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!
good summary.
unfortunately, if he is ultimately the nominee, the socons here are being whipped into a frenzy against him. when you see Ted Olson and Sessions demonized on FR, that's very clear. you said above that you thought it might be "theatrics" - it isn't, the people here posting that they would not vote for him in the general against Hillary, believe them, they aren't going to. and they don't really care if that means Hillary takes it - to them, its more important for the socons to have veto power over the republican party, then to stop Hillary from walking into the oval office. its the "victory through defeat" approach.
They were despicable is what they were.
Apparently nopardons thinks it's better to just kill the unwanted in this world. She's supporting a candidate who has no problems with sucking the brains out of partially born children after all.
L
Keep in mind Al, that the same Gay Pride parade that Rudy marched in also had NAMBLA marching right in front of him.
NAMBLA in case you are unread is National Man Boy Love Assoc. Their moot is something like; "After 8 is too late" meaning they need to molest young boys before they are 8 years old.
This is done to INJECT them with seamn which is full of male testorone and freaks the young boy's system out as well as sexually imprints him
So vote for the preverty if you want, but he won't make past the primaries.
I guess I missed that. There are few, if any people on this board who will tolerate someone else speaking for them.
oh sure, we'll prevail - easy. the last time the clintons held the white house, their 8 years of stewardship led to the destruction of the two tallest buildings in the United States, and part of the Pentagon.
give it to them again, and you'll have a WMD go off on US soil. and when that happens, you won't have to worry about any constitutional issues regarding abortion or gay civil union anymore - Hillary and a Dem congress will suspend the constitution in the wake of WMD attacks on US soil.
Rudy is a DEMOCRAT in sheeps clothing.....he may be a fiscal conservative but his conservatism stops there.
I'll vote for Duncan, maybe Newt or Maybe Romney....but NEVER would I prostitute my values and vote for Rudy....
While Mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani filed baseless lawsuits against gun manufacturers and distributors for the purpose of making it harder for people to exercise their Second Amendment Rights. He also sought to prevent enforcement of immigration laws.
Call those "social" issues if you like, but I can't see how any conservative could support such actions.
Indeed it is.
It would be nice if we don't have to choose between two candidates we don't like. The nice thing about the primaries is that we get to choose which candidate we least disagree with. There might even be a selection.
In the general election, I always vote against the candidate I hate most.
We had it all scripted out about four years ago. Bill Frist, an accomplished doctor who became a successful Senate leader, was going to be anointed. Okay, he screwed up.
Then George Allen was going to lead us to the Promised Land. He screwed up, too.
We've got no Plan B.
Giuliani obviously has the billboard name to win, but it looks like it would be without any enthusiasm from many conservatives. McCain could also win the nomination, at least, but without the same conservative support. He's just a nasty guy, though, so if my political theory about likability winning the general election, he's the only one who could give Hillary a chance.
So, here 20 months before the general election, I'm just sulking. Angry.
While true, I think this should be put on the proper context. What Rudy did was make it impossible for law abiding citizens to protect themselves. And as a citizen on the street, who has the first line of defense? Of course, the citizen is the first in line to defend himself. No, not the police nor the HHS..they won't be there. It's just you against the thug. And Rudy wants you defendless.
Hunter is a congressman. What does he know about organizing a government? He is one of hundreds of legislators. Thompson's experience is as a legislator and actor.
Again, where are the job skills necessary to be effective in organizing an administration of thousands of employees?
Rudy Giuliani ran the largest city in America - and did it successfully. He's had real accomplishments in his career. Whether it was breaking up organized crime as US Attorney for the Souther District or as Assistant Attorney General in the Reagan White House or overseeing the economic revitalization of New York City...the man has a solid resume.
Americans select their presidents from the middle. And they don't elect senators or congressmen. They seem to want to hire governors, ex military, even industrialists for president. Rudy has the necessary executive experience for this job, in my humble opinion.
Well said!
This is probably the true picture of most conservatives....rather than a democrat, I'd vote for Rudy.
In the meantime I'll hold out for a Hunter or Thompson, or any damn body who is reasonably conservative and supports border security, firearms ownership, and keeping islamist terror away from my neighborhood.
(It's a BIG neighborhood)
PS: McCain is a whole 'nother story.
No, my question is,why is YOUR STATE GOVERNMENT and YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT fine with it?
You still have elections out there, don't you?
Between his views on abortion, and the fact that he was behind some of the first law suits against gun manufacturers, I don't think that I can vote for the man.
Say what you will, that "Rudy will save the US from the terrorists!" Maybe. But at what cost? What will the America that's been saved look like?
Mark
Hey, Al... having just read through the first hundred or so posts it appears some don't agree with you, however I think it's great! Not all of it will fall on deaf ears.
Jim - I appreciate and respect your sentiments at this time. There are many on FR who have voiced there heartfelt sentiment that there is no way they will support Rudy even if he is the nominee. During the primary season, it is their right and duty to fight for the candidate that best reflects their views. For those of you who have strong disagreements with some of Rudy's positions, you have no reason to settle at this time. Pragmatism voting based on "electibility" is too much of a compromise at this juncture. Perhaps in extreme circumstances, this may be appropriate but it is generally not a good idea. While one might consider a potential Hillary candidacy as such an extreme circumstance (quite understandable), on balance I do not think so. I feel it is important to give one's views as much as a place at the table as possible. I offer the Toomey vs Spector race as a prime example of pragmatism gone awry.
I say these comments as a New Yorker who has always been and still is a strong supporter of Rudy. In this thread, Al has articulated a number of issues that touch on the case for supporting Rudy. However, as far as the primary goes, there are many here who will not, and probably should not based upon their viewpoints, support Rudy at this time. Regardless of the merits of Rudy, these people will not be primary supporters. Even though I support Rudy on the merits, I feel much kinship and respect for those people who have expressed their strong anti Rudy rationale. In fact, there is no reason for these people to have to deal with the possibility of supporting Rudy right now. While I appreciate Al's attempt at generating Rudy support, I will not do so on FR during the primaries.
If the race in 2008 comes down to what I predicted in 2002 - Rudy vs Hillary, then I will be getting in the game big time and will be challenging those that will not be supporting Rudy with enthusiasm, let alone not supporting him at all. Right now it is premature for such discussions. My belief is that the "No Way Rudy under any circumstance" feeling is more emotional then rational thinking. I believe it is a sentiment more reflective of the current feeling underlying the primary. I understand fully the depth of honest feeling about these sentiments. There is no reason to feel otherwise at this time. The current focus should be on the primary battle. I will be enthusiastically supporting the Republican candidate (even if it is McCain - god forbid) over the Democratic candidate.
Jim, if in fact Rudy does become the nominee of the Republican party, then you as well as others who have expressed their sentiments on FR will have to deal with and make a decision on that reality. There is an incredible difference between Rudy and Hillary. While far from an ideal choice (a tremendous understatement for some), I suspect that regardless of your dislike of Rudy as the nominee this choice will be a very simple one upon any reasonable reflection. If such a race occurs, I look forward to a good discussion with you.
As this is the first time I have corresponded with you, I want to express my sincere thanks to you for this site. For now, I say to you God speed on your fight for your candidate.
I don't condemn those who vote third-party--from a related troubled conscience. I do insist that anyone who stays home and doesn't vote at all is foolish. FOOLISH. It is a stewardship issue, scripturally.
I don't understand your statements.
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.