Posted on 02/25/2007 7:17:47 AM PST by 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.
LOL! That was my first thought when I read your post, mkjessup. areafiftyone is a woman. :)
I'll keep checking though! ;-)
I didn't know it was "indefensible" to criticize CPAC then. I'm sure I made several negative posts about speakers AND attendees at the time. If you had bothered to inform me way back then that CPAC was a sacred cow, I wouldn't have to wonder now whether you are more concerned with shielding CPAC or Rudy from criticism.
I'm actually glad Rudy will be speaking at CPAC. I hope he gets asked good questions, because I'm very interested in his answers. I'm particularly interested in finding out what bone he intends to throw to conservatives in order to get their support in the primaries, because that's what this is all about.
Is Hillary attending CPAC, too?
"Wife" #2, Donna Hanover, was a previously married non-Catholic who is unlikely to have sought an annulment of her first marriage. Thus "marriage" #2 was barred by her previous and still existing marriage.
At the point of civil divorce #2, Rudy was still a never married man in the eyes of the Church.
Judy Nathan is apparently Rudy's civil wife #3 and, if she was previously unmarried (for whatever Canon Law reason and I don't know that she was), his first and only wife in the eyes of the Church. In that event, there is no ongoing mortal sin of which we would know, other than homosexual shenanigans of others.
We ought to be careful not to unjustly accuse Rudy of what may not be his sins. We can disagree with his public policies in various respects or support other candidates while being just.
Nice try. The reason FOR the annulment from wife number one was to get married to wife number two in the Church. He is playing a shell game with wives. You are buying it. Not me.
The annulment was in 1983, wife two was married to hizzoner on 4/15/84 in a Catholic Church. St. Monica's - Upper East Side.
Please don't confuse people with facts. :)
We will most likely be in the Omni Shoreham hotel bar on Saturday after CPAC adjourns. Hope to see you there or around the venue March 1-3! :o)
nutmeg & zelig
CPAC 2007 agenda so far: CPAC 2007 agenda
LOL! That's the problem with CPAC... it's so much fun to stay up late in that very accomodating hotel bar (or wherever), yet it's so hard to get up early to see those early speakers. I admit I've missed a few of the early ones at past CPACs, but not really because of late-night drinking. Most likely late-night FReeping like I'm doing now. Or maybe a combination of both...*ahem*
I hope to see the presidential candidates as well. I sure wish they didn't start until at least 10. Oh well... ;-)
Will we see you at CPAC this year?
Looking forward to seeing you tomorrow at our annual meeting! Safe travels...
I do not favor Rudy as the GOP nominee unless Tancredo were the only competition (in which case I would vote for Rudy early and often). I could certainly vote for him in the general election if he were nominated and shall if I am convinced as to his judicial appointment intentions and if he is standing against anyone vaguely likely to be the Demonratic nominee.
I am not buying anything. I have told you what I believe to be the case as to Rudy's marital history. If you have any facts to offer, I am certainly open to be convinced. This is not a question of: "We don't like Rudy. Therefore we believe anything and everything detrimental to him." I prefer the truth. If you think about it, I'll bet you prefer the truth too.
Assuming, as I do, that you are right as to marriage #2 being at St. Monica's, I stand corrected. Now a question may still exist as to whether her first marriage was annulled without which there should never have been a marriage at St. Monica's. That the marriage was contracted in a Catholic Church ceremony suggests that her first marriage must have been annulled.
Therefore, if there was no annulment of marriage #2, Rudy is indeed living openly and notoriously in mortal sin. There, I said it. Of course, it is also gruesome that Rudy and Hanover married on April 15. What an awful anniversary!
Whose annulment was in 1983 (Rudy, Hanover, both?) and, given that the Church does not report annulments publicly, how do you know? Has Rudy or Hanover made an annulment or annulments public?
No offense intended, none taken. I appreciate your scruples.
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.