Posted on 03/18/2006 9:38:27 AM PST by UncleSamUSA
Okay, you got me.
Rudy is a strong law enforcement socialist.
Except for when it comes to the illegal immigration invasion...
so because al sharpton hates rudy means we should vote for him?
LOL....such a shame for what passes for logic these days.
Unfortunately, such a gesture would be insincere. Giuliani has already pledged support for the co-called woman's "right to choose." He is as pro-choice as any Democrat. Any attempt by him to gain points with conservatives on this issue would be nothing more than deceitful pandering.
"I thank you, I thank NARAL for taking the lead in establishing freedom of choice for all of us, and as the Mayor of New York City, I thank you for being here in New York City."
N.A.R.A.L. "Champions of Choice" Lunch
Rudolph Giuliani, April 5, 2001
Today's American liberal,whatever the party label,is a selfish ,conceited @#$#@$$$.
"Alexei is bleeding badly and may die", proclaimed Nicholas and Alexandra, "our only hope, indeed our very salvation lies with one man, he who is called 'Rasputin'."
I do though have a question, Czar Sabra...How do you come to the conclusion that George Allen could not win the Presidency or defeat Hillary Clinton?
Unless I struck a persuasive nerve I can not understand why my opinion would get you calling me Czar and referencing Rasputin.
That's all it is, my opinion.
I have spent the thread stating why I don't believe almost any Republican will win in 2008, not just Allen.
If you want my opinion of Allen specifically, he is a run of the mill able politician with the usual accomplishments of people who have held similar office.
I find him bland and have been unimpressed with his performance on interview shows. He is the typical VP candidate.
Also, I am less certain Hillary will be the Democrat nominee but do believe only an extraordinary political star will beat whoever the Democrats do nominate.
On the other hand if they go nuts and nominate Al Sharpton, any Republican wins.
Score one. just came across this.
Thanks for posting that .We will see more Conservative positions from Romney as he breaks away from Mass . Romney could be more Conservative than Reagan , but to some people around here it wouldn't matter because he's from Mass . I can't see the logic in that line of thinking.
I agree with you. I would hate to see Rudy run also, in spite of the fact he would be great on terrorism. He's PRO-CHOICE and is NOT AGAINST PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION. His candidates to the Supreme Court would logically reflect his pro-choice views. Bush should have given him a post in his administration, like Homeland Security. Don't run Rudy.
LoL, Guiliani would have beaten John Kerry perhaps by an even greater margin.
The election is won through leadership and Kerry had none. Guiliani does and you will be unpleasantly surprised by the primaries.
My question is a very simple one? WHO from the GOP can beat him? I simply don't see ANYone capable of doing so (since my man George Allen has shot his foot off) except one even more disdained by the self-appointed spokesmen of "conservativism", Johnny Boy McCain.
BTW I do NOT believe that ProLife voters are more fanatical than ProAborts. There has been no "litmus test" on our side remotely as stringent as that of the Left.
My opinion on the race is not a reflection of a desire to elect Rudy. It is based upon the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the alternatives. He and McCain appear far stronger than any others.
I do believe him to be the strongest leader of the pack which generally translates into who wins. (I am assuming that Cheney will not run nor Rumsfeld.)
My prediction is that the Far Right will do all it can to split the Party if Guiliani is nominated. And my belief is that it is encouraged surreptitiously by the Far Left. A good example of how the latter can lead the former into mindlessly running over the cliff is the Ports' deal.
That was a tremendous disaster for the party which has shown itself to be in the grip of the Far Right which does not have a clue about the way the world works.
The greatest Pro Life issue is bringing the war on terrorists and the war in Iraq to a successful conclusion. Everything else is small potatoes. Without a victory in those fights the Left will become so dominant that any value you have will be under greater pressure than anything you have seen so far.
If the anti-abortion movement does not understand this it will become the enemy of the REAL prolife needs.
While your thinking is exactly what the Left loves to hear the reality is that the exodus of the Ultra Right will be overcompensated by the attraction of the less conservative.
Reagan would never have agreed with your sentiments. He made a point to attract those from the other party who could be reached by reason. Your branch would rather spit in their faces and insult them because they do not oppose ALL abortion.
Southerners know the Rudi of 911 and the GOP Convention. They will not hold NY political necessities against him.
He will get up and start telling stories of his day prosecuting the mob, etc. and the folks will be eating out of his hand. Southerners love few better than a good storyteller.
Allen's inability to see through Cindy Sheehans nonsense means he is not ready for Prime Time. Unfortunate but that is a fact.
Baloney!
First off, I don't pay attention to the liberal leftwing on my decisions for which candidate I will support for President. So far, the only possible candidate I've rule out for 2008 is the liberal, Rudi Giuliani. I am not part of any ultra right wing, as you say. I'm a mainstream conservative. Mainstream conservatives decide the outcomes of GOP presidential primaries. Mainstream conservatives are pro-military, pro-life, pro-family, pro-2nd amendment and pro-limited govt. Mainstream conservatives oppose gay rights, gay marriage, envirowackoism and illegal immigration. I'm telling you, mainstream conservatives will never vote for Rudi Giuliani to be the GOP candidate for Prez in 2008.
Ronald Reagan preached it in his time and Rush Limbaugh preaches it today. When the Republican Party sticks to advancing a conservative agenda for America, the GOP wins elections. When The Republican Party doesn't advance a conservative agenda for America, the GOP loses elections. 1992 and 1996 are prime examples. Bush41 ran from the Reagan agenda in 1992 and lost. Dole strayed away from the conservative agenda in 1996, and he lost.
From 1976 to 1980 Ronald Reagan built a conservative coalition of religious conservatives and fiscal conservatives into a Republican Party that has a conservative core to its party platform. You need to read this speech by Reagan at the 4th Annual CPAC Convention: A New Republican Party
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.