Posted on 08/21/2006 11:04:35 AM PDT by neverdem
oops,
politics --
Absolutely. I wasn't implying that you weren't for strong defense, I just wanted to clarify for some what most of us took for granted.
Why not add:
- No one left handed
- No one has never served in the military
- No one who has any gay friends
- No one who did not marry inside their own family
- No one who cannot play the banjo
- No one who has ever been to Disney World (they let gays in there you know)
- No one has ever been divorced
We try to have civil discussions here. Don't try to put words into other peoples mouths when you can't counter what they really said.
But it is a point well taken. I will add that to my list from now on! LOL!
Many on Free Republic just cannot fathom how MUCH support there is for Hillary Clinton all over the country. All she needs to be elected is OH, and everything else falls in place.
The legislatures are the only places where elected officials can really influence gay marriage. Its not like a President could force it on the whole nation by himself.
Oh come on now Mr. Edd.....
Don't preach or pretend to be the posting police.
I am as civil as the next individual - perhaps you lack a sense of humor.
Judge much?
The key to a winning GOP presidential candidate in a normal year is to find a candidate that appeals to both of the major wings of the party (social & fiscal) while not being viewed as threatening to the moderate/RINO wing.
That's how Bush got the nomination, and got elected. And, in spite of several major disappointments, it is how he's governed. Tax cuts/Mexican amnesty for the fiscals, SC judges for the socials and "compassionate" big government conservatism for the mushy middle.
Now, take a look at the supposed GOP candidates for '08:
Rudy & McCrazy - non-starters for the socials, for obvious reasons.
Romney - Representing the bluest state in the union, coupled with a Morman background, likely will be too much to overcome.
Newt - Interesting because, when it comes to ideas, he is easily the best of the bunch. However, his stint as Speaker showed having ideas and governing them are two different things. Newt was a poor leader once in power (see Breach of Trust by Tom Coburn). Plus, his personal life is about on a par with Rudy's.
With one exception, the rest of the bunch have virtually zero name recognition and even less money, making them non-starters as well.
That one exception is U.S. Senator (and former governor) George Allen of Virginia. He meets all three criteria for a winning GOP candidate, which is why the 'Rats (via Webb) and the Washington Compost (via the "macaca" nonsense) are trying so hard to trip him up before he gets positioned for the '08 primaries.
For those on the thread who would scream "War on Terror!" as reason for supporting Giuliani and/or McCain, lets stipulate that no GOP candidate is going to get the nomination unless they strongly support the WOT - none. Therefore, there is no absolutely reason to accept the RINO baggage of either Rudy or McCain - all that will do is ensure one of the major wings stays home, and Hillary strolls back to 1600 Pennsylvania.
You want to keep Hillary out? Nominate a conservative who is acceptable to each wing of the GOP. Otherwise, it is a third party situation just waiting to happen, with president HRC waiting in the wings.
The best news would be for Cheney to have a change of heart and accept the nomination for '08 - I believe he would walk over Hillary, especially once they get to debate. The next best news would be for a true conservative not currently on the radar screen to come out of the blue.
Considering the unlikeliness of either option, I believe Allen will be the best choice for conservatives in '08 - unless the left can destroy him before he gets there.
Here ya go. Enjoy. Good old fashioned liberal talk.
On the issues of abortion and gays:
“I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights,” Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. “No, I have not supported that, and I don’t see my position on that changing,” he responded.
--- Rudy Giuliani Source: CNN.com, “Inside Politics” Dec 2, 1999
And on gun control:
"We need a federal law that bans all assault weapons, and if in fact you do need a handgun you should be subjected to at least the same restrictions -- and really stronger ones -- that exist for driving an automobile."
--- Mayor Rudy Giuliani,
Dixie Ping
free dixie,sw
One of the best reasons not to vote for rudy,
Dean became unraveled, Kerry lost respect, Edwards was never in touch, Clark looked ridiculous, it was a circus. Guiliani is in the same boat.
free dixie,sw
I thought he was mediocre, but OK. But, when I saw the transcript of his debate with Webb in the RTD a couple of Sundays ago, I realized that he is a total dope.
Mitt "endorsed once by the Republican Majority for Choice PAC, and twice by the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans" Romney will also prove unacceptable to Southern conservatives.
Mitt "support and sustain Roe v. Wade" Romney's decade-long record of support for abortion on demand will be found out.
As will Mitt "all people should be allowed to participate in Scouting regardless of sexual orientation" Romney's support for homosexual Scoutmasters and tax-paid same-sex benefits for the homosexual partners of govt employees and his appointment of two homosexual activists to the bench.
Plus Mitt "don't hold your breath waiting for the NRA's endorsement" Romney's support of the assault weapons ban and other gun control measures will go over like a lead-filled balloon down in the Southland.
The Bible Belt will not be unbuckled for Mitt Romney, except maybe to give him a good whippin'.
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.