Posted on 03/04/2007 1:04:27 PM PST by Al Simmons
One recent anti-Rudy poster stated the following:
"And if Rudy does get the nod, expect the MSM to open up the hype floodgates on the cross-dressing and the gay stuff -- oh, not condemning of course (wink) but how it's a big change, how will this play in the South, does this mean gay marriage is A-OK for the GOP."
MY REPLY: And if they do it will be countered with images of Rudy's heroism during and after 9/11 and most Americans will be DISGUSTED - at the MSM, NOT at RUDY.
The issue in 2008 will be the WOT - what with Iran's creeping closer to nukes and threatening the world. Not pull-out, but how to best change strategy and WIN.
Your statement does not mean to, but it nevertheless implies that Southerners and all Socons are stupid one-issue voters. Having lived in the Bible - Belt for 8 years I can tell you this is FAR from the truth. Its almost like you have been taken in by, and are repeating the MSM's Koolaid mantra about this group of Americans - of which I consider myself to be one, BTW.
Southerners are the most patriotic of Americans, they know we are at war, they absolutely DESPISE the treasonous opposition like Murtha, and they know that Rudy is the one who will take the fight to the terrorists - and without a velvet glove a la Dubya in Iraq, but with brass knuckles.
Rudy's principled stance on judges and the 'socon' issues (ie. he is a constructionist who will appoint constructionist judges like Scalia and Roberts - confirmed by no less a Federalist Society Conservative luminary than Ted Olsen - combined with his tacit promise that he is not a 'crusader' on social issues but believes that they should be decided by the people's elected representatives is right in line with what 90% of 'socons' (like myself, for example) believe).
So the fact that he is not flip-flopping a la Mitt and trying to brown-nose this "group" is also enhancing his image as a true leader - which he is - its funny how it was the Veterans here on FR who have been the first to catch on to that. Its a 'disturbance in the force' that we are highly attuned to, if you will. We can tell a real leader from a political poseur a mile away - and Rudy is a real leader.
Therefore Rudy will not meet significant opposition in the primary voters block except from a tiny minority of 'no compromise - any time any where' radicals who are squealing like stuck pigs around here the past few weeks because their own tactics have resulted in themselves becoming increasingly marginalized and out-of-the current conservative stream, which gathering itself up into a raging torrent that will sweep Rudy into office.
I was open-minded on Rudy when the bashing started a couple of weeks ago. Now, I am 100% behind him. The misguided attempts at character assassination, and 'can't see the forest for the trees blindness' of the anti-Rdy bots around here has had this effect on many, many Freepers - and is having this effect on conservative voters across the country.
Contrary to the idiotic "Rudy=Hitlary" statements which even the biggest rube knows are BS, the difference between Rudy and Hitlary (besides that one will cut-and-run while the other will get tougher in the WOT) is that Hitlary is a doctrinaire crusading Marxist who will use the FULL power of her office to sign laws and appoint judges who will seek to limit and take away our rights as religious Americans, home-schoolers and 2nd Amendment backers - this will be THE FOCUS of her administration, NOT the WOT. She's waited nearly 40 years to implement Saul ALinsky's tactics for turing America into a Marxist-liberal state. And she is cackling about the dissent she hopes will split the GOP and give her a cakewalk to the WH. Happily, she is DEAD WRONG about this.
Rudy's priorities are straight - WOT is #1, - AND IF YOU GET NOTHING MORE OUT OF THIS POST, PLEASE GET THIS:
Rudy is a PRINCIPLED CONSERVATIVE who believes that the people should decide most of their social issues through their local elected representatives - and he will appoint conservative judges who have that philosophy - as opposed to Hitlary, who will appoint Ruth Bader Ginsburgs to every open Federal Judiciary Seat ACROSS THE NATION.
THAT is the real difference between Rudy and any national radical crusading left-wing Democrat who will run in 2008 (99% chance its Hitlary in my view).
So look at this issue beyond looking at out-of-context quotes made by Rudy when he was Mayor of a 5-1 LIBERAL city where he had to politically survive in order to save the City (which he did). He was THE most hated politician by the liberal limousine crowd that NY had ever seen. Does this sound like Rudy=Hitlary to you?
Look at his record of leadership and supporting pro-life and pro-2nd Amendment conservative candidates ALL OVER THE COUNTRY in the 2002, 2004 and 2006 elections.
That is called loyalty and patriotism. This is a man in whom I would have every confidence being back-to-back with in a political foxhole - and I cannot say that about any of the other candidates.
So please, those of you criticizing Rudy so viciously around here - get your 'gaze out of your navels' and see the 'Big Picture'.
Rudy is not a threat to conservatives, he will uphold local rights (especially through his judicial appointments), AND he will fight to protect this nation from a terrorist and a looming nuclear-terrorist peril. The alternative is to elect a Dem and concede defeat - HERE and ABROAD.
He is NO THREAT to the so-called 'socons'.
But he is a DEADLY THREAT to the terorrists and terrorist states (read:Iran) who would destroy us - and he a DEADLY THREAT to the liberal hegemony that Hitlary and her backers would LOVE to impose upon us.
It is the MSM that is playing up the 'Rudy is splitting the GOP base' FALSE stories. They are hoping to create such a split so that they have a chance to defeat him in 2008.
Well, their strategy is NOT WORKING, and he will defeat them - for all our sakes - in 2008.
Over and out!
must be fine with it.
Democrats, Liberal Republicans, pro amnesty.
And millions of Americans who live in flyover country and don't have a clue what is going on with this issue and support pro amnesty candidates.
If Rudy wins the nomination and conservatives vote for him in November but don't invest any time or money beyond that, he's guaranteed to lose the election.
The only way a candidate can win is by giving people a reason not only to vote for him but also to support his campaign. Even if Rudy were running against the Devil himself, I'd rather buy $1,000 worth of guns and ammo than send $1,000 to his campaign; I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that.
A candidate who isn't interested in conservatives' vote in 2008 isn't going to be interested in their vote in 2012. He'll thus have no reason in the intervening four years to avoid alienating them.
In New Jersey? EFG
"I'm conservative, but Rudy ain't the guy."
I'm conservative, too, and Rudy ain't.
I must just go by what Rudy has stated himself, that his policies are not much different than Clinton's.
And we know the Clinton's are Socialists.
Rudy is anti-gun rights. I can't vote for that.
Whether you like it or not, abortions are legal.
Whether you like it or not, tax payers fund welfare and have funded it, under several different names, since America was a bunch of colonies.
That quote is prior to his being elected mayor, from a lefty paper, and has less than nothing whatsoever to do with what Rudy, as president would do.
And FWIW, the nation, as a whole, doesn't see abortion as a top priority, to get worked up about. Since you care so much about it, how many abortions have you stopped? How many pregnant women/girls, have you personally counseled, and how many unwanted babies have you adopted?
Liberal judges and activists have already stuck their noses into social issues, so it's going to require a conservative government to undo the damage.
Had liberals just left well enough alone I would have agreed with you.
What law compelled Rudy Giuliani to file his lawsuits against gun manufacturers? I am certainly not aware of any. Please, educate me.
No you're not and you described my position most excellently.
Thanks,
L
I think that is why he uses RR's qoute about not saying anything bad about other Repubs.
Rudy is a gun-grabbing, unborn-baby killing Eastern Establishment LIBERAL. He is no kind of Conservative (unless it's the "Conserve Big Government" sort that's becoming popular here on FR). No way EVER will I support or vote for such a person. Him or McLame or Romney... three birds of a feather.
Indeed, but I would posit that he was not driven by ideology but rather by convenience. As such, I don't think the terms "liberal" or "conservative" are really applicable.
Ain't happening in this life time. Ain't gonna get on board with no person that agrees with premediated murder of unborn children. Like it or not, so sorry, ain't gonna vote for Rudy. He is a liberal. A liberal is a liberal is a liberal, is a socialist, is a communist. You vote for him if you want too, but ain't no way in hell that me or my wife are going to vote for this guy.
Do you have a source for that contention?
We routinely criticize leftists here. Nobody seems to be upset when we criticize the likes of the Clintons, Obama, Reid, Gore, etc. It seems that some here think that a leftist with an "R" after his name should be exempt.
Dittos to JimRob here. Rudy is not conservative and it seems every election since Reagan our candidates slide a little further left on this issue or that. There is less and less difference between the Pubbies and Dems on many issues today and this slide needs to be stopped.
Just my two cents, but thats how I feel about it.
While the Republican majority in congress was failing miserably to cut spending from '94 to '01, Rudy cut spending in NYC to less than the rate of inflation for his entire 8 years.
Yet some at this conservative site seemingly don't care about fiscal conservatism.
Some, like the guy who voted for the massive Perscriptions Drug Benefit, No Child Left Behind, The '05 transporation bill and on and freeping big-spending on...
Whoopee!
Bump!
And if he put a D behind his name he couldn't beat Hillary or Obama in the Dem primaries. How can anyone think he'd beat the Dem candidate in the general?
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.