Posted on 02/18/2007 12:46:51 PM PST by dirtboy
Trying to make a logical decision based on my priorities.
ROFL!!!!
Gilmore is a cipher. It's on my to-do list to learn more about him.
I must have missed something. Did I miss where Rudy has already won the GOP nomination?
To the contrary, they seem to be downright allergic to them, considering they avoid them like poison ivy.
All right. Here's a question for you: suppose it's a race between Rudy and Hillary. Which would be a better use of $1,000?
"Or would you prefer a pure Stalinist who WILL try to introduce gay marriage, who WILL try to ban all guns, who WILL try to ban homeschooling - not to mention appoint HUNDREDS of Federal Judges who will make sure to 'make it so.'"
If we have to choose between 2 liberals in the election, there will be no winners. I see little difference between these 2.
I suspect that AWB #1 probably didn't help matters either, though I wasn't following issues back then enough to know how much it hurt.
I like your either/or better. Mine was voting for Rudy or joining the Hari Krishnas.
Nominate Rudy and you'll end up with Hillorat.
I live in Virginia, I think Gilmore is wonderful and he is a staunch conservative in every way, but I do not see any possible way he can be elected president.
Wow! Does this mean I get that Kimber?
Hitlary will appoint Ruth Bader Ginsburg/John Paul Stevens types to the Federal Judiciary.
Rudy will appoint Antonin Scalia/John Roberts types to the Federal Judiciary.
The legacy of those appointments will be with us 20 years after their presidencies have ended.
One would think that thought alone would be enough for you to focus on Nov '08 and remember Ronald W. Reagan's "11th Commandment":
"Thou Shalt Speak No Ill of Another Republican".
Its funny how people like to throw the Gipper's name along with mud at some GOP candidates while conveniently forgetting that he himself never did that.
It beats the heck out of sending money to a guy who wants to take your Kimber away from you if you get it. So the way I look at it, buy TWO of them. One because you want to. And the second because you didn't donate to a gun-grabber's campaign.
Please show ANYTHING in Rudy's past to support that. Talk is always cheap for politicians.
If I were in his shoes, I'd simply state the (legally) obvious that the 'abortion right' is nowhere in the Constitution, so the issue should be left to the individual states (as it was prior to 1973).
That's not only the legally Constitutional position, but a 'winning' one.
Pulling a 'Romney' - Opposed-In Favor-Opposed (again) is the mark of a professional politician who cannot be trusted.
Come to think of it, I think I just talked myself out of being for Mitt...
What evidence do you have to support that? His appointments while Mayor of NYCity show a strong tendency towards liberal Democrats. I'd say Rudy would appoint jurists in the mold of Lawrence Tribe, George Mitchell and even Alan Dershowitz. Not Thomas, Scalia and Rehnquist.
Btw, the 11th commandment was/is a fallacy.
If they haven't learned any lessons from 1996, they will either endorse him or give him a quasi-endorsement. Unfortunately, I don't think the NRA has yet acknowledged any connection between their quasi-endorsement of Bob Dole and the passage of the Lautenberg Abomination.
Hardly. I made the case on this very thread that such is not the case. He said recently that gun laws are a state issue and wrapped himself in the cloak of federalism to deflect criticism of his gun-grabbing ways as Mayor of NYC. Ignoring for now the absurd notion that the 2nd Amendment does not apply equally to the states, I showed here how in 1997 he called for the fedgov to pass laws imposing stricter gun control laws on neighboring states.
His history belies his current statements on federalism, so why should I believe his palitudes on federalism's first cousin, strict constructionism?
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.