 |
| Rush Is Right! |
| We Shouldn't Redefine Conservatism |
 We can support a candidate for president without twisting, distorting and redefining conservatism to fit the candidate... |
Posted on 02/13/2007 12:34:44 PM PST by zarf
Theodore Olson, the stalwart conservative lawyer and former solicitor general for the Bush administration, told the Spectator he will be supporting Rudy Giuliani's presidential bid.
"I admire his character, his capacity for leadership, his instincts, and his principles," Olson said over the phone this afternoon. He said he will help Giuliani raise money as well as offer advice on legal issues and domestic policy matters that involve constitutional questions.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
You're really stretching here.
But at this point in the election cycle, he was way behind in the polls, and no one thought he had a chance to win the Presidency.
Conservatives who are already throwing up their hands and conceding to Rudy don't seem to have much fight left in them. Unfortunately, if too many are like that, we might as well start monograming the White House towels with donkeys. (Not because Rudy can't beat Hillary, but because Republicans with no fight in them can't win the Presidency.)
"So I see no difference - and frankly, I think Hillary is scarier - if it's all about personal protection get the scary person." Since the Witch would be likely to join those from whom we need protection that is a surefire prescription for disaster. But this irresponsibility has been long recognized in the Implacables. They will contribute nothing in 08.
"The conservative wing of the party will NOT vote for Rudy." You IN NO WAY speak for conservatives. In fact, you are more likely to ATTACK conservatives such as Sessions, Drier, and Olson when they speak their minds about 2008.
Apparently you like any conservative except those saying what they believe.
The small group for which you do speak is dominated by those who have NEVER supported any credible politician, who have attacked almost everything the GOP and President have tried to do and who are TOTALLY unrealistic, unreliable and irrelevant. They are the same <2%ers we have been dealing with for the last 7 years pushing one unelectable candidate after the other.
It is not uncivil to post out posted ignorance and ask why it was done.
I am not stretching at all. I REMEMBER these events. All are verifiable.
I was just kidding with you. I agree with you but could not resist mocking the Rudyphobes.
Personal insults are not permitted on FR. I'm going to report you to the mods. < /true conservative thumb suck>
Interesting. Responds in an uncivil manner, then tries to justify it.
I'm not conceding the race to anyone, although I do not yet know whom I will support.
"Conservative" is a broad term and there's no doubt in my mind that Giuliani holds many conservative values. He also holds some values to the left of mine. The more a person disagrees with him on a particular issue, the more that person is likely to brand him as a liberal, or a RINO, but that doesn't make it so.
In my estimation, he's a fiscal conservative, tough on crime and defense, and a social moderate.
That doesn't make him a liberal. He would not be welcome in the Rat party.
We've seen quite an outpouring of sentiment among some social conservatives here that they would rather see Hillary elected than to cast a vote for Rudy. That makes no sense to me, but the sentiment appears to be honest.
The question for Rudy is whether he can still get a majority of the ballots if those social conservatives either stay at home or cast a protest vote. I don't have an answer to that question for him.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen, because obviously, I've not been on every Rudy thread. But based on the ones I have been on, and there have been quite a few, I definitely wouldn't say there was an 'outpouring'. There may be a few that have said that out of spite.
For the most part, I think the social conservatives feel they can't support Rudy in the primary. I know that's true of me. But if he wins the primary, I would vote for him in the general election.
|
| Rush Is Right! |
| We Shouldn't Redefine Conservatism |
| We can support a candidate for president without twisting, distorting and redefining conservatism to fit the candidate... |
"I didn't realize until today that I am apparently Cindy Sheehan."
Nice to meet you, Cindy! :)
The Clinton co-presidency pardoned 16 members of the terrorist FALN organization, as well as two convicted Weather Underground terrorists Susan Rosenberg and Laura Sue Whitehorn.
Don't ever forget that it was Ted Olsen that made up the 'box cutter' lie on Sept 11, 2001, that has confounded air travel for all of us since.
Amen!
It was unhappy that there weren't MORE terrorists to pardon.
Giuliani prosecuted Marc Rich; the Clintons pardoned him.
Yep, but we are told there is no difference between them.
Barbara was very much a supporter of Rudy. They were dear friends. If Barbara was still living she would understand the very real threat we face from radical Islam is the #1 priority and that Rudy is the only hope for us to retain the White House. I know this because she was my Mother in Law.
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.