Posted on 02/25/2007 4:17:02 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Just what ARE Rudy's qualifications that make him the "BEST man to lead as CIC?"
Please, I'd really like to know.
Do none of our other Republican candidates even compare to Rudy's superior military/war experience and knowledge?
Anti-gun
Pro-gay
Pro-illegal alien
Pro-Abortion
Arrogant
Egocentric
History suppportive of Democrats
WAIT A MINUTE!!!! He's GREAT - as a DEMOCRAT candidate.
Rudy has nation wide positive name recognition, a necessity for any future republican POTUS. Reagan was a beloved movie star, Bush a veep, Eisenhower a great general...... conservatives must start grooming candidates who are widely known IMO
My post, 324, was showing manufacturing.
The data fields of the poll were change to reflect a different result with the same data.
Well.. Rudy Evaded The Draft with the help of a 'friendly Federal Judge'.
Wouldn't a DRAFT DODGER make the "BEST" CIC???
(big) /s
(reason 9,987 why Rudy is UNFIT to be POTUS)
>>>>Briefly scanned through his Core Principles - nothing on immigration, although I agree strongly on most issues.
Allow me to assist:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1773423/posts?page=9#9
I don't see anyone posting that Hunter should be excluded from the primaries. let him run, go ahead.
and don't tell me there aren't a ton of people posting that they would not vote for Giuliani, even in the general election. they are all over the place here.
If you believe that link contains anything but hyperbolic speculations and third or fourth hand connections you are dreaming. Someone knew someone who might have known someone who could have known someone else if the moon was blue and it rained on Saturday.
If there was ONE verifiable fact you might have a scintilla of evidence of wrongdoing. That story stands as a monument to imbecility and credulity.
I know it, you know it and I'm pretty sure J.R. knows it, from the replies between them earlier.
Give him just a little more rope, they always wind up hanging themselves.
To say a law clerk to a Federal Judge avoided the draft is one of the most absurd things I have ever read.
One avoids the draft by taking actions they would otherwise not take in order to avoid service.
Every single law student salivates at the thought of a Federal Judge clerkship.
Fact, if you look at the timing, Giuliani went in and out of 1A status depending on what he was doing in life. And what he was doing was a natural progression of education to career.
Back to attacking him for wearing a dress in a skit.
"If there was ONE verifiable fact you might have a scintilla of evidence of wrongdoing. That story stands as a monument to imbecility and credulity."
Thats great. If he were to ever be the nominee he will have no trouble explaining that to 300 million people every time the media prints it, or asks him about it, and dozens more just like it or worse.
They will drop a new one every few days until the general election.
He is the easiest for any Dem to beat so the media will give him a pass until after the nomination. After that.....
Rudy has nothing to fear from an ill written hack job with no fact of any concern. He would have more to fear from other National Enquirer-type stories such as the claim that Bat Boy is his illegitimate son.
Great. Then he's all set.
He's not a draft dodger. Those deferments weren't that uncommon, I remember several LEOs who got them. I could be mistaken, but I believe under the lottery law you were required to face the draft for one year. Rudy got lucky with a high number, and went 1-A, likely voluntarily, in a year he knew the chances were remote. The oldest person in my training platoon, 25 if I recall, was a Chicago detective who could defer the inevitable only so long. Was he a draft dodger? I took advantage of 4 years of deferments before enlisting. Was I a draft dodger. George Bush, he followed the law too, we know he's a draft dodger.
Actually I wish there were a credible threat from the Right but don't see one. As I have said elsewhere there is no guarantee I will vote for Rudy in the primary since he will likely win Illinois in a landslide.
His leadership qualities are outstanding, as are his speaking abilities. While I don’t like some of his methods, he did an excellent job with regard to crime, and in demonstrating post 9/11 leadership. He’s a good tactical thinker and administrator.
Leadership and organizational skills, speaking ability, relations with the press, those can all be demonstrated by simply winning in the primaries.
In my view Gingrich is his equal in those regards, and while he lacks the hands on management experience in the realm of law enforcement, he’s superior in experience of managing the wheels of government, and I believe has a superior world view. We’re electing the equivalent of a General, not a field grade officer, no matter how talented.
Same for Hunter, though he has to demonstrate the leadership skills.
It’s ironic that no one seems to address Rudy’s “strengths”, which are equaled by other candidates, including McCain.
Instead worry about what he wears to charity events.
But the American people likely have a different idea than you. Only McCain stands as a realistic alternative for the nomination and no one is more hated than him here.
Like many other questions, the definition frames the issues.
He is a social liberal if being pro choice, not necessarily pro abortion, identifies one as a Liberal.
And or if as mayor of a huge diverse multiethnic city, he didn't believe guns should be freely available to anyone anytime.
And finally, if he has gay friends and doesn't mouth the bread and circuses hope for a Constitutional Amendment against gay marriage.
There is so much more to being a social conservative then those three- or there should be.
Railing against blasphemous art- in the face of being called all sort of fascist names- is being a social conservative.
Restoring decaying and dangerous neighborhoods back to civilization, is, or should be, a mark of a social conservative.
Even kicking out a terrorist from your presence, should be a mark of a social conservative.
Many of these threads are a conversation of babel.
Some demand an absolute purity on abortion, gays and guns, and they might have a leg to stand on if those issues dominated a Presidency.
If Allen or Santorum, for example, had won hugely, and were running, social conservatives could argue that all things being equal, they prefer someone who also meets their standards on guns, gays, and abortion.
Reality dictates we decide from what's available. I like Gingrich. But, unfortunately, he is politically damaged beyond repair. If he were the nominee, he would have coattails. The wrong kind. He would drive Republicans over a cliff.
Hunter is an open source fantasy. If he wants to be a serious contender, he needs to start by winning a CA Senate seat and becoming a household name. Today, he is such a political non entity that no one will even nominate him for VP. He brings nothing to the ticket.
It's Giuliani or Romney or McCain as the nominee of the Republican Party. I believe Giuliani is head and shoulders above the others.
The three are unacceptable to the zealots. So be it. Zealots sometimes succeed in destroying their natural allies. But always succeed in destroying themselves.
If Gingrich can win in the primaries, he can win in the general. Same for Hunter, electability is something than can be demonstrated, just ask Howard Dean.
Please... the little temper tantrums and hissy fits put forth by some of the "socons" on this board are worse than anything I posted.
Frankly...I'm sick of the "RINO" term being tossed about willy nilly by a minority faction within the party at anyone who doesn't lock step with the complete socon agenda.
To be more brief...bite me
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.