I'm out of here. Need to reclaim my sanity in the real world, LOL! I left you a little something.
Posted on 02/01/2007 2:30:56 PM PST by Dark Skies
More voters say they would be comfortable with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani as president than other top 2008 contenders, though majorities would also be comfortable with other leaders from both parties, according to the latest FOX News Poll. In addition, of all the 2008 hopefuls — announced or frequently mentioned as a possibility — voters want to hear more from one candidate specifically: Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.
Opinion Dynamics Corporation conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from January 30 to January 31. The poll has a 3-point error margin.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The Democrat party needs to knock Rudy out to get at someone beatable.
The Rudy Hooligans are Democrats or unknowing tools for the Democrat Party.
You mean Newt, who divorced his first wife, reportedly while she was in the hospital being treated for cancer...and then he served her with divorce papers. Granted, they were discussing divorce at the time, but still, the timing could have been better.
Oh and I found this:
Personal life
Gingrich has been married three times. In 1962, Gingrich married his first wife, Jackie Battley, resulting in the birth of two daughters. He began to discuss divorce with Jackie prior to her diagnosis with cancer. In 1981 while she was recovering from surgery, the papers were finalized. Gingrich married his second wife, Marianne Ginther, in the fall of 1981. [4] They divorced in 1999 amid rumors Gingrich was having an affair. A year later, he married the alleged subject of his affair, a House aide 23 years his junior [5] named Callista Bisek [6], as Gingrich presided over the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton. It should be noted that the impeachment of Bill Clinton was a result of his purgury in regards to his affair, not for the affair itself.
Married three times? Yes, the Christian Evangelicals will go for him. I detect some hypocrisy here.
If people break off and vote third party for whatever reason they cause Bill Clintons.
I'm not the one of the ones threatening to break off. I have not seen one Rudy person threaten to leave the party if he is not the nominee.
Exactly the opposite from the DHers.
Time for The Office, Mr. Perot. Have a good evening, and think about my Newt research. Hey, I have no problem with his having had affairs, but I dont think he has all the values of a true, blue (or red) social conservative as you wish to point out. Maybe you can make a little excel spreadsheet showing his views and that will help all of us misguided Rudy lovers.
Useful idiots as Peggy Noonan termed them.
Typos are not mine.
Rudy Giuliani on Hardball discussing judicial nominations.
MATTHEWS: you pointed out Howard dean is not a good example. a good paradigm of getting across the aisle politically. What about this group of 14 senators. The seven democrats and republican. we had a big sampler of them earlier this week. Do you think that's a future for the two parties to maybe break away from the leadership so both sides try to find what Jesse Jackson likes to call, common ground?
GIULIANI: sure. Absolutely. That s a good example. The difference is Howard dean is a party chairman. If anybody is going to be excessively partisan, it will be a party chairman. Republican or democrat. The senators have to get things done. They have to accomplish things. And the way you accomplish things is often by compromise. One of my political heroes was Ronald Reagan. And Ronald Reagan among the many other things that he used to say was that if you were willing to take 70% or 80%, and not insist on your entire position, you could accomplish a lot more.
MATTHEWS: let's talk about judgeships. I know you're pro-choice and you're for gay right and you're a little bit off the center mark of the Republican Party. Maybe you're in the center of the country. we have all this supreme court action coming up this summer. I hate to be ghoulish about it but we may have a resignation, a retirement from the chief justice. Do you think Scalia would be a good choice to move up from associate judge to a chief justice?
GIULIANI: he's somebody I ve known for many, many years. I ve worked with him in the justice department during ford administration. I had tremendous admiration for him. And he would be a terrific justice. he would be a terrific chief justice. Obviously the president has a lot of people to consider. I don't know. he probably doesn't know at this point what he'll do. You know, Scalia is a terrific judge.
MATTHEWS: he's a popular guy. I just wondered whether you think he fits in that category of not being extraordinary. in other words, not being a reason for a democratic filibuster.
GIULIANI: i don't think he would cause a democratic filibuster. People disagree with him probably somebody disagrees about everything. But I think that he would move through. I think that, when you think about it, he doesn't really add anything to the political calculus of the court torrid logical calculus of the court because he is where he is and he is on the court. it will be whoever gets appointed to let's say, if justice Scalia is elevated. Whoever gets appointed to replace justice Scalia will be the one that gets the most scrutiny.
MATTHEWS: you know the big fight is one that the courts, you know, you're an attorney. You know that the big issue is whether to change the balance with regard to abortion rights. Right now it is about 6-3 counting O Connor and the conservatives. And also Kennedy. Do you think that if you were president, would you stick with that balance? Or try to maintain it?
GIULIANI: I wouldn't -- I selected 100 judges or so when I was the mayor of New York City. I participated in the selection of judges when I was in the Reagan administration. I wouldn't pick a judge based on whether I knew or didn't know the position on choice. I would pick a judge based on the overall record. how intellectually powerful they are. How accomplished they are. Are they going to be fair? in my case, i selected judges for municipal court so they were largely going to handle criminal cases. and i wanted judges that were tough. I wanted judges who would be a little tougher on bail and on letting people out and, but not necessarily excessive on that. The idea of selecting a judge, the litmus test, I don't think practically works. I ve seen the selection of the Supreme Court justices when justice O Connor was select by Ronald Reagan. I was in the justice department. And you look at somebody's entire record. You don't know what they'll decide about these things.
MATTHEWS: the good old days when f.d.r. could pick Felix Frankfurt and discover he was a conservative or Ike could pick out war yep and find out he was a liberal or suitor could get picked by George bush sr. aren't the days oh when you could pick a guy and not know which way he'll go?
GIULIANI: I don't think so.
MATTHEWS: what about the interest groups, leak you have the people for the American way. And you have James Dobson, focus on the family on the right side of things. Do you think those crowds will let you get by with picking somebody they don't know about?
GIULIANI: yes. I think they have to. in many cases, first of all, you might select somebody who hasn't really taken a position on any of these issues before. MATTHEWS: can you get them passed if they have no paper trail?
GIULIANI: I think so. Depending on how powerful the credentials are. Are they very accomplished lawyers, very accomplished judges, do they have the intellectual capacity and the integrity for the job? if they're very powerful candidates, I think there isn't going to be as much focus on one individual position.
MATTHEWS: let's put together a Giuliani slate for the court next summer. Suppose you put Supreme Court associate justice Scalia up for Rehnquist's seat. Then you move up Alberto Gonzales up for associate justice. Would you like that ticket?
GIULIANI: I think beyond talking about who is on the court, you shouldn't talk about other selections for the court. The attorney general is a terrific lawyer. And really doesn't have, although he was on the Texas court, he doesn't have a record as a federal judge.
MATTHEWS: he would be perfect by your standards. you could pick a guy without nailing down his position on roe versus wade.
GIULIANI: i don't know that you want to pick somebody on that. the supreme court requires tremendous intellectual capacity to be a contributing justice. And someone like the attorney general would certainly fit that category very, very well.
MATTHEWS: are you available?
GIULIANI: no. I m not available.
MATTHEWS: why not? You just described yourself. high intellectual caliber, hard to figure politically, no paper trail on roe v. wade.
GIULIANI: and somebody that's a little harder to figure on some of these issues probably has a better chance to get confirmed. I m not a candidate.
MATTHEWS: we'll be right back with the former mayor of New York. Rudolph Giuliani.
"George Bush Senior's moderation and broken promises on tax increases caused many to vote for Ross Perot."
That is true and a great point "read my lips"... Everyone remembers the no new taxes bit, but another major factor was the fact that he got pi$$ed at the NRA, tore up his membership card and said he wanted nothing more to do with them!
In my area that stupidity cost him as many votes as the tax thing.
Give it some time, you cynic.
I'm out of here. Need to reclaim my sanity in the real world, LOL! I left you a little something.
It's the social conservatives that threaten to leave. If so, they split the party.
A little reminder. FR is a conservative website. Our two main political objectives are to advance conservatism, not liberalism and get conservatives elected to office, not liberals. Rudy doesn't meet minimum conservative standards.
Well, we have a Primary Election first. Be sure to get the word out about Giuliani's liberal views and to vote for an actual Republican - preferably a conservative - in the Primary.
I know, but worse!
What would you expect social conservatives to do? Vote for a social liberal?
I'm not an Evangelical Christian, but I am a social conservative and if I have to pick a candidate who has a less than impeccable personal life I'll pick the one I agree with on the issues.
I would hope thatin the general election they would vote for a fiscal conservative over a fiscal liberal.
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.