Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hillary/Giuliani: Serious About Race For President
WCBSTV.COM ^ | 27 JANUARY 2007 | AP

Posted on 01/27/2007 8:42:25 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist

(CBS) NEW YORK -- After all the hinting hemming and hawing about whether they are really in the race Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani left no doubt in the minds of voters that they are serious about a presidential run in 2008.

"As a republican and I'm very, very optimistic that we're gonna turn this around and that we're gonna turn it around very, very quickly. Meaning this year, in time for 2008," said Giuliani-R , Former NYC Mayor at an engagement in New Hampshire.

And Senator Clinton confirmed her White House intentions in Iowa with her newly innovated slogan "I'm in it to win it."

"They're both in the race. Hillary has a much bigger organization set up. She's been raising money nationally longer," said political analyst Joseph Mercurio, about the man who was nicknamed America's Mayor after 9/11 and the senator who would be returning to the White House this time in the top job. "He's got a tremendous amount of name recognition nationally. He needs to set up a national organization before he's fully plunged into the race. But, undoubtedly he's running just as well as she is," he said.

So, what happens if it shakes out to be a Hillary versus Rudy battle for the white house in 08?

Mercurio says, "it would obviously good if one or the other of them won for New York City or the state how that plays in the rest of the country whether the New York image is a drag or not is a whole other conversation."


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: electionpresident; giussolini; hitlery; rudyrino
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-243 next last
To: Spiff

Great record. Thank you for sharing it. And thank you for your service to the cause.

However, why aren't you supporting anyone thus far? If your moral standards are the rock upon which you bravely stand, why are you waiting for political contingencies to bear themselves out? Might that not be, um, somewhat relativistic?


201 posted on 01/28/2007 1:20:33 AM PST by IslandJeff (that for every right there is a duty, for every benefit an obligation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

You, standing in judgment of me. How ironic.


202 posted on 01/28/2007 1:21:48 AM PST by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: IslandJeff

Do you have a point?


203 posted on 01/28/2007 1:23:17 AM PST by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Have you read it?


204 posted on 01/28/2007 1:25:46 AM PST by IslandJeff (that for every right there is a duty, for every benefit an obligation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
So I guess the adhering to your principles idea was just that - huh? You weren't thinking of actually doing that yourself? You are just in preach mode, right?

It's always something that you could consider. I think you would be much happier. Just by adhering to your principles. You know what I mean. If honesty is a principle of yours, for instance - to tell the truth - all the time - even when it is not expedient to do so. That is what constitutes character: the frequency with which one adheres to their principles. It has nothing to do with telling others what they should believe or how they should live their lives. Character is a very personal thing. But I would love to see you develop yours. As I say, I think you would be much happier and, btw, much more effective.

205 posted on 01/28/2007 1:27:42 AM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

LOL...I've been called a liar by the best of 'em...liberals hate it when you tell the truth on 'em...but you're unique, I will give you that. As I said earlier, boring...but unique nonetheless.


206 posted on 01/28/2007 1:31:55 AM PST by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: IslandJeff

Of course I read it. What's your point?


207 posted on 01/28/2007 1:32:42 AM PST by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: IslandJeff

Your answer will have to wait til tomorrow, at least as far as I'm concerned.


208 posted on 01/28/2007 1:44:22 AM PST by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I want a good all around conservative leader; not one that is beating both drums.


209 posted on 01/28/2007 4:20:07 AM PST by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

It makes perfect sense to this woman

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

210 posted on 01/28/2007 6:03:10 AM PST by TommyDale (If we don't put a stop to this global warming, we will all be dead in 10,000 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

You mean, they know I'm a liberal?

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

211 posted on 01/28/2007 6:05:34 AM PST by TommyDale (If we don't put a stop to this global warming, we will all be dead in 10,000 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
They blew it in 2006 with their temper tantrums.

Ah, the chronic re-assessment of the GOP leadership. It's not our fault!

The GOP lost because it failed to give Reagan Democrats and independents a reason to vote for it. You cannot convince such voters that it is critical for you to stay in power to fight a war when you stuff Iraq appropriations bills full of earmarks and covort with K-Street.

And there is a reason why many such voters are called Reagan Democrats. They are drawn to pubbies who eschew Reagan's social conservatism, given they can't find such in the Dems. Rudy ain't the guy to get them back to the GOP column as a result.

212 posted on 01/28/2007 6:08:31 AM PST by dirtboy (Duncan Hunter 08 - rationalization not required, he IS a conservative already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: IslandJeff
he has the most resolve and love for the rule of law than any other Washington-stained Republican currently seeking the office

I guess that's why he fought to keep NYC's sanctuary policy for illegal aliens through the courts, and when spurned by SCOTUS, said he would just ignore the ruling - while at the mean time revoking gun ownership permits for long-term holders who never committed a crime. Law and order, my arse.

213 posted on 01/28/2007 6:10:02 AM PST by dirtboy (Duncan Hunter 08 - rationalization not required, he IS a conservative already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

It is common courtesy here to ping the person quoted if you use an attributed quote.

Not once have I questioned the War on Terror or the President's plan in Iraq and Afghanistan (or even Iran). Don't take my comment out of context. We are fully Republican conservatives but we will NOT allow a liberal to be forced down our throats.

As for your daughter and son-in-law -- I thank them for serving our country. Rudy Giuliani has nothing to do with them, since he has never led an army or even served any higher office than a municipal mayor. I'm not sure I would want MY child in a combat zone with Giuliani as the Commander-in-Chief.


214 posted on 01/28/2007 6:10:56 AM PST by TommyDale (If we don't put a stop to this global warming, we will all be dead in 10,000 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: IslandJeff

Who are they supporting? Alan Keyes and have been for a long time! Some of them have already outed themselves from that group and others I am beginning to recognize how they post. No one will satisfy them except Keyes!


215 posted on 01/28/2007 7:30:40 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Broken Glass Republican - Vote Rudy/Steele - Take Back the House and Senate in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom; Reagan Man; TommyDale
To think my daughter and son-in-law in the Navy served in a combat zone for voters like this?

I used to respect you even when I disagreed with you.

No longer.

How on EARTH is this poster's comment a reflection on his views towards supporting the military? Just because he doesn't think YOUR GUY is the right candidate for the GOP, for reasons that are quite relevant to long-term GOP positions, you have the gall to call to make such a statement about him? Let along the fact that you put his post in large font and can't even exercise the freeper etiquitte to ping him?

Let's see - you also disparged the motives of pro-life organizations earlier - you implied they didn't want to see Roe v. Wade overturned so the donations would keep coming in. You and your ilk are working hard to make Rudy seem more conservative by tearing at the Reagan legacy. You act like Rudy is the only candidate supporting the war when there are several others, including those with a military background and national experience on military matters. You act like Rudy is the only guy who can win when he pulled out of the NY Senate race against the Hildebeast - he's 0-1 in national campaigns. You say he's a law and order guy when he circumvented federal law to maintain NYC's sanctuary city agenda. You seek to deal with valid conservative concerns about Rudy's positions by ripping into those core conservative positions as being stupid or ignorant. And then when it is pointed out that Rudy is pro-gun-control, pro-choice and pro-amnesty, you just say we're unappeasables. In other words, if we don't throw out SEVERAL core conservative positions (as opposed to one or two) to support your guy, we're just hack zealots.

Pathetic. Truly pathetic. If you think that approach is going to win Rudy the GOP nomination, yeah, it could. By rifting the GOP and ensuring a Dem win in 2008.

And then you will just blame the conservatives for your own damn political sell-out.

216 posted on 01/28/2007 7:49:09 AM PST by dirtboy (Duncan Hunter 08 - rationalization not required, he IS a conservative already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: IslandJeff
You could count actual pro-Duncan Hunter posters on half of one hand.

Only if you have a few hundred fingers.

I'm really curious why Rudy supporters, time and time again, have to take such liberties with the truth to push their guy.

217 posted on 01/28/2007 7:50:33 AM PST by dirtboy (Duncan Hunter 08 - rationalization not required, he IS a conservative already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

I was so shocked that I forgot to ping you. I am sorry!

It hit me like a ton of bricks that anyone would go to the polls not caring if they won or not with their vote. I look at things differently because if we don't win the conservative agenda goes down the tubes. Spent too many years working in the trenches and seeing the Dems in charge in the House year after year after year. In 1994 we finally got the House back. Then I came on here in early 1999 because I am conservative and I vote for conservative candidates.

In 2002, however, I did not vote for the most conservative in my House race because he couldn't win in the general. I joined the campaign of his opponent in the primary because the other candidate was the campaign manager for Pat Robertson in 1988. Plain and simple for me because I live in a predominately Democrat House District that has been Republican for sometime now but could swing with the wrong candidate. My candidate won because he reached out to various groups and a common theme since then is that he is not conservative enough which is bogus because there isn't one social conservative issue in the Congress he hasn't voted for and will continue to vote to approve.

J.D. Hayworth came into OK the other year and basically trashed my Congressman as not being conservative enough in front of our Convention. Then he touted Istook who lost 2-1 to the pro-abortion, liberal, trial attorney lawyer Democrat for his second term along with now having a pro-abortion Lt Governor after Republicans holding that seat since 1994. I have seen this state go DemocRAT statewide and am having a hard time with the fact. I was part of a group that tried to tell some others that Istook was going to get clobbered and another Conservative candidate would at least have a fighting chance. They wouldn't listen and went with the most conservative. Same in the Lt Governor's race.

It taught me a valuable lesson as it has others I know. We cannot afford in this environment to take a chance. I was a George Allen supporter because I heard him speak here in OK and it was WOW with what he had to say. He lost his Senate seat. My problem is that I have heard the others speak at various functions in person and except for Rudy there is no WOW factor either in presentation or what they are saying.

For my Congressman or Senator, I wouldn't vote for a social liberal unless the House seat would turn Democrat but I have don't have to worry in my area. President is different because they don't make the laws and when a candidate says they will appoint strict constitutionalist judges that is all I ask. Any candidate for President saying they will get Roe v Wade overturned is kidding themselves and pandering to the voters. I would rather have a candidate that says what he believes then one that panders.

From what I can tell in Oklahoma social conservatives don't do a very good job of governing. They are vindictive if you don't agree with them and will run someone against them in the primary in our own party all because they disagreed with the people in charge. The State Rep they are trying to kick out of the caucus is very conservative but wants ethics and is tired of campaign accounts being used for slush funds. Some Reps are not very ethical either but they wear it on their sleeve how they are a social conservative and people like me were buying into it until I started looking at their ethics reports and how they spend their donations after I was tipped off. Donated thousands in 2006 and frankly will not do it again unless I have vetted the candidate.

Now you see where I am coming from because we stand a chance in 2008 with the wrong candidate to give the WH to the DemocRATs and this Nation cannot afford to do that. Every issue I believe in will be DOA especially if they keep the Congress. Clinton only governed for two years with Dems in charge and we took over in 1994. We cannot even afford two years of Hillary.

I have held my nose and voted for candidates in the general I didn't like but they were better than any DemocRAT because of leadership positions.

Now you see where I am coming from and why losing is not an option that I want to consider so I will support the person I believe can win the Presidency and elect a Congressman and Senator that I do agree with about 100% of the time. Yes, I am willing to settle for a candidate I agree with about 80% of the time no matter the issues as long as that candidate is strong on national security. I don't agree with a DemocRAT 5% of the time so there is no race. I don't vote for DemocRATs period!


218 posted on 01/28/2007 8:16:48 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Broken Glass Republican - Vote Rudy/Steele - Take Back the House and Senate in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

BINGO! DITTO DITTO DITTO!

Just for the record. We have active duty children, my husband is a HUGE Sooner fan and pro life, pro gun, small government, low taxes, and a mean nasty Evangelical!


219 posted on 01/28/2007 8:41:37 AM PST by Coldwater Creek (The TERRORIST are the ones who won the midterm elections!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: mariabush
my husband is a HUGE Sooner fan and pro life, pro gun, small government, low taxes, and a mean nasty Evangelical!

My kinda guy.

Other than the Sooner fan thing (go Cowboys!).

220 posted on 01/28/2007 9:19:45 AM PST by dirtboy (Duncan Hunter 08 - rationalization not required, he IS a conservative already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-243 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson