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!
"Why don't you Rudybots go create a RudyRepublic.com site and leave us the Hell alone. Just because we don't support your liberal Republican of a candidate doesn't mean we hate Rudy personally. Rudy's a liberal, and you can look down at us all you want with your hoity-toity attitude until the cows come home but it still won't change the fact that Rudy is a liberal."
Well said!
I realize that I am not as smart as the Rudybots, someday I may be, but until then I will not ever place a vote for him.
So, other candidates should just be excluded? Why even have a primary then?
This is NOT a game, the fate of the US and our very lives are at stake, literally.
No matter's who's President, the WOT will have to be addressed. Rudy will be just another Nixon, a big-government liberal who'll hold the line on foreign policy while doing virtually nothing about advancing conservatism.
Thank you, Al.
This was well thought out and well written. I am very conservative across the board, but would be happy to vote for Giuliani. I really appreciate you doing this.
I used to travel to New York both before and during Rudy's tenure and he did what no one believed could be done. Thanks to him, I stopped hating going there.
I have no regional prejudices. Bill Clinton was from my beloved south, and so is John Edwards. There are conservatives in NYC. They are just outnumbered by the "I want the government to give me stuff" crowd, but they are there.
Hmmm, on spending if Rudy is socialist then Duncan Hunter is a flaming communist.
The question here is what are those who are opposed to Rudy going to do when he gets the nomination and when he becomes the President?
But that doesn't mean that Reagan didn't believe in challenging another Republican on their politics. Remember, Reagan is the only Republican to EVER challenge a sitting Republican president for the party's nomination.
lmao. After what I was reading last night I wouldn't cast my vote for him. Anti gun & pro gay is just not the way IMO. ~P~ big EFG
Many here concur with the Founding Fathers' view of moral absolutes.
I urge you to cease ceding ground to those who would whitewash the Bible out of society--either your way, by what may be an aversion to discussing it as regards the relevant moral trajectory of candidates--or permitting to come to power evil rulers who very clearly would act to make illegal such discussion--as your boogeyman Hillary would (and she most certainly would)--as would Rudy, from what seems to be his level of genuine support for people of faith.
As regards your objection to my Rudy/Caligula parallel, when one throws a rock into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one got hit. That's not you I nailed, I hit the target--Rudy's CHARACTER. The truth hurts. I say the parallel is appropriate.
I stand by my comments.
It's SO easy for you and your ilk to take things out of context/cherry-pick and use these things for propaganda. But when asked to actually PROVE something, you can't do it.
Prove that Rudy and Hillary and Bill are all alike, or stop making that claim!
I don't care if you criticize Guiliani, even all the tiresome predictable spam is easy to scroll down and avoid (how many hundreds of times do we need to see it, really). I was talking about personal attacks against other members of the board. The insults have been vicious and personal lately and it seems just about any term is acceptable against a Guiliani supporter.
That's is not what I was taught. We are supposed to vote for the people who most nearly reflect our values and principles. This "vote for the likely winner" is new to me. And, being conservative, I am suspicious of it.
Why do you believe Rudy Giuliani would be more likely to win than Mitt Romney? While I suspect Mitt's being a Mormon probably won't help him, I don't see that as being nearly as big a strike against him as Rudy's gun lawsuits or sactuary-city actions are against him.
Mitt has been preaching conservative positions and thus has some realistic likelihood of gaining support (time and money, not just votes) from the conservative base. Rudy seems to hold the conservative base in concept; even if conservatives vote for him, they won't provide the other support he's going to need.
Post #222 well said
"Jim, I'm wondering if you're declaring here and now that, if Rudy Giuliani were to get the Republican nomination, you would either not vote or vote third party. Could you clarify that for me, please?"
Not speaking for Jim, but for myself. If it comes down to Rudy/Hillary I do so declare that I will vote 3rd party. And I would definitely being rooting for rooty to get his butt smacked from one side of the country to the other. Only then could the republicans regain their conservative roots and rebuild the damage he will have caused.
Well said!
Lucker, I think you left out that he will support cross dressers in the miltary. :-0
Rudy is the only one who has been beating the Dems consistently in polls.
What are you smoking?..
Hitlery and Rudy believe the same way about MOST THINGS...
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.