Giuliani Speaks at CPAC (CSPAN) LIVE

CSPAN ^ | 3/1/07

[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

[finnman69]

Say hello to your next president.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

I was reading a comment on Michelle Malkin's site, and one of them pointed out some of the comments about these Rudy threads here on FR.

The Left, it appears, have been lurking here lately with great interest. They are not only overjoyed at how the so called "Champions" of "true conservatism", are attacking other conservatives personally with such vile and hatred. They are ecstatic that the general public is being given such a negative view of who and what conservatives are all about.

The now have a new term for those self righteous/morally superior "pure conservatives". They are calling them the "American Taliban" or the "Taliban Conservatives".

If this is the image they are so proud to project to the millions of people who lurk here, then so be it. This illustrates some of the comments that some of these "real conservatives" have made in regards to executing women who have had abortions. (among several others)

[TommyDale]

"What a revealing post. This isn't about being on the winning team, no matter how much some like to cheerlead and jump on the bandwagon. This is about advancing conservative principles."

That's the problem in a nutshell. Principles are not about "winning". Real conservatives are about keeping principles. And we are the bad guys because we won't rally around their liberal wolf in conservative sheep's clothing.

[Howlin]

Speaking of hypocrisy

appoints Democrats to the bench at an 8 to 1 ratio over Republicans

I was on the thread where it was proved and shown to you that that is an out and out lie.

Yet still you repeat it.

[MadIvan]

We have made great strides in winning the hearts and minds of the people, and it starts with the media not being able to quote a charismatic leader on the subject opposing our moves to limit abortion. And that's even though Bush isn't particularly engaged on the issue because he's a bit busy with the whole terrorism thing.

I would cite President Bush back at you - this war is going to be lasting for quite some time. Any President who takes over is very likely to have to continue to have it as his main focus. Secondly, the evidence is clear - abortion has continued, Roe vs. Wade has not been overturned. Polling information suggests that most Americans would like abortion to remain legal, albeit more regulated than it is at present.

You know, when the guy sticks his fingers in the dike, and someone comes by and notes that there's still puddles on the ground so whats the point and claims we really don't need another person to take his place with those fingers because it's not going so well WITH the fingers in the dike, I'm thinking don't forget what happens if we pull those fingers out.

When a group of Saracens ride towards the people standing in front of the dike, swords out and raising a murderous cry, one hopes a leader will pull his finger out and shoot the blighters dead. Others can continue the long slow work of changing the American public's conscience - which is a process that will last longer than a single Presidency, or multiple Presidencies, as we can see. It will require appointing the appropriate judges - a commitment Rudy has made, from below, it will require people of faith and commitment who will continue to inform the ignorant about what abortion means. This is less glamorous and simple than having a President sign it all away with a swoop of a pen, but it is the watertight method.

Ivan

[onyx]

Odd for a political forum, I admit.

Indeed! I do enjoy posting the Dose once a week on Wednesday. That thread is truly Sanity Island. :0)

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Thank you Peach.

[Flightdeck]

"Silly me... I thought Clinton's purjury and rape constituted "lies and infidelity."

I would have referred to that as "lies and rape". Instead I referred to his lies and infidelity, something that Giuliani is very guilty of.

[onyx]

And they get their thrills posting pictures of a man in a dress. Things that make you go hmmmmmm....

LOL --- and then there's THAT. Good point, Corin! LOL!

[MadIvan]

I hope you're right. McCain can do damage to the Republicans if he goes on an insane rant. The Republicans do not need their own version of Howard Dean.

Regards, Ivan

[Howlin]

And for anybody thinking people aren't watching:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1793875/posts?page=32#32

[trisham]

Excuse me? I was Time's person of the year, and I don't think it's rude to point that out.

*************

Congratulations! Since you're too modest to mention it, let me divulge to our fellow FReepers the award to you of the Nobel Peace Prize. They're both major awards. :)

[BigSkyFreeper]

I don't have the approximate date of that post, but I bookmarked the articles I came across in my research, some related, some not, but they all had their relation to the Duke Cunningham scandal:

Contractors 'knew how to grease the wheels' 

Hunter is ‘Duke’s’ friend ’til the end 

Rep. Hunter still disputing $667 property tax bill

[Peach]

That's a good point.

A post onyx made was printed in an MSNBC article, so it's clear the media is still reading here.

Given some of the posts the other night throwing around terms that used to get freepers banned, I will not be surprised to see those posts also show up in newspapers.

Onyx's post was innocuous and did not do a dis-service to conservatives at all. Some of the posts we're seeing now are things that all right thinking Republicans would want to distance themselves from.

Consider, Hunter had to fire 2 campaign workers because of some rather intemperate remarks they made about or to illegal immigrants. Those remarks were moderate compared to the ugliness posted here.

[MadIvan]

If McCain is the nominee, I will argue as strongly in favour of him as I have for Rudy. It will be with a heavy heart, as I don't believe he has the fortitude to win this.

Regards, Ivan

[CharlesWayneCT]

Actually, the pro-life movement is getting a bit upset with the lip service of that "quickie phone call", but at least it means that once a year the media has to notice there was a march, because they can't ignore a phone call from President.

[onyx]

Have you not noticed? I have not been speaking against any candidate. I can see "some" good in almost all of the GOP candidates. The first of the candidate debates are scheduled for April 4, and I am happy to wait to see what they have to say and to let them rip into one another.

[Howlin]

Here: I'll spell it out to you. That is actually a Rudy supporter showing his affection to Rudy in the best way he knows how.

The Dale Carnegie Institute called; your certificate for completing the "How to Win Friends and Influence Your Enemies" class came in:

[Peach]

You sure don't mind jumping to a lot of conclusions, do you.

[SJackson]

I was reading a comment on Michelle Malkin's site, and one of them pointed out some of the comments about these Rudy threads here on FR...The Left, it appears, have been lurking here lately with great interest. They are not only overjoyed at how the so called "Champions" of "true conservatism", are attacking other conservatives personally with such vile and hatred. They are ecstatic that the general public is being given such a negative view of who and what conservatives are all about...The now have a new term for those self righteous/morally superior "pure conservatives". They are calling them the "American Taliban" or the "Taliban Conservatives"...If this is the image they are so proud to project to the millions of people who lurk here, then so be it. This illustrates some of the comments that some of these "real conservatives" have made in regards to executing women who have had abortions. (among several others)

See my post 637. Can't really argue with their assessment. It's wrong, but for better or worse groups are often stereotyped by small minorities of their membership.