Posted on 03/02/2007 8:40:17 AM PST by areafiftyone
All day today we are covering speakers and panels at the 34th Annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, DC. This morning, we'll hear from Republican presidential hopeful former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. He will be followed by Reps. Scott Garrett (NJ), Tom Tancredo (CO), and others.
CLICK ON THE MAIN CSPAN PAGE HERE
Regards, Ivan
ROFL. You just had to go and give them ideas.
Yeah, I fear for it too. The Rooty Rooters are turning it into a liberal site.
I think you are dead wrong about JFK being a republican. But it appears that a lot of "conservatives" would be ready to VOTE for JFK if he was alive today.
The drugs, women, sleeze, mob connections would apparently not be a big problem?
I wouldn't say that they harbor a wholesale hatred for everybody, but clearly the worst suspects are inspired more from personal venom and other demons.
I think most of these folks have a sincere desire for people to live better lives because they know that their lives will be better because of it.
These same people also have a poor grasp of human nature, namely that good people are very capable of sometimes doing a bad thing.
For example, prescribing a policy that doesn't honor same-sex marriage is one thing. Extrapolating from that all sorts of anti gay sentiments is another thing. And when these folks see that not everyone shares those sentiments, they just can't seem to cope. I have often asked these types specifically what is 'conservative' about it?
I have yet to get a coherent, rational answer.
Oh, my, what a sense of humor you have; that's scary!
And the scariest part is I can see it happening..........LOL.
Definition of sarchasm :.
(sär'kãz'əm)
1. (n.) The abyss between the creator of witticisms and the intended recipient who does not find the humor in it, or is jut plain dumb.
Origins: The combination of sarcasm and chasm. While originally coined as a "sniglet" by comedian, Rich Hall, this term has become so widely used in American language almost as to be common place here in the States.
Example: Either you find this definition funny, or there is a sarchasm between us.
If it was quite clear, why was it so ambiguous? Reread your post.
If he were alive today, I'd think being 90 years old would be his big problem.
>> Someone unplugged the cameras... <<
Shirley, you can't be series!
***********
Heh. :)
Not at all. As I've stated repeatedly in the last several days, all that insanity has sent a considerable number of freepers over to the Rudy side of the equation.
It's also fun to watch the hysterics who happen to agree with that characterization of Rudy supporters.
I'm just waiting for the next vanity that maybe calls freepers who like Rudy murderers.
Fear for what? That FR was willing to go halfway to the left to accomodate Bush - but won't go 80 percent to the left to accomodate Rudy? That FR conservatives don't like folks trashing Reagan and making up stuff about Hunter? That we do believe that life, gun rights and fighting illegal immigration DO MATTER? And are not SIDE ISSUES?
READ THE FR MISSION STATEMENT. READ THE GOP PLATFORM. We are being asked to rip those up to go along with the Rudy leftward parade.
Count me in! I am not missing this one. First one in 2000 I had an ice storm and second one I was really sick with bronchitis, etc.
Shut up. You're intentionally twisting what I said.
I really don't care to have any more conversation with a guy who does that, and who thinks conservatism is a mental disorder.
Maybe you think I made your point for you, but why not directly answer my questions? What evidence makes you think they are unprincipled (hint: disagreeing with you, while a self satisfying and self reflexive posture, isn't evidence of being unprincipled)?
Or is it that strange (and dubious) breed of Freeper instinct that decided it for you?
Aren't you surprised at the freepers who think it was just fine and dandy to call Rudy supporters treasonous liberals? It's really telling me a lot about some of the people here.
He's just confused as to how a forum that was largely derisive when Bush made really bad choices to head up agencies, like "Brownie", don't seem to mind at all that Rudy Gulliani's pick for Homeland Security of our country was a man who had to resign in disgrace and ended up a convict.
I want a strong leader, a proven leader, but I also would like someone who does a little better job of picking his friends than George Bush seems to have done -- and Rudy has some bad choices to explain.
That's it! ;-)
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.