Rudy's A Down-Hil Racer In Prez Poll (Marist Poll)

NY Daily News ^ | 12/08/06

[Hydroshock]

Some are more "evil" then others, and there are limits to how far I am willing to go. Rino Rudy is past, way past those limits.

[TommyDale]

You are right, it is not up to you. Why are the liberals using this conservative forum to promote the liberal pro-abortionist, gun-grabbing, homosexual agenda driven, amnesty-for-illegals Rudy Giuliani? Who do you think you are to say that those who don't vote for Giuliani are wasting their vote? That entire line of thought is ridiculous. How do you know a third party won't come along and pull 51% of the total vote?

[Chunga]

I'm not promoting Rudy. He isn't my first choice...I'd like to see Jeb Bush become President. That probably won't happen. I like Tom Tancredo. He won't make it. I like Mitt Romney, Condaleeza Rice, George Allen, Rick Santorum and 50 other Republican candidates better than Rudy.

But if Rudy runs against Hillary, Rudy gets my vote. No conservative third party candidate will win the presidential election in two years. Anyone refusing to cast a vote for Rudy if he runs against Hillary is my political enemy. I have absolutely no problem with that.

[TommyDale]

Before you start declaring enemies, why not wait at least until we see what develops over the next year to 18 months?

[Chunga]

Before you start declaring enemies, why not wait at least until we see what develops over the next year to 18 months?

Why not post that advice to the incessant, unceasing, ubiquitous one-note Rudy bashers who have suddenly sprung to life and are invading every Giuliani thread posted here?

[TommyDale]

The reason Rudy Giuliani gets attacked here is because most Freepers are conservatives, and find him to be a fraud when it comes to conservatism. He may be "conservative" in New York, but to the rest of the country he is just another liberal Democrat, with a (R) after his name.

There have been elections in New York in the past when Rudy didn't even endorse the Republican candidate, but instead endorse the Democrat. What kind of real Republican would do that?

[TommyDale]

"Why not post that advice to the incessant, unceasing, ubiquitous one-note Rudy bashers who have suddenly sprung to life and are invading every Giuliani thread posted here?"

How about making that a two way street? How about stopping "the incessant, unceasing ubiquitous one-note Rudy fanatics who have suddenly sprung to life" and are trying to shove him down the conservatives' throats?

[justshutupandtakeit]

That is not what the article says. Read it again.

[stockstrader]

Good post.

These Rudy supporters are the REAL 'one trick ponies'. Rudy is a 'one trick pony' with his ONE (and only) big issue being national security (as it should be).

However, the person most culpable for 9/11 was Slick--and Rudy provided 'political cover' for Slick after the Chris Wallace interview fiasco by saying that (and I am paraphrasing here since I don't have the exact quote, but the intent of his comments is clear), and I paraphrase, "No President would ever intentionally do anything to harm national security". That statement help take some of the public heat off of Slick for not capturing OBL. That statement also makes the case against a 'one trick pony' like Rudy--since he is, in effect, minimizing the case for him!

Combine that statement with the incredible growth in surveillance activities from the Patriot Act, ECHELON, CARNIVORE and who knows what else--along with the removal of the Gorelick wall (thanks, Slick), and the new bureaucracy, with tens of thousands of new government employees (the Homeland Security Dept)--and you see that Pres Bush had put up a great line of defense that any future President can ride on for a long, long time.

We don't need a one issue candidate like Rudy--when his abortion, gun control, pro-gay, pro-amnesty, big govt leanings make him unacceptable to the conservative base (not to mention a minor issue, the 'train wreck'--aka his personal life).

[TommyDale]

Thanks. Good post by you, as well! You are being nice to Rudy, giving him benefit of the doubt regtarding national security. I have asked several times, with no answer from the Rudy fanatics, "What experience does Rudy actually have that qualifies him to be Commander-in-Chief?" He was a good Mayor of NYC, but that hardly qualifies him as a strong defender of our national security.