Posted on 02/14/2007 9:22:08 PM PST by PhiKapMom
HotAir has a must see video of Rudy Giuliani talking about the senselessness of non-binding resolutions and what's wrong with Washington from the Mayor's appearance on Lary King Live. In case you haven't seen him make this case in the last few days, this is must see viewing:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/14/video-rudy-on-non-binding-resolutions/?s=video
Transcript:
GIULIANI: I mean, you can look at the practical and common sense conclusion on that anyway you want. But there's something more important than that. We have a right of free speech in this country and we elect people to make decisions. Here's what I would prefer to see them do, though, if you ask me what's my view on that. The nonbinding resolution thing gets me more than are you for it or against it. I have tremendous respect for the people who feel that we either made a mistake going to war, who voted against the war, who now have come to the conclusion, changed their minds, they have every right to that, that it's wrong, you should, in a dynamic situation, keep questioning. What I don't like is the idea of a nonbinding resolution.
KING: Because?
GIULIANI: Because there's no decision.
KING: But it's a statement.
GIULIANI: Yes, but that's what you do. That's what Tim Russert does and that's what Rush Limbaugh does. That's what you guys do, you make comments. We pay them to make decisions, not just to make comments. We pay them to decide. The United States Congress does declarations, the war…
KING: So if you feel that way, withhold funds and that's the way you feel?
GIULIANI: The ones I think have a better understanding of what their responsibility is and are willing to take a risk are the ones who are saying we've got to hold back the funds, we've got to vote against the war or we're for the war. And maybe it's because I ran a government and I tend to be a decisive person. I like decisions. And I think one of the things wrong with Washington is they don't want to make tough decisions anymore. Nonbinding resolution about Iraq, no decision on immigration, no decision on Social Security reform, no decision on what to do about energy independence, no decision. You know why that happens? Because it's unpopular.
I think my points pretty clear. Rudy will split the party AND we will lose the presidency.
That's a fear, but not a fact. If he's the one standing between Hillary and the WH, he gets my vote.
LOL. If the party splits over the life and liberty issues the results won't be pretty.
If Rudy wins the nomination then "the Party" will have spoken. The crybabies who subsequently stay at home will then have to live with the realization that the helped unleash Hell on earth.
Sigh. Okay, but it's not as if a simple assertion of impending doom means anything, politically, by itself. You have to win that argument electorally. Your position has to garner votes. You have to actually defeat Rudy. So far, your sole strategy seems to consist of predicting that bad things will happen. And so far, Rudy's strategy of campaign appearances and speeches and interviews and answering questions and presenting himself seems to be gaining support amongst the party's primary voters.
The debate will be waged; may the best man win.
Isn't Russ Feingold the only Senator who voted against the war? I don't respect that guy at all. In fact, he's the most overt political threat to everything I believe in.
Wow. Just wow.
Guess he's gotta keep his Soros/ANSWER friends happy, eh?
Rudy`s appearence on LarryLive tonight was appalling. Especially the way he handled the Iraq issue. Rudy is forever attemptiing to take both sides of every issue.
Is this what people really want for a POTUS? A double-talker? A snake oil salesman? A Carnival hawker? Someone who'll make up his mind as he goes along? Just a go along to get along rhetorical mantra.
Sounds like Bill Clinton to me.
No thanks.
I respectuflly disagree. I have been around my State of Oklahoma in the last few weeks talking to activists who are fighting in the trenches to find good candidates. My emails also tell me a total different story about Rudy here in Oklahoma. They are excited about Rudy and what he brings to the Republican Party here with an upcoming Senate race in 2008.
Most of us want social issues back in our states and out of the Federal Government. Abortion should NEVER have been made a federal issue IMHO. The ruling was writing law by the SCOTUS. I am a big State's Right person who doesn't believe social issues should be handled in Congress. But then I don't believe except for a few items that Education belongs at the Federal level either. The Feds need to stay out of our local schools unless they are performing so poorly the State cannot handle it and then someone better be cleaning up the State Department of Education if they cannot handle poor performing schools.
A President has very little control over social issues and frankly in this enviroment, I don't think that is the most important thing facing this Nation. We have Islamic fundamentalist that want to kill us and DemocRAT candidates running that want to cave into them so the world will like us. Without a strong candidate to lead the Republican Party, we could hand the White House to a cut and run DemocRAT and I am not willing to see that happen.
The Republican Party is not going away and most social conservatives I talk to in my state rank the WOT and defense of our Nation as their #1 priority in a candidate. We are a pro-military state with so many bases that any candidate that puts anything ahead of the WOT and military doesn't a stand a chance. The people of Oklahoma also remember that Mayor Giuliana was one of the first people to call Governor Keating after the Murrah Bombing and sent a crack team of rescue workers to Oklahoma. Governor Keating was one of the first to call the Mayor after 9-11 and offer Oklahoma's support. Our State donated teddy bears to children who lost family members and a new fire truck that today rolls through the city with the Spirit of Oklahoma written on the truck.
Our family has been around the Air Force for over 30 years and everyone on my email list from various bases where we have lived is supporting Rudy because of his strong stance against terrorism. That's their #1 priority. They are strong Republicans and Conservatives who want someone that will stand up to the terrorist and for our military. Most of them when they think of Armed Services name Sen John Warner and say it should be Senator Jim Inhofe not Warner heading Armed Services or be the ranking member. Duncan Hunter doesn't appear on their radar screen and these are mostly retired and some active duty AF types that worked for my husband as Lieutenants and are now much higher ranking officers.
Believe with the enthusiasm of Rudy you will see Republicans gain members and Fiscal Conservatives like Dr. Coburn move more to the forefront in Congress. Sen Coburn believes in smaller government and less taxes and you are not going to get it unless we have a President that won't take no for an answer from some of our spinless Reps who have ACU Conservative records in the 90's. What have they done for us as Conservatives in cutting spending at the federal level. Maybe Rudy will infuse a spine in some of them which is long past due.
Dr. Coburn ran here in OK in 2004 as a limited government, cut the waste type of candidate. What you see him doing now is what we sent him to D.C. to do.
This complete red state has Rudy #1 in the poll by quite a bit that just came out. I personally think it reflects the feelings of this pro-military state who also are fed up with all the earmarks and pork spending in the Congress. Our four Republican Congressman and two Senators are always on the right side of those bills but they need help with someone at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue twisting arms.
Republicans in Oklahoma want to win in 2008 after the beating we took statewide in 2006 with a social conservative running for Governor. He lost 2-1 and ran one of the worst campaigns I have ever seen. He had no message except he was against abortion, gay marriage, illegals, etc. but it didn't resonate because Oklahoma has strong abortion laws already on the books if Roe v. Wade is overturned, we passed the marriage bill declaring marriage is between a man and a woman, had no solution for the illegal program, and it went downhill after that.
The common remark I have heard talking to people is that some issues have been overplayed and time to get down to the business of trimming government waste at all levels and allowing us to keep more of our own money.
It is my personal belief knowing some of the people Rudy has hired that he will bring a strong Conservative on has his Vice President. Wouldn't surprise me to see Governor Keating as the next Attorney General in a Giuliani Administration. The people I know in his campaign are strong Repubican Conservatives. He has satisfied me on the 2nd amendment and his stating that we have a right to bear arms. He is for controlling the borders. In my heart I don't believe he will push a moderate or liberal agenda, I believe he will be a conservative on issues that matter to me at the federal level and will appoint judges that will return issues to the state where they belong.
People need to listen closely to what he says instead of to some of the spin a few posters have been posting. I know I have changed since 9-11 and issues that were important to me in 2000 are different today. I believe that 9-11 changed Rudy and how he views issues today versus prior to 9-11.
Took me awhile to write this because unlike a some people on here I don't cut and paste what I wrote before. Each question/statement deserves different answers. I firmly believe that Rudy deserves a fair shake on this site like any other candidate to be vetted and all the spam that accompanies these threads along with some of the foul mouths need to stop. Let's debate the issues and the candidates without so much rancor and without the spam that keeps going on. It doesn't sit well with me frankly that a poster that trashed Freep Republic is now one of the leading spammers on the Rudy threads. The only time I have left FR to join and post on another site was to spend a few hours going after Todd on another site because he was posting some of the nastiest things and I had it with him. I joined, posted, and quit the site thanks to the moderator. I have been loyal to this site over the years and frankly resent being called names because of who I support for President. I am no less of a Conservative Republican today then I was last year when I supported George Allen. I just happened to see the end game as beating Hillary, Obama, or Edwards.
A social conservative will not sell to a large portion of this Country IMHO if they won't sell statewide in Oklahoma.
My more than two cents and sorry it is long but this is how I feel and why I support Rudy.
Well, that's the whole point isn't it. If Rudy gets the nod, then that means those of us who believe in our God-given unalienable rights just got kicked to the curb. Sometimes there are things that are just not open to negotiation. Our God-given rights to life and liberty are two that I would say are not open to debate.
Do you think Rudy can become the first President to lose his home state?
So....does a "real" conservative want Roe overturned or just the abortion issue returned to the states? And if a state decides to ban abortion, what good is that? Activist judges will just overturn the decision. Like with partial birth murder.
I hate abortion. Sadly, I don't believe it will ever stop, completely. It can only be diminished by changing the heart of those who choose it. And I don't rely on any politician or judge or law to do that.
Sounds like John Kerry all over again.
Sounds like Bill Clinton to me.
Funny thing. My tagline agrees with you.
Please define this supposed "split": are you predicting a percentage of GOP voters staying home should they not approve of the nominee? joining third party? what, exactly?
I'd suggest a better approach would be to battle for the nominee of their choice, but if they lose in a fair fight, that's also the result of liberty.
I have no idea. I am not closely following his campaign or any of the candidates at this juncture. I always wait for the first of the candidate debates to even begin to make my choice.
Seems like an up hill battle for any GOP candidate whose home state is solid blue, like Mitt's and Rudy's. In today's climate, I doubt RWR would carry CA.
So is holding your breath until you turn blue.
That line jumped out at me earlier; liberals always think if you SAY it it's true.
Me too, except the end game is beating Hillary. I am certain of that. Nobody has ever won the Presidency without winning their home state. Rudy will not win in NY, and Hillary will be the next President. That where the Rudy end game disconnects, as I see it.
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.