Posted on 03/05/2007 1:11:47 PM PST by meg88
Today I have seen the future and that future is President Rudy.
It's not that I'm voting for Rudy, but the vacuum to be filled has been filled.
Consider this:
Rudy Giuliani and Tony Snow are the only guys who have had to have fire marshals bar people from entering due to overcapacity in a very big room.
In the green room, Giuliani's speech was the only one to cause everyone to sit down, shut up and watch.
More and more, the conservatives at CPAC are realigning. You have the Brownback folks, the Mitt folks, and the people who are headed quickly to Rudy. And you know what? They are more or less cheerful in doing it.
They've found the guy who knows he needs them to get in the door. They know the calculus Rudy has made -- the conservatives aren't selling out their principles; Rudy is telling them he won't impose his social view on them, but he'll keep them safe.
After all, abortion is not an issue when a terrorist has killed you.
Look for all guns to turn on Rudy now. He's been the frontrunner all along and now the rest of the pack realizes it.
The reception he got at CPAC should worry them.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
And I suspect there will be. Different debate forums will set different rules, regarding how a candidate is polling in order to get a microphone. I'm not sure how that will all play out.
I'd call for a plea to FR to stop the venom. I've gotten WAY too many freepmails from Freepers who have been here many years who have no desire to be a drama queen with an opus thread, but they're gone just the same.
There's no way in hell that is good for this forum.
And nobody appointed me "Resignation Central." I don't know how many others might have left without a squeak. I'm telling you that it's happening and most freepers won't even notice. But it is a great loss all the same.
I'm willing to guess what will happen next year in electoral politics, but I don't have to guess what will happpen to this forum if the venom isn't stopped right now.
I'm not yelling at you, personally, of course. I'm yelling at the forum. Do not let this continue.
He is against gun rights, for abortion and loves to hang out with the gay crowd.
He's a democrat.
Not goign to happen. He is an unelectable rino.
My official prediction is that Chuck Norris will win the presidency in 2008. :)
Agreed, and that's an outrage. On the other hand, a Republican has been in the White House for 18 of the last 26 years, and for six of those years, Republicans also controlled both houses of Congress, and yet the only thing we have to show is a ban on partial birth abortion that may not survive legal challenges. The only way to end abortion is to amend the Constitution, and under the Article V of the Constitution, amendments are initiated by Congress or the States, not the President. And while the President nominates judges to the SCOTUS, the best they will do is reverse Roe v. Wade, which will not end abortions, but rather return the issue back to the states, and the blue states -- where the vast majority of abortions are performed -- will continue to allow abortion on demand.
My point is that while abortion is a very important moral issue, the president has very limited power to change the staus quo, so let's not make decisions solely upon that issue. In contrast, the POTUS has huge amount of power with respect to national defense, the war on terror, and economic issues, and so in choosing a president, those are the real issues that deserve our attention.
When you bash Rudy Giuliani for leaving his "wife" remember to include that she was first and foremost a self-centered "actress" playing a part in The Vagina Monologues.In my view Rudy Giuliani is the one candidate who can beat Hillary Clinton; the others lack the a) name-recognition; b) spine to withstand the Saul Alinsky destruction; c) ability to think on one's feet in debate; d) proven ability to handle a big executive responsibility in a large-scale terror attack (eight million residents during September 11).
Rudy's fiscal credentials have been noted by columnists from George Will to Human Events. He cut taxes in New York and made a surplus where vast debt existed courtesy of Dinkens. He cut the murder rate from 2100 to 600 with other crime stat improvements proportional. Turned off the welfare spigot and put people to work instead, a prime aim of social conservatism.
I am an NRA member (including the right to bear six fundraising solicitations a week) and I understand what Rudy did in New York was to cut crime. I think he gets that you don't come to Iowa and tell Wal-Mart they can't sell ammo, etc.
Rudy has the fiscal conservatism and the strength on national security which were the hallmarks of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Both these conservative icons stressed national security and government respect for taxpayer dollars.
Goldwater in his later years endorsed gay rights per the National Review article by William F. Buckley. Reagan began as a pro-choice Democrat and evolved on the issue of abortion.
I see Rudy evolving on abortion as well, and where it really matters (judges) he publicly says he would name the constructionalists such as Roberts, Alito and Scalia.
A win by Hillary-Obama will put a Communist and a Muslim in the White House, and will remove America from the war on Islamofascist terror. In which case we infidels will be the victims.
We win the White House, we win the battle against Islamofascism, we get more judges like Roberts, Alito and Scalia and all of that is a strong step for everything worth fighting for.
I am too much a realist--having gone door-to-door for Goldwater--to risk the unthinkable damage a Hillary Clinton victory would cause.
Newt Gingrich's Contract With America had nothing about guns, gays or abortion--and yet it was a platform for a tremendous victory against Clintonian Communism in 1994.
I appreciate Duncan Hunter's coming to Santa Fe in 2000 to speak on behalf of our former-minister Senate candidate Bill Redmond, but we don't have four years and a billion dollars to carry a single-digit candidate to the White House.
Much the same is true of Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, and others.
Perhaps as you say, as a vice-presidential candidate a conservative could be an asset towards victory.
A team effort will be needed to get everything done--and it begins with the top-of-the-ticket victory--which must be an electoral, not a moral, one.
There's some good in that man. He's got a summer to sell me.
Congressmen face a nearly impossible task for the reasons you mention.
Let's take a closer look at the only one who became President as arguably being a Representative in a far different time.
James A. Garfield.
He didn't campaign to become President before his nomination. He was a very successful Civil War general for the Union, and he parlayed that into a House seat. Eventually he became Floor Leader which is the equivalent of House Majority Leader today.
He had been appointed as US Senator from his state back when state legislatures appointed Senators instead of them being selected by popular vote. So, he also arguably was a Senator, although he hadn't yet been sworn in.
He was no insignifcant figure. He was a leading politician and public figure of his day.
Still, he did not become the Republican nominee until the 36th ballot vote at the 1880 convention. He was a compromise candidate for the delegates.
There is no comparison to today's elections. That's just the way it is. Duncan Hunter, if he becomes the Republican nominee, and certainly if he wins the election, will be breaking new ground entirely.
I'm probably not telling you anything you don't already know, Labyrinthos, merely using the reply to your post to set some facts out.
To suggest that Duncan Hunter's candidacy is the longshot of the century is also probably the understatement of the century.
Excellent email, Phil!!
Glad you got it read!
"Today I have seen the future and that future is President Rudy."
Please save us, Fred Thompson!
Apparently you know everything about everything. You have absolutely no idea what our discussions were or if we even had any. Perhaps they got online and decided for themselves.
Rather than make inquiries, you make kneejerk assertions, and I will not again commit the mistake of posting a comment in your direction.
Thanks for the ping --- it is good to see Saul Alinsky mentioned --- never, never, underestimate the tactics Hillary will employ. She will do anything to win the election. She must be defeated.
Encouraging.
You are correct , the conservative right does not have a Horse in this race. I will agree with you on that. The Republican will win though, that I promise you.
Like you, I too see this as an epic issue with profound demographic and cultural impact on the order of a pervasive nuclear winter killing us slowly that makes the WOT look like a minor train wreck by comparison. I also struggle to keep the gruesome reality of this issue visible while avoiding incendiary rhetoric. It's tough.
I see more and more staunch conservatives are getting it about Rudy!
I got your email today, it's a very good one.
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.