WHY ALL CONSERVATIVES SHOULD SUPPORT RUDY WITH ENTHUSIASM IN 2008

A CONSERVATIVE BUT RATIONAL MIND | 3/4/2007 | AL SIMMONS

[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!

[GunRunner]

No thanks.

I'll never be enthusiastic about a gun grabber.

[WhiteGuy]

everyone has an opinion.................

[Flightdeck]

"And he is a Conservative. The fact that he may not pass your 'purity test' doesn't mean that he is not."

Did you catch this thread the other day:

Rudy Giuliani: "I would like to run on the Democratic Line"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1793570/posts

[michigander]

As of post 496. there have been 171 unique posters to this thread. I don't count myself.

While it is an interesting breakdown, that anyone would take the time to do it is ............ original. Kudos to you.

I agree with you last statement 100%.

[nopardons]

Rudy is the antithesis of Hillary, on tax cutting, cutting the size of government, affirmative action, the WOT, terrorism, crime, school vouchers, charter schools, government leaving people alone to make their own choices, the military, health care, judges, dictators ( Rudy put reigns on Arafat; Hillary applauded and kissed Arafat's wife !) and much more.

Anyone who claims that there is no difference between these two people, are either lying through their teeth, or are completely devoid of any knowledge about these two people.

[stockstrader]

No way this conservative ever votes for liberals.

Count me ENTHUSIASTICALLY AGAINST him!

[devane617]

Dude, That is awesome! Thanks for the breakdown...

[nopardons]

No, what I think is that you are just a keyboard commando, who is just all talk. Thank you for proving my supposition to be correct.

[dcwusmc]

I would prefer to see someone in political office who actually RESPECTS the Constitution and the lives of the unborn. Which means I will not now or ever compromise my principles to vote for a Rat-lite. If I can't support a HiLIARy, a REAL Rat, I cannot either support a Rat-lite.

Rudy is a liberal Democrat in all but name. In other words, he is a socialist slimeball, gun-grabbing abortionist and I cannot and WILL not support him even if he were running for dog-catcher.

[Syncro]

Very true. He wants to control the use of guns across the entire Nation with Federal Law.

...we need the help of other states, and of the Federal Government to promulgate more rigorous gun purchasing requirements nation wide.

[nopardons]

Spot on!

[aligncare]

Also, a lot of people are using a candidate's conservative credentials as a basis for their support.

I'm basing my decision on a candidates resume - his job history, record of accomplishments and so on. And in my opinion, Rudy Giuliani has the best resume.

I suppose the next best resume is Romney's. He too has had experience actually running an organization - like the state government of Massachusetts. Plus he served as the CEO and organizer of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Most of the other pubbies are just legislators without any experience as a CEO. That's required to be president. Governors, retired generals and yes, mayors all have that experience in common.

[nopardons]

Oh EV, your projection complex has reached mammoth proportions, I see. LOL

[TomasUSMC]

Duncan Hunter gets my vote, so far.

[madprof98]

A month or two ago, I never would have imagined that we would have 4 or 8 more years of Democrat political control awaiting us. But that's very clear now. Hillary WON - even if she is not nominated by her party - because she has so frightened the conservatives in this country that many of them would gladly cast aside their principles in order to keep her from being elected. Some have even made a virtue of what they think is necessity by ridiculing the values the GOP has held most dear (and enshrined in its party platform) since the days of Ronald Reagan. What an ugly mess!

[Old_Mil]

Each major political party is entitled to $4 million (plus cost-of-living adjustments)8 to finance its national Presidential nominating convention. A qualified minor party may become eligible for partial convention funding based on its Presidential candidate's share of the popular vote in the preceding Presidential election. Nice try. You forgot the above, among other things. Those other things that come with all the free publicity that come along with a party stunning a March madness style upset in the political realm. Dogcatcher gains you nothing when you're trying to build a party. Today, a party must be built with exposure and money from the top down.

[Syncro]

Hunter and Rudy have exactly the same stance on partial birth abortion.

That has been shown to be false, and posted right to you. And yet you still state it, even after posting these statements:

This is the problem with the spamming and propaganda, that is being posted to FR

1/2 truths, things taken completely out of context, cherry-picked quotes (see your "cherry picked" quote false statement at the top of this thread)

I would have no qualms with people stating, ACCURATE refutations of why they are against Rudy...

(I have no qualms with you stating ACCURATE statements.)

Propaganda, false statements, INNACURATE refutations by YOU. Do the same things you complain about others doing and you look foolish.

[kellynch]

Women weren't on stage in ancient Rome or Greece either.

Anyway, you and I are agreeing. Rudy in drag is not exactly a "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert" type of show. I remember seeing those photos when they were new. We all just chuckled and thought he had a good sense of humor.

[Old_Mil]

Nopardons has been spaming several threads with outright lies about Hunter, so needless to say his credibility is shot.

[supercat]

Prescisely. But it seems some are having a little trouble figuring it out on their own. So I sought to demonstrate the result of his gun grabbin policies...where law abiding citizens, who are without question their own first line of defense, are left defenseless under the Giuliana regime.

When trying to convince people--especially liberals--of something, it's often best not to state your conclusion outright (which will raise their defenses), but rather to present some facts which can go past their defenses and then chug around in their brain until they form the conclusion which could not have penetrated their defenses directly.

This technique works best if the cognitive dissonance doesn't materialize until after the conversation is ended. At that point, their defenses may be down enough for logic to penetrate the liberal fog.