Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WHY ALL CONSERVATIVES SHOULD SUPPORT RUDY WITH ENTHUSIASM IN 2008
A CONSERVATIVE BUT RATIONAL MIND | 3/4/2007 | AL SIMMONS

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!


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 1dumbvanity; allaboutme; attentionwhore; blahblahblah; brownnosers; duncanhunter; duncanslob; fallacy; fearmongering; giuliani; hillary; lipstickliberal; lookatme; me2ers; pompoms; rino; rudy; rudyhitlery; rudytherino; rury; thatissogay; uselessvanity; wot; yesmen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 741-743 next last
To: aligncare

Well I am not a Sosial Conservative, I am pro-life, pro gun, and I never said he was a baby killer.


581 posted on 03/04/2007 7:45:05 PM PST by stockpirate (Rudy would be Very Bad for this country and Very Bad for the Republican Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 558 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons

My dad, a retired Marine, says it only takes one "to hell with you" to do away with a hundred "hurray for me's".


582 posted on 03/04/2007 7:45:47 PM PST by ryan71 (You can hear it on the coconut telegraph...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aligncare
Yes, I agree with you.

While resumes may not tell the whole story, they certainly DO tell quite a lot about what a candidate has done. Words are just not enough anymore; if they ever were, in looking at a candidate to vote for.

583 posted on 03/04/2007 7:47:10 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 532 | View Replies]

To: Syncro
Now, now, that was never "proved". nether, as some of you claim, has it been "proved" that the cases against Hunter have been dropped.
584 posted on 03/04/2007 7:50:07 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 537 | View Replies]

To: kellynch

True, but women WERE part of the roving "jongulars" of the Dark Ages.


585 posted on 03/04/2007 7:52:02 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate
I would vote for Hillery before I would cast ONE vote for him!

You'd rather see Hillary Clinton in the WH as opposed to Rudy? All I can say is, wow. With all due respect (seriously).

586 posted on 03/04/2007 7:52:45 PM PST by proud American in Canada ("We can, and we will prevail.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
I stand corrected. This is a conservative forum. Where's the part about this being a social conservative forum only...I must have missed that part.

So, GWB can spend like a liberal, turn a blind eye to the Mexican invasion like a liberal, increase entitlement programs like a liberal...but, as long as he holds personal views that are socially conservative - he's a conservative.

Rudy Giuliani can cut taxes (23 times), reduce the size of city government, privatize 32,000 city-owned apartments, reduce crime through tough, smart policing, remove 600,000 from the welfare roles, come out for school vouchers. But, because he holds personal views on abortion that are different than your's (which means nothing in practicality because the president can't change abortion)...Because of those personal views - not what he does - he's a liberal.

How could I have been so blind. Now I get it. The social conservative thought police simple require you to think a certain way to be accepted as a "conservative".

My bad.

587 posted on 03/04/2007 7:53:01 PM PST by aligncare (No, the science is NOT settled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 574 | View Replies]

To: aligncare
The rules changed for renewing...this happened after I had two carries for 19 and 17 years. Rudy changed the rules and made it almost IMPOSSIBLE for law-abiding citizens who ALREADY had carries to renew. Rudy reduced the number of carries for lawful citizens by a significant amount.

30,000 carries in NYC down to 3,000 during Rudy's term. He wasn't responsible for taking ALL of them, but he sure took my two.

588 posted on 03/04/2007 7:53:13 PM PST by Pharmboy ([She turned me into a] Newt! in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: aligncare

You are avoiding the issue that I brought up to you while trying to change the subject. That's a typical liberal tactic. You said this is a republican forum, I gave you information that proves you wrong. Now, if you want to acknowledge that you were wrong I'll be happy to answer your questions. If not, then no need for us to waste time with each other. As Jim said, FR is a conservative forum, not a republican forum that you claim it to be. Care to recant?

You were saying?


589 posted on 03/04/2007 7:54:04 PM PST by dmw (Aren't you glad you use common sense, don't you wish everybody did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 577 | View Replies]

To: Old_Mil
Obviously, "spam" is the newest word to be misused.

I haven't EVER "spammed" a thread. And no, I am not "spreading lies" either. It is a fact that Hunter is a PROTECTIONIST as well as being a BIG GOVERNMENT guy. He also was caught in the House Banking Scandal; not to mention the fact that he was connected with Cunningham and Wilkes and others, with problematic pasts.

590 posted on 03/04/2007 7:55:47 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 539 | View Replies]

To: alicewonders
You are viewing this from your own bias and your own problems faced, in becoming a parent. Coming from that position, it your own thin skin and bias, that colors your posts to me and don't reflect the views of most Americans, for whom abortion is not a primary concern.

You have gone completely off topic and have completely misrepresented what I originally posted to another person.

In a world free of abortion and moral people, there would be NO babies for anyone to adopt. Take a minute or three and think about that. If you got what you wanted, there would be NO BABIES ANYWHERE for the childless to adopt.

Unlike you, I won't use this thread, nor any other, to sink to your level and allow your baiting and personal attacks to drag me into a silly flame war.

591 posted on 03/04/2007 8:03:07 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: dmw
I see all the pros there - btw, thanks for providing that lists of pros for me.

However, in reviewing all those pros, I seem to be one pro shy. Can I still self identify as a conservative? How about being two pros short? Three? Or, is it all pro or no go?

Gee, I'm so confused. And all this time I've been calling myself a conservative. However, I am expecting my conservative handbook by FReep mail any time now.

I have promised to study it and get my thinking straight. Kay?
592 posted on 03/04/2007 8:05:39 PM PST by aligncare (No, the science is NOT settled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 575 | View Replies]

To: hellinahandcart

I wish I could support him. I'm taking a wait and see attitude.


593 posted on 03/04/2007 8:08:24 PM PST by cyborg (No I don't miss the single life at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

My apologies, then. I don't wish to engage in mischaracterisations of you.


594 posted on 03/04/2007 8:08:24 PM PST by aligncare (No, the science is NOT settled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: Mom MD
Why would you sell your soul (literally - if you are a Baptist I assume you believe what God says in His Word) to support Rudy?

That's odd. I didn't think my eternal soul depended on whom I support in an election.

Could you point me to that verse?

595 posted on 03/04/2007 8:08:39 PM PST by Gurn (Islam is a cancer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: aligncare
>>>>>I stand corrected. This is a conservative forum. Where's the part about this being a social conservative forum only...I must have missed that part.

You miss an awful lot. I don't know how many times this has to be two posted, before you get the message. Listen up. The first points listed by Jim are two big time social conservative issues. The others touch upon social conservatism to one degree or another.

As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.

Instead of working on being a bigger smartaleck then the other Rudybots, it would serve you right to get properly informed.

596 posted on 03/04/2007 8:08:42 PM PST by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 587 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

1. You have repeatedly lied about Hunter's position on abortion and birth control.

2. Hunter is not a protectionist. Under a Hunter administration, foreign trade will still occur with countries of goodwill. However, countries that use trade as a weapon against ours (like the Chinese) will be held accountable. By the way, China may attack Taiwan soon if you've seen the latest. I'll refrain from saying "I told you Nixonites so" because it's so obvious.

3. Every Republican has been a big government guy since Reagan left office. You didn't need to read their lips to come to that conclusion. Hunter was being a team player. You're going to condemn him for something that you Rudy supporters are constantly badgering others about when it comes to not supporting your liberal guy?


597 posted on 03/04/2007 8:15:39 PM PST by Old_Mil (Duncan Hunter in 2008! A Veteran, A Patriot, A Reagan Republican... http://www.gohunter08.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 590 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Unlike you, I won't use this thread, nor any other, to sink to your level and allow your baiting and personal attacks to drag me into a silly flame war.

Yes, I'm sure you'll just rise above it all - gassy emissions have a tendency to do that.

598 posted on 03/04/2007 8:17:29 PM PST by alicewonders (I like Duncan Hunter for President in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 591 | View Replies]

To: gobus1
Here's what I think about Romney's "Mormon stuff":

Anybody who'll fall for Mormon theology, well, he doesn't need the launch codes.

599 posted on 03/04/2007 8:18:35 PM PST by Gurn (Islam is a cancer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 493 | View Replies]

To: alicewonders

LOL!! Good one!


600 posted on 03/04/2007 8:21:55 PM PST by dmw (Aren't you glad you use common sense, don't you wish everybody did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 598 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 741-743 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson