Posted on 03/02/2007 1:04:18 PM PST by Ultra Sonic 007
Greetings.
This is just going to be a simple thread. Granted, there's been a lot of vitriol on both sides of the Giuliani/Hunter divide, and those who are undecided (or voting for someone else) are probably wondering about the rage.
Well, let's examine this situation a bit.
First of all, Rudy Giuliani. He certainly cleaned up New York City; no doubt about that. His fiscal policies certainly seem conservative compared to the rest of New York City (despite that fact New York City and its home state are home to some of the highest taxes in the US; I wonder what previous taxes must have been like, adjusted for inflation?). I won't deny that he did a lot for New York City, but it's important to think about his positions and standpoints. Then you'll see why detractors of Rudy Giuliani are so angry.
For one thing, he is not a very constitutionally sound candidate. All you have to do is look at his positions concerning the 2nd Amendment. He's far too wiling to accomadate illegal immigrants. Socially, his conservatism is rather lacking; despite some Freeper's wish to the contrary, a lot of people regard abortion as a major issue considering that it results in the loss of innocent lives. His positions are often in conflict with a majority of the GOP, and are simultaneously coinciding with those of the Democrats. With the exception of the War on Terror, he's mostly opposed to the GOP. Considering the far-Left bent of New York, that's not surprising. That's one reason why a lot of people are skeptical of New York's former Mayor; although conservative by comparison with the rest of New York, he's most certainly not conservative enough for the office of the US President.
Although I know that the War on Islamofascism (the War on Terror for those who are politically correct) is supported fullheartedly by Rudy, it's important to weigh that with other issues as well. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was steadfast in his support of World War II, yet he was responsible for introducing a glut of socialism into American society (Social Security ring a bell?). This is a lead-in for a point I'll get into in a moment: sacrificing social conservative values for a strong wartime leader may seem fine and dandy, but why should that occur when other strong advocates for the War on Terror exist...without the Leftist baggage that Rudy carries?
A brief look at Duncan Hunter before I continue on; his strongest points are his social conservative values and his previous service as a Ranger. His military background and military family provide strong evidence for a good wartime leader, and one of his strongest points are his stances for border control and AGAINST illegal immigration. Granted, his fiscal conservatism may be a bit spotty; he's pro-tax cuts, but he's also a bit of a spender. I've heard many complaints about how he's against free trade, but his stances strike me more as against China's trade practices. Seeing China's military build-up and their friendliness with Iran and other hostile countries, it's understandable. I certainly don't hear him complaining about trade with England, Japan, Germany, or other countries.
When weighing all the issues, it would seem that - comparing Giuliani and Hunter - the latter comes out as more conservative than liberal, whereas the former is more liberal than conservative. I know that Reagan's famous "80% ally and 20% enemy" quotation has been thrown about a lot by Rudy supporters, but "80% enemy, 20% ally" seems more fitting for Giuliani considering how diametrically opposed he is to conservative values. The support is all the more confusing when you consider one important facet. When looking at this facet, some of you might wonder why there is such anger on Free Republic lately.
We're not even at the primaries yet.
Yes, that's right. The mainstream media has been trotting out Rudy/McCain/Romney as the big three Republican candidates, and considering the supposed invincibility of Hillary, it's quite easy to imagine a Rudy vs. Hillary general election. I guess this "anyone but Hillary" mentality is justification for supporting someone like Rudy, who's quite liberal. A major reason for his popularity with conservatives is:
A) Name recognition (a good deal from 9/11 alone).
B) "Electability"
I don't quite know how one can gauge option B. Perhaps it stems from the 2006 elections, where Republicans lost in a big way. I guess those who look at those who loss (like Santorum) and guess that illegal immigration is a losing issue. Understandable. However, this is surrendering to the power of the media, which has managed to color the Republican Party as the Party of Corruption. If their searing eye was directed at the Democrats with the same intensity, we'd see a big switch in voter positions. But alas, that's a different issue.
Think about the Democrats who won. Granted, a lot of voters wanted an alternative to "corrupt" Republicans, but take note that many of the new Democrats who won ran on pro-life, socially conservative positions. Whether this will hold up has yet to be determined, but it should remind people that socially conservative issues still carry a large sway with voters. It all comes down to presentation; certianly, Rudy Giuliani is an effective speaker (as his recent CPAC appearance showed; sorry Bush, but you're not very telegenic). Whether Hunter is has yet to be determined (8:00 PM Eastern on C-SPAN tonight will show a replay of his 8:30 AM speech, so we'll see; call C-SPAN to make sure they don't change it!), so we'll see.
But anyway, back to my main point: the primaries.
I see many Freepers tearing themselves to shreds. Many people are angry with Rudy supporters, and I see some Rudy supporters lament why they're so antagonistic. Can you blame them? We're not even at the primaries yet, and you're throwing your weight behind someone who is far more liberal than conservative. Obviously, this is quite concerning.
There are conservative candidates out there. Grassroots can accomplish a lot, and we are NOT at the primaries yet. For a conservative to support a liberal candidate strikes many here (including me) as contradictory, as it should be. Rudy Giuliani's own standpoints on many issues infuriate a lot of Freepers (note to all: showcasing the standpoints/political leanings/views of a candidate is not smearing). I note how many complain about people trying to "tear Rudy down".
This is what happens when the candidate you support is a liberal.
Of course conservatives are going to tear a liberal down! If revealing his stances, showcasing his political record, and doing so repeatedly counts as tearing an opponent down, so what? Would you not do the same for Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Hillary, Al Gore, or Obama? That's why politics is a deadly game and requires a tough skin...but alas, I have to finish with my point.
Conservatism is being rendered irrelevant bit by bit in this country, and a lot of people can see that. They want to reverse that tide and remind people why America's conservative values are the best around. But how can we accomplish that when we ignore conservatives in favor of popular liberals?
Needless to say, Rudy Giuliani was great for New York City. But he's simply too liberal to be good for America.
And what if it does come down to Rudy vs. Hillary?
Well, there's your answer: it's still a what-if. We're not there yet.
So focus on the conservatives until then. Unless you want conservatism to surrender itself to irrelevance.
If you mean will conservatives sit back and go along with the theory that conservative Republicans are politically incorrect, and that we must submit by encouraging conservative candidates to surrender, and they become passive cardboad cutouts for the Giuliani crowd?
Not going to happen. Primaries and the nomination race are UNPREDICTABLE.
THe people are the wild card. And if a conservative candidate ignites them, then all of the RINO strategery will be out the window, lost in the scramble to get behind a conservative candidate.
This has the RINO faction very concerned, because they want a clear path right into the convention. But the RINO faction will not achieve that.
Oh No.
THe game is afoot
And all the caterwalling in the world will not prevent a battle royal for the Republican party occurring.
Surrender? Conservatism?
Those two words do not even belong in the same sentence here on FR.
Yep! The same MSM that lies about the war and illegal immigration but somehow they are being forthright about Republican presidential candidates.
"To me, Rudy with a conservative veep (to ward off a splinter right 3rd party challenge) could be a winner."
Why? Why would having even a proven diehard conservative holding the proverbial pitcher of warm piss make having a liberal in the White House palatable? I'll go with another standard-bearer, thanks. I don't trust Rudy, and I won't vote for a lesser-of-two-evils 'conservative' again.
Test 1, 2, 3..
(pc's been down, had to login again for some reason?!?)
Okay ta-ta, back to working on my computer. (Hope it works tomorrow)
Reading through, I sense you are defining "conservative" as the social right. If so, then we have a distinct difference of opinion, as much of the agenda of the RR does not comport with conservatism. One can be against abortion, and by default some stem cell research, believe in creationism, against gay marriage, and be a liberal in every sense of the word.
If you're suggesting that Rudy and others are not conservative in a classical sense, then I definitely take issue with you.
If Rudy were a libertarian, I wouldn't mind it so much. But he's a liberal statist.
I don't know if anyone else feels the same way but I don't believe this just started with Rudy. The tension has been brewing since before November. How many times did social conservatives quietly suffer through insults, being threatened with just hold your nose and vote R or you are voting for Hilary? This is getting old and doesn't work anymore.
In my view and in light of our turncoat republican congressmen who sided with the libs voting to defund our Miltary protectors, Lets not carry this arguing to far, the candidate we choose needs our undivided support to win in 2008, sure he will not be everything to everyone but first and formost he must have resolve and a willingness ala Ronald Reagan to get the job done. If we dont take a hard view on terrorism and our borders we cannot beat these animals back to hell.debating is healthy let us not turn into the circus we see on cnn, msnbc, and the rest of the liberal propaganda machine
Yes.... well, in that case, offer him some tap water and Ritz crackers.
Give me the beer :)
Correct you are. It won't ever work for me.
I remember Bob Dole's campaign. I bought several of his books and gave them away. I talked my heart out against Clinton to no avail. The reason this was to no avail is because my heart was not in it. I knew what a RINO Dole was and it went against the grain. I even remember Rush speaking for Dole and I couldn't get behind him then. If Rudi gets the nomination, it will be third party for me. I am not supporting someone I don't believe in.
Where's your well-organized composition, then?
Excellent post.
You can have some of my beer. Getting a keg for St. Patrick's Day -- woohoo!
Are you kidding?? I've been drinking!
Welcome to the big leagues, slugger ... step up any time.
My memory cells aren't what they used to be, so particulars often escape me ... the wisdom of FreeRepublic keeps me aligned.
Rudy is a likeable guy, but I love my country, and no way, do I want a liberal president.
Vote for a conservative in the primaries!!
PLEASE!
OK, let's just turn that around, and replace one word, to see how it looks from your side of the screen.
"The "All or Nothings" and Rudybots on FR are would rather have Hillary as Pres. All in the name for teaching the Republicans a lesson."
See, how that works two ways? ;o) Now, what we really need to know is who is the real conservative here? I think we all know that answer.
So, you should understand that you are lining up with liberals if you support Rudy, because he is one, and that would go against everything you have written on your profile page.
I want you to know that I said all of that in love. LOL!
The Republican party has many wings. Some of us think the most important issues are the war on terror, a free economy and low taxes. Those nice folks, who include me, love Rudi Giuliani, because his stances are pretty much ours, and his stands on other issues just don't excite us one way or the other.
Others consider gun issues, anti-abortion or gay marriage to be more important. Those people are completely baffled that Rudy Giuliani is even in the Republican party or is supported by Republicans. I do not have anything against these people; I think they are good folks. I am not going to go and smear them, saying they're less than human, as they seem to want to do to my side.
They are not less than human. They are real people who have valid points.
So let me hand over a few of mine.
If you think of how out of control spending has been even under George W Bush, who at least pays lip service to fiscal conservatism, you can just imagine what it would be like under Duncan Hunter, who has been mentioned by many as "a bit spendy". I don't remember Bush being spendy in Texas; now he is. The pressure to spend Federal government money is enormous and you need to be a real leader to resist it.
This is where Rudy's record shines. He stood up to the biggest spenders in the nation and won battles against them fair and square.
And if you think of what it would take to align the nation as one body united in fighting the War on Terror, I think Rudy's leadership skills are our best chance.
In other words, if those two issues are your most important issues, a vote for Rudy is a vote for a strong leader who will push those issues far more than anyone else would.
If gun control and abortion are your most important issues, I fully respect your desire not to support someone who is in opposition to your most heartfelt views.
But I don't think those views are going to change anyone's minds. Those who support Rudy know his views. Those who oppose him know his views. I think that if you want to defeat Rudy, you're going to have to find some kind of real problem with the guts of his administration. Show how he's less fiscally conservative than we think, or that his leadership during 9/11 wasn't what it's cracked up to be, and we're likely to at least listen.
Keep on going on about abortion or gun control, and I don't think anyone's going to listen.
Illegal immigration, I'm afraid, is a bigger issue and one I really don't know how to deal with. But only 2% of the electorate considers it their most important issue. I personally have very mixed feelings on this issue, and respect both sides. I hate the idea of this place tearing itself apart over another illegal immigration debate, but I fear that's exactly what's going to happen.
When it does, please remember to shoot the message, not the messenger. You can say I'm a disgusting, lawbreaking SOB for admitting to disobeying speed limits (and comparing that disobedience to illegal immigration), but that's not going to change anybody's mind on the issue. In fact, it may make people sympathise with me just a bit.
So let all of us take Ultra Sonic's example and be of good cheer. If Rudy wins the primary, I'm 95% sure we'll take the general. And that's what all of us should really care about, as long as we care more about the issues Rudy represents than those he doesn't.
If you care more about those peripheral issues, which from my perspective barely matter, more power to you and I wish you the best. the only problem is that I don't think you'll get the candidate with the name recognition or ability to connect with voters that will win us the general. You'll be happy when you win the primary and cry about the result in the general. And I'll be sad for you, honest.
But I'll be sadder for the country.
D
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.