Big surprise there. Call out Captain Obvious
Posted on 02/15/2007 10:12:09 AM PST by meg88
Pundits of all political persuasions have been chattering about whether Rudy Giuliani, whose name is invariably modified by the description "social liberal," can overcome the objections of many religious conservatives to win the Republican nomination.
Will his assurances to appoint judges in the mold of Roberts, Alito and Scalia be "enough" to put their concerns to rest? Will conservatives overlook social issues in an election focusing largely on foreign policy?
The more interesting question is whether Giuliani can establish a new description of what it means to be "socially conservative." Perhaps to be socially conservative means something more than just fidelity to pro-life and anti-gay marriage positions.
Giuliani has a convincing argument that he is an ethical or cultural conservative who in the end will protect the values that most conservative Republicans hold dear.
What does this mean? It means that he sees the world as a battle between good and evil, and politics as a struggle between decent hard working people and elites who have too little respect for their values -- public safety, respect for religion and public virtue.
His world view is not one of multi-culturalism or moral relativism. He shows no empathy for bullies -- be they Mafia bosses or Al Sharpton. Giuliani, of course, first rose to public prominence by fighting the largest bully he could find: the Mob. Time magazine called his prosecution in 1985 of 11 Mafia leaders the "Case of Cases" and quoted his declared intention to "wipe out the five families."
For him, it is all about who is good and who is not, regardless of whose feathers he might ruffle.
Liberal sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians and diplomatic niceties did not prevent him from tossing Yasser Arafat (with great delight) from Lincoln Center.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
I am hoping Newt jumps in.
I don't want to desert the GOP, I want to fight with them. Anyone but Rudy and I roll-up my sleeves.
If it's Rudy, I'm afraid it's time for at least a temporary divorce.
:-(
"A Giuliani nomination will split this party wide open, possibly fracturing it beyond repair."
LOL!!!! Thanks, I enjoy a good laugh.
At least thats what the democrats will call it..
Rudy should be in the cabinet maybe but not President elect..
Many republicans WILL NOT vote for Giuliani..
OR any of the other republican leftists..
NEWT is the ONLY game in town that could give Hillary a run for her money..
She would NEVER debate him.. NEVER.. He would kill her..
The question: has America been sufficiently dumbed down to elect Hillary?..
By Americas schools and colleges.. especially Americas women..
I will not, under any circumstances, vote for the death of my party.
Big surprise there. Call out Captain Obvious
Osama bin Laden is happy to know that.
Nice try but no cigar. It appears the attempts to spin Rudy into a social conservative will never end.
How will Rudy change Roe v. Wade while in office? (since he has said he will already appoint judges compatible with Chief Justice Roberts)
---"Would you like me to explain it further to you or are you smart enough to know the difference."---
Nope, you've explained your view adequately:
$2 is less than $1.
If standing for principle means nothing to you, then why does your tagline read as it does?
No Rudy, ever. We'll try again in 2012.
At least you admitted you are on the fringe and unappeasable.
As the skin of the onion is slowly peeled away, we start to see that the St. Rudy supporters are not just backing him because he is the “only hope of winning”, but they are starting to reveal that they are in agreement with a large percentage of his liberal social views. (if not all)
The repugnant venom directed to the core of conservative social beliefs is just appalling by these Liberal Republican supporters on the FR. It is in many ways disheartening to see how the St. Rudy supporters are so affirming of St. Rudy, and defend his beliefs and his Liberal doctrine as something that was in the past and not part of his “current” beliefs.
As St. Rudy is continued to be painted as a righteous (real conservative) leader for America by his supporters, his FR supporters will start flipping their cards over to reveal that their personal convictions are in concert with Guiliani’s.
We've been over the judge thing.
His definition of "strict constructionist" is radically different than yours and mine.
That's like trusting Hitlery because she says she's against "judicial activism."
Not only the courts, but Osama bin Laden will be stronger than ever!!!
If any Republicans had stood up in 1999 and suggested that Rudy Giuliani would be a great canadidate for the White House, they'd be laughed out of the room without a shred of credibility left.
I am hardly a conservative "purist." Rudy is not even 50% of what we're looking for. To use such an argument on behalf of Rudy is laughable.
That is way out of bounds. Many Republicans oppose Giuliani for substantive, policy-based reasons. There are a significant number of Giuliani supporters who continually question the patriotism and loyalty of those of us who are not convinced. I oppose Rudy Giuliani, and I will accept criticism on that score, but being called pro-terrorist, or pro-Hillary Clinton is going too far. It is a recipe to drive people away for good.
George Bush has already done that..
ONLY NEWT could repair the breach..
It looks awfully good for the Hildebeast..
Course its early.. but the MsM and MsP are working overtime and with much intensity to make the Giuliani and Clinton contest happen..
What ever the MsM and MsP is for has red flags all over it..
Republicans are following like a Pavlof's Dog.. as usual..
A disgusting sight here at freeRepublic..
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.