Rudy To Attend CPAC

The Politico ^ | 2/25/07

[areafiftyone]

February 24, 2007

Rudy To Attend CPAC

I reported a piece last month about how Rudy and McCain were skipping some conservative conferences.  One of the events I mentioned that they had not yet RSVP'd to is the Grandaddy Of Them All -- the Conservative Political Action Conference or CPAC.  

Turns out Rudy will attend CPAC.  He'll speak to the confab Friday.

[EternalVigilance]

I know you don't believe in grays, but they are out there, just beyond the line of sight of your horizon.

"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness!"

Whether you want to admit it or not, Torie, some things are black, and some things are white.

Abortion is black, not white. People are the most valuable thing on this planet. They are made in God's Image and are therefore of inestimable worth. They are also helpless and defenseless, which makes their murder to be among the blackest of crimes against humanity.

Robbing citizens of the ability to protect themselves, their families, their communities and ultimately their country, is black, not white.

Empowering those who promote a self-destructive immoral lifestyle, and who desire the destruction of our civilization's foundational institution, marriage, is black, not white.

[Reagan Man]

Obfuscating your own remarks I see. You first linked "insufficiently conservative" meaning to "denigrate". Then you delinked the two in #286 by only mentioning "insufficiently conservative". Gotcha! Caught in the act.

My point was I don't see calling someone insufficiently conservative, as a term of denigration. Obviously, you do. The way you weaved that term and that word together lead me to call it what it was. Hyperbole, sillytalk, outrageous rhetoric. Good try, but it didn't work.

Next.

[EternalVigilance]

We've watched with disgust as you repeatedly tried to trash Reagan to make Rudy look more conservative.

Yes, while at the same time trying to make Clinton out as a Republican, in the interest of trying to make Giuliani appear to be not as bad as he is.

[Old_Mil]

What I said, on an Anglican thread about the reunification of the Catholic and Anglican churches, is that I don't approve of the how the RCC handles annulments/disolutions of marriages. That's a big hurdle you're trying to jump there by saying that I object to the traditional Catholic view of marriage. It's pretty much an insurmountable hurdle, not that I expect it to stop you.

No hurdle at all, given that the Catholic church holds that a secular divorce doesn't terminate a Catholic marriage.

Our Anglican church is a parish of the Diocese of the south, Catholic Church, egghead.

So now you're claiming to be an Anglican rite Catholic? Ah well, no matter. Whatever your flavor-de-jour, you're still supporting public funding for abortion and the promotion of homosexuality by your advocacy of Rudy. That speaks far more clearly than details of theology.

[Reagan Man]

There is nothing the RudyRooters won't say if they believe it will advance their cause. They did the same thing with Bush43 and Reagan.

Basically, many of FR`s well known Bushbots, have become Rudybots. No fool`in! Cantcha tell? Dontcha see? LOL

[M. Thatcher]

So sorry to confuse you. Calling someone insufficiently conservative is the same thing as denigrating someone as insufficintly conservative.

[narses]

My understanding is that he annulled marriage number one, not number two. His third wife is not Catholic. He is essentially living in a state of continual and public mortal sin.

[68 grunt]

... We've entered Bizarro-World..

Yeah, with you a bizzaro-conservative.

[wagglebee]

Basically, many of FR`s well known Bushbots, have become Rudybots.

And for the most part they FReepers were NEVER conservatives in the first place!

They decided during the Clinton years that they hated Democrats, though they don't know why other than they dislike the Clintons. They have some sort of patriotism that compels them to support the war on terror and based on the ever-present "Day in the Life" threads, they find the First Family "attractive" and likable, so they confine their views to how they "feel" about the Bushes and the WOT while ignoring social conservativism.

Now along comes Rudy. They also find him "attractive" and he supports the WOT. And HE IS A SOCIAL LIBERAL JUST LIKE THEY ARE and that makes them "feel comfortable." For these non-conservative FReepers (who think this is a Republican rather than a conservative forum) Rudy is the "dream candidate" because he is a pro-war liberal with an "R" after his name.

[Reagan Man]

Couple of facts.

I oppose liberals of ALL stripes.

You support the liberal Rudy Giuliani.

Holding those two different positions as we do, on this conservative political forum, shows you're the one thoroughly confused, and rightly so. Many conservatives have strayed off the rightwing reservation in the name of political expediency. You're not the first. ;^)

[68 grunt]

... our outrageous rhetoric just pushes us anti-Rudy forces even harder in opposition to his candidacy. Keep it up.

Sure, Reagan Embarrassment, like you need an excuse to tear any coalition asunder.

[Lirona]

You said:

The American public, the Independent and swing voters have all been programmed to vote Anti-Conservative.

and

I will wager that the more "conservative" the candidate is, the more lopsided the Democrat victory will be.

Its obvious by that statement that you realize that rudy is no conservative, and that's why you think he'll win.

thank you for finally admitting that you're backing a liberal against a liberal.

I'm going to stick my principles and back the right man for the job.

[Torie]

Yes, I am aware of your opinions about guns, gays and abortion. And about a quarter to a third of GOP voters tend to share your black and white views.

[wagglebee]

Meant to ping you on this too.

[narses]

And immigration. Guns, gays, abortion and immigration are all big deals at the grassroots and Rudy gets every one of them wrong. He also loses the Catholic vote based on how he has treated his three sets of marital vows.

[Spiff]

Its not. But this post was intended to make an announcement for the People interested in Rudy and discuss the issues which we welcome and it turns our every thread is become an open invitation for the anti-Rudy people to come on board and call us RINOS and Liberals. I would like you to take a look at the Duncan Hunter threads and tell me how many Rudy people go there and spam his threads with hateful Rudy comments? If they do I will gladly tell them to stop and leave the threads alone. He gets what he deserves here. He's a flaming liberal.

This has been explained to you repeatedly. I'll try again. You're openly campaigning for a liberal candidate - the most radically liberal candidate ever to run for the Republican presidential nomination. Free Republic is a conservative forum where promoting a liberal is going to cause heartburn. If you were to post an announcement for people interested in Hillary or Obama and promote them, you would be met with derision as you're promoting liberal candidates. It's no different - at all - when you post stuff to promote radically liberal Rudy Giuliani. There is no difference on a conservative forum.

[M. Thatcher]

Couple of facts. I oppose liberals of ALL stripes. You support the liberal Rudy Giuliani. Holding those two different positions as we do, on this conservative political forum, shows you're the one thoroughly confused, and rightly so. Many conservatives have strayed off the rightwing reservation in the name of political expediency. You're not the first. ;^)

I am as conservative as anyone here, we simply disagree on a nominee; but unlike your ilk I will never call your conservatism or your religion into question.

[68 grunt]

... Basically, many of FR`s well known Bushbots, have become Rudybots. No fool`in! Cantcha tell? Dontcha see? LOL

Here Reagan Embarrassment tries to alienate all whom remain loyal to the POTUS.

[Torie]

That must be why Rudy lost the Catholic vote when he ran for mayor of NYC.

[garv]

Right, semantics. You posted a false statement and lied about it over and over. That's semantics alright. You are and remain a liar.