynote speaker would do. It would allow the Republicans to talk about 9/11 and the WTC without going down to the site and hearing the Demonrats shrill about how the Republicans are "politicizing" 9/11.
Plus, he tells it like it is and is a tremendous public speaker.
To: GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY
Agreed. He is of course affectionately known as America's Mayor by many across this country. I agree as well that I don't think with Rudy as keynote speaker, it would be considered politicizing 9/11. The Dems could have picked NYC as their site, but they didn't.
5
posted on
02/03/2004 3:21:25 AM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(All Our Base Are Belong To Dubya)
To: BigSkyFreeper
The Dems might have gotten the NY site if Hillary hadn't walked through a back door and "Screw** it up".
6
posted on
02/03/2004 4:41:30 AM PST
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
To: Sacajaweau
New York City was more than happy to host both the Democrats and the Republicans. The Democrats decided on Boston for whatever reason while the Republicans chose New York.
I understand if the Dems chose NYC, but why Boston? It seems like it was savvy move by the Republicans IMO. They invade the liberal N.E., while the Democrats play it safe and remain in uber-liberal MA instead. Why not have their convention somewhere in the Mid-West or Florida where things would be in play?
To: GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY
Yeah. They can come to Philadelphia and see what fifty years of their repulsive liberal policies have created in what ought to be America's proudest city.
To: kattracks
"For those of you that want to know whether I am going to be the keynote speaker at the RNC convention . . . 'probably not' is the answer," the mayor said during a breakfast sponsored by the Association for a Better New York in Midtown.Bloomberg should be banned from the convention. He's a RINO and a complete nitwit.
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
To: TonyRo76
With the exception of New York, you are 100% correct.
Philadelphia is especially sad when you think of what it once was. I cannot go there without finding myself on the verge of tears. There, where America made the boldest statements about human equality and freedom in the world, now what? Slums and crooked politicians.
Comment #12 Removed by Moderator
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