Posted on 02/23/2007 7:05:51 PM PST by FairOpinion
I've never voted for Rudy Giuliani in my life. But I'm thinking hard about it now.
In both cases, I surprise myself.
The rest of America may know Rudy as "America's Mayor" for his ceremonial performance post-9/11, but for New Yorkers who lived through the Dinkins years, Rudy Giuliani is more than a guy who stands tall when the skyscrapers fall. By the late '90s, people were beginning to say that New York City was ungovernable: Remember the court-driven interest group spending, the disorder, the bums taking over the parks and the playgrounds and the street corners, spiraling welfare costs, the crime, the small business disaster, the high taxes, rent control, the South Bronx? New York was a disaster area, a poster child for what liberalism hath wrought.
The glittering cosmopolitan New York City we now live in, the one seemingly every college student in America dreams about moving to, is largely Rudy's gift, forged in the face of intense, daily, nasty invective from those who at the time insisted that to demand order and civility in a large city was to be a fascist.
Even Rudy's 9/11 performance tends to be misdescribed. It was not that he "stood tall" or didn't emotionally collapse. George Bush came to New York City and made graceful speeches about how we will rebuild the hole in the ground that still remains. What stood out for us in that dark time was not that the mayor of New York insisted we would triumph over this adversity, but that he didn't try to spin us about how unimaginably bad this sort of adversity was. He didn't try to soft-pedal the uncertainty, the chaos, the suffering the city was going through, and that gave us the confidence to believe that reality, terrible as it was, could in fact be faced.
I never voted for Rudy when I lived in New York City for one simple reason: abortion. I don't look for purity in politicians, just for some small pro-life reason to vote for a guy: Medicaid funding, parental notification, partial birth abortion. Throw me the slightest lifeline, otherwise I assume he just doesn't want the vote of people like me. Rudy never did. So I never gave him my vote. And of course it doesn't help now to recall the way Rudy treated his second wife, nor do I particularly want to imagine the third Mrs. Giuliani as Laura Bush's successor.
So I could have sworn, even a few months ago, that I'd never vote for Rudy Giuliani, in spite of my deep respect for his considerable achievements as mayor. So why would I even think of changing my mind? Two things: national security, and Hillary Clinton's Supreme Court appointments.
When I ask myself, who of all the candidates in both parties do I most trust to keep me and my children safe? The answer is instantaneous, deeper than the level any particular policy debate can go: Rudy Giuliani. And when I look ahead on social issues like gay marriage, the greatest threat I see is that the Supreme Court with two or more appointments from Hillary Clinton, will decide that our Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, created a national constitutional right to whatever social liberals have decided is the latest civil rights battle. It's hard to see a state that George Bush won in which Rudy Giuliani will not beat Hillary Clinton. And he will put a whole slew of new blue states into play: Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, to name just three. (The latest Quinnipiac poll shows Giuliani in a dead heat with Clinton in Connecticut.) Which puts people like me, who care very deeply about marriage and life issues, in the position of thinking hard about Rudy.
If you let the PC police run yur life.
Well a good standard to see if something is offensive is to try it out in public. Call someone a homo, and if your not punched in the face for it it's not offensive.
Always with the BS alternative. Go on, vote for Rudy. What the hey. You're a RINO.
I've named names in the last few weeks, and most here are well aware of the candidates I support. Naming names was not the point. Rudy is clearly the worst possible disaster that an R can be hung upon, and is only even in consideration because the MSM and the RINO caucus are pushing him. The Rino caucus tells us that he can beat Hillary, so we should jump on his band wagon, but Hillary will not be the dummo nominee anyway, so who cares?
Let's not let our enemies pick our candidate, OK?
Newt, even with all his hubris and deception, would certainly be a far better candidate than those chosen for us by the MSM. If they really knew him, they might even be promoting him instead of Rudy, or they might be reserving him for when Rudy crashes.
Typical Leftist ideology... call something hate to use on your enemy...
Let's return to what I actually said:
"I do not like the perverts, the dopers, the gun grabbers, the illegals or the baby killers.I won't vote for scum like that either..."
Hate is not mentioned.
More like drinking hard about voting For Rudy Guiliani
Your guess is incorrect.
Why then would you do anything to help them get elected?
And Arnold is helping him. Yet another consequence.
Why is Simon endorsing RG?
Bill Simon used to work for Rudy Giuliani as a US attorney. It's understandable that he would return the favor, if for no other reason than out of mutual friendship. When Simon ran for governor, Rudy came to California and did his best to save the sinking campaign. So there is also the likelihood of returning a political favor at work here.
Jorge, I think that Hillary (Obama won't be the front runner) would clean Rudy's clock in the general election. Why then would I want Rudy to be the candidate, even if my only motivation was to stop Hillary? Just for the record, she makes me want to puke.
Anyway, if the election comes to that, it is nothing more than liberal vs. liberal, with the only difference being the degree of liberalism. I am sick to death of voting for Republicans who refuse to act as I feel Republicans should act. I despise liberalism, and damn sure won't vote for it just because on an "R" in front of someone's name.
You seem to be the Duncan Hunter expert here. I'm as pro-life as anyone. The idea that we are even having a conversation about people having the ability to murder their own unborn children is puzzling to me. You never even hear about a sewer rat or pig doing such a thing.
But doesn't that quote reek of a litmus test? Shouldn't Roe v Wade be judged in a sterile, judicial vacuum of law and overturned because of the legal merits of the case and not because of emotional arguments one way or the other?
I want strict contructionist judges. Period. NO litmus test or everyone will see right through it. My question to you (sincerely, because I don't know) is how do you know that Rudy won't keep his word and nominate a Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts type justice? What else BTW about Hunter is worth knowing before I make up my mind about who to give my money and support to?
You wouldn't know true Republican if it fell on your head.
I'm a TRUE CONSERVATIVE, you dolt.
LOL. A true bag of wind.
What have YOU done for your country, goofball?
I, at least, have served my country as a active-duty Marine for 13 years in a combat mos.
I have been involved in politics since I first voted for Ronald Reagan when he first ran for President.
I have ONLY voted for a democrat ONCE, and that was for the conservative (on MOST issues) Governor of GA - Zell Miller. (BTW, I have NEVER voted for a Republican that could REMOTELY be considered a RINO, and NEVER will)
I am a LIFETIME Benefactor member (I have put my money where my mouth is in a MAJOR way over the years) of the NRA.
What the f**k have you done for your country and the Republican Party or Conservative Movement?
I've refuted self-righteous RINO bags of wind like you.
Go back to DU where you belong.
You are not sane or cognizant enough to warrant further replies.
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.