Posted on 03/13/2007 5:25:25 AM PDT by Ouderkirk
The] "Hustle" may have been a line dance we did back in the days of disco, but today it's what GOP leadership and a complicit media are trying to do to the voters responsible for the Republican Party's successes since Ronald Reagan.
Realistic chances of winning notwithstanding, there are no fewer than 13 Republicans in the contest for the 2008 presidential sweepstakes. But to hear party leadership and the media spin promote the candidates, one easily gets the impression that John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are not just the only candidates, but that McCain and Romney are the opening act for Giuliani as he awaits his coronation.
This is a ruse, a con, and in brief, an attempt to hustle the voters. GOP leadership is trying to "Bob Dole" us. They have, in effect, met in the smoke-filled back room of a private club and decided amongst themselves who they want in 2008. Their problem is how to deceive the voters into believing that said pick is of the voters' choosing.
Their solution: hand pick the candidate, truncate the primaries, shove the candidate down our collective throats vis-à-vis the media's promoting, interviewing and discussing (ad nauseum) McCain, Romney and Giuliani, but in such a way as to always have Giuliani shine brighter. Then, when he has garnered the nomination, we the voters will be told, "Yes, it is true he is a little more moderate than we may like," but if we don't vote for him, Hillary will win and hell will freeze over.
To which, allowing that same has no basis in theological truth, I respond, "If there be a hell on earth, and it freezes over because I vote my conscience and Hillary wins, I'll walk on ice until the party lets the voters truly have a say."
Now, my scenario may not be completely accurate, but you can bet I'm not far off base. One thing is for certain – of the 13 Republican candidates, only three of them are being touted – and don't tell me it's the fault of the other candidates, because a week ago this same media (Fox News included) was trying to convince us that the corpse of Anna Nicole Smith was newsworthy.
I watched as Republican pundits, Fox News, GOP talking heads, and other cable news shows all downplayed the tremendous success of presidential candidate Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., in the South Carolina straw poll. McCain finished two votes ahead of Giuliani, who in turn finished four votes ahead of candidate Hunter.
Even though Hunter finished in a statistical dead-heat with each, garnering 24 percent, of the vote, Giuliani was declared "the clear winner" and "the presumptive Republican presidential favorite." While these comments were without question a slap in the face to McCain, it was Hunter who they chose to disparage the most.
After all, went the reasoning on Fox News, Hunter had his son campaigning for him the entire week before the straw poll – to which Hunter, in classic fashion responded, "You know, I woke up to ... one of the commentators saying that the only reason that Hunter beat all those guys in South Carolina is because his Marine son has been there for a week. Well, I looked down at that army of consultants – everybody who was vertical in South Carolina was hired by the other guys – and I said, 'You know, that is a good match-up: One Marine versus 550 consultants.' We did have the advantage!" (From Hunter's speech given at Conservative Political Action Conference, Washington, D.C., March 3.)
My point is this: Giuliani is being touted as the "Nation's Mayor" and "the presumptive favorite" by the media and most of the GOP armada, but there are a dozen other candidates, and none more honestly conservative than Duncan Hunter.
But the armada and the media don't want you to know that. They want the voters to think there is a choice of one, and if we don't go along with said choice the sky will fall. They will tell us that our picks/choices can't win and we have to go with their guy.
It is not, however, about whether or not their choice can win – it is about whether or not their choice is fit to win. I've seen Rudy as a prosecutor, I've seen him as mayor, and I've seen him dressed up in his blond wig with heavy eye shadow and makeup, strutting about in drag (1997 mayoral spoof of Victor/Victoria).
Now, I'd like to see the media and the GOP armada of talking heads consistently acknowledge that there are a dozen other candidates, and only one of them a true conservative.
So vote for a guy who advocated public funding of abortions and compares his policies to those of Clinton - now that would be the only sane alternative.
Very good point - all "hustle" references in leads should be outlawed until further notice! :-)
We were discussing Rosie O'donnell Giuliani, not Duncan Hunter. I know you can write and focus much better than that! Stay on subject here.
And if a guy who supports public funding of abortion, gun control, and illegal alien sanctuaries gets elected, than we can all say that it just worked out. This must be the new Orwellian version of FR.
The reason Dole got the nomination had more to do with who wanted to take the bullet for the GOP against Clinton. Any GOP candidate would have been a longshot in 1996. Especially since Perot was running again as a third party candidate. Perot received 8.4% of the popular vote in 1996. Clinton beat Dole 49.2% to 40.7% and in electoral votes 379-159. I can't imagine any Rep candidate doing much better against Clinton in 1996.
"Well I think the Republican Party is better off without people like you, please stay home on election day."
But-but-but I thought the Republican party was the Big tent party, and that we are supposed to embrace homos, abortionists, gun grabbers, illegal aliens, moderats. I guess everyone is welcome except conservatives.
Two New Yorkers vying for the big prize. How representative of the country as a whole!!!
My response is in the post you are responding to (which almost makes me seem like a mind-reader, answering your question before you even ask it :-):
But I did not intend, and do not support, equating Giuliani TO Hitler.
So no, I did not intend, and do not support, calling Giuliani a mass murderer. He simply supports mass murder.
If we were going to start arresting people, which we are not and I am not going to do either, it would be the people who actually perform the abortions and the people who order the abortions to be performed, not people who simply use their free speech rights to advocate for the murder of our children.
I think it's enough to strongly oppose him in the Republican primary when he is running against candidates equally strong on the war on terror, equally fiscally conservative, but who speak out for the rights of the unborn against the brutal attacks of the abortionists.
If Rudy was the ONLY republican running who believed in a strong war on terror and tax cuts, I might be persuaded to choose those over someone who was strongly pro-life but was wrong on those two issues.
Thank God I don't have to choose a man of low moral standards who support abortion, because we DO have other choices.
He was a great leader when the war started, i.e. when we were attacked by the terrorists on 9/11. Giuliani showed a great leadership during one of the most tragic and most critical times in US history. That is why I am sure he will be a great leader during a time of war. President Bush is a great leader in the war on terror and a great Commander in Chief, and he did not have this deep experience with the military. So your question is about military experience is silly. In 2004 liberals wanted to sell us John Kerry based on his Vietnam record, it did not work at all.
His plan to fight the war on terror, is to fight them over the Middle East including Iraq and stay on the offensive there against them rather then fight them here. That what he said in so many occasions and that is what President Bush is doing.
See my post # 75.
Idiots who prefer to see a democrat as President over a Republican that does not give them 100% of what they want should not be voting in the Republican Party. They should form their own party of idiots.
"There are 2 types of Rudy fans - the uninformed or anti-conservative TROLLS who do not belong on FR"
Ouch...that's going to leave a mark!
I'm sure FAUX NEWS, Fred Barnes, and the HUFFINGTON POST are more reliable, huh?
The ugly truth is that Bob Dole would at least crack the 40% mark in a national election. Liberal Trojan Horse Guiliani would struggle to reach 35%.
First of all I don't read Huffinton Post. It's a liberal site. Fox News has gotten crappy the past year so I prefer the internet to get my news.
I am astounded that so many people fail to grasp the lessons from Dole "loosing". (It is getting to the point that I can't tell how many people intentionally misspell that word as a Freeper joke and how many of them really do misspell it.) They seem to think he lost simply because he was the "establishment" candidate that was foisted upon us. He may very well have been the "establishment" candidate. But he lost because he was an old, uncharismatic guy running against a charismatic guy presiding over a relatively good economy. I don't know enough about Hunter or Tancredo to know if they have charisma. I do know that Newt has all the charisma of a newt. And if people think he's going to win the general election, simply because articulates conservative issues, they are deluded. Now, Fred Thompson just might have the right combination. I'd like to see if he gets any traction.
Yea he's been killing us all day long with those remarks!
In the primaries it is the most conservative wing of the party that vote, if Duncan Hunter is their choice he will win, it is a simple as that.
Noone's trying to force Hunter down anyone's throat. If you don't want to vote for him than don't. We just find it bizarre that "conservatives" would condone a candidate such as Juliani. He might as well be a Democrat. To be proactive in an election is to vote for someone, not against someone else.
The reason Thompson is being considering is because the base is rejecting Rudy. The Rudybots don't get it. Rudy does not share our values, period and we are not going to be lulled into accepting him.
I have lost all respect for Fox News, it's McCain, Romney, Rudy 24/7 and ZERO discussion of the issues. I follow politics rather closely and bedrock issues are hopscotched around in favor of idle bs chit-chat just for face time on the tube.
In marketing its called brand recognition. The next president is being marketed to us as if we are to F'ing stupid to realize it.
Shame on the GOP!
Hey, GOP. You got bounced out of office in 06 because you ignored the base with regards to immigration and limited government. You want to make that two elections in a row?
Stop with the Rhino crap already!
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.