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!
What are you talking about?
Ask pharmboy.
What do you mean?
"This is NOT a game, the fate of the US and our very lives are at stake, literally."
Exactly correct. Which is why it is imperative that we NOT EVEN THINK about McGiuliRomney (or any other RINO/CINO) sitting in the Oval Office. So now I guess you'll stop shilling for these losers?
Personally, I hold people like you responsible for the democrats gaining a majority in Congress. If all you can do is nominate RINOS/CINOs and insist that they are the only ones electable, why is it such a shock to you that people will vote for REAL democrats instead of Rats-lite?
No, they weren't.
Rudy was trying to control how many guns could be legally sold in other states, as a way to keep guns out of his state. It's the same thing he's dreamed about for years. The man is obsessed.
He said when he announced the lawsuit that gun manufacturers had produced many more weapons than could be need for the "legitimate" purposes of hunting and law enforcement. Apparently self-defense is illegitimate. Apparently he wants gunmankers to produce only as many weapons as the police force needs, and let gunshops nationwide go out of business. And apparently a lot of so-called capitalists and conservatives are just dandy with that.
I suppose he thought he was really moderating his position when he told Larry King he only wanted gun control on handguns. Yeah, way to bend, Rudy.
WHO?
Good for YOU Al Simmons! I hear ya!
Ted Olson.
Oh. Forgot he was involved in that.
The reality is that it is March 4, 2007. We still have nearly a year left during which there will be debates and other information which will allowing primary voters to make an informed decision, not one based on fear or misperceptions.
I am looking forward to hearing details on important issues such as the war, the economy, illegal immigration, as well as social issues from each one of the candidates. I haven't made up my mind yet and I feel in no rush to do so.
In the meantime, I hope we refrain from extreme pronouncements about the Republican candidates. Your title "WHY ALL CONSERVATIVES SHOULD SUPPORT RUDY WITH ENTHUSIASM IN 2008" seems premature and overly provocative, IMO. Let's have a primary candidacy, and then when a candidate is chosen we can begin the (humble) calls for unity against the Democratic opponent.
You go Gurn!
Women USED to be actresses PRIOR to just a bit before the time of Shakespeare, when the Church ruled that women could no longer be on stage. When that happened, boys and young men were forced to portray women, in plays and did so in as realistic a manner as possible.
OTOH, once girls and women retook the stage, men and boys, from around the mid 1700s, began to do OVER THE TOP burlesques; doing female parts in a way that one knew that they were men and boys doing caricatures of women. The makeup and clothes and gestures being completely nonrepresentational of normal females.
Elite boarding schools and Ivy colleges ( all of them, BTW, founded by, for, and with religious affiliations ) were the first to do HAIRY LEG SHOWS! It then filtered down into other social strata. And nobody, NOBODY, until just now, on FR, has EVER taken any of this to be something "peculiar", strange, proving that those who engage in these skits were "cross dressers", homosexual, nor anything else even remotely connected to that world.
Any man who has ever gone to boarding school, many public high schools, college, and/or belongs to some club, in this nation, has probably, at some time or another, either been in a similar skit or seen one. The loud protestations, now, on FR, against Rudy, for having dressed up, is either completely disingenuous, or based in abject, mordant, blatant stupidity.
I guess you prefer to see Hillary in the Oval Office and a Dem controlled Congress.
And this pro gun, pro fun, lapsed Catholic will cancel YOu out.
Go read up on it.
He's convinced many...maybe not here, but I think people can and should think for themselves.
AGREED 1,000 percent.
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.