Skip to comments.Giuliani not fit for the White House: poll (Go Rudy!!)
Posted on 03/21/2007 5:04:50 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
click here to read article
You also don't answer:
-questions which would reveal your hypocrisy
Figures - just another rudy supporter whose only reason for supporting rudy is that they're so frightened by either hillary or terrorism that they'll latch on to rudy on a purely emotional basis.
I agree, I think the WOT is the most important issue facing us. Of course I won't vote for Rudy in the primaries because of social issues.
In my view Newt Gingrich and Duncan Hunter are Rudy's equal if not his superior in prosecuting the war. Which requires a coherent understanding of terror, a comprehensive world view dictating how we'll prosecute the war internationally (it's more than Iraq), as well as the ability to manage the war in Congress. A potentially hostile Congress. McCain is probably supreior on this issue.
I appreciate Rudy lowered the crime rate in NYC, and has done private security consulting, but to my knowledge he hasn't addressed the WOT in any specific way. In fact I don't have a clue what he'd do about Iraq. Other, perhaps, than deny visas to Iranians visiting the UN, which makes nice headlines but that's all.
Can you convince me that Rudy has a clear advantage over these candidates, a large enough advantage to cause me to throw social issues out the window?
Now you are projecting.
"Now you are projecting."
No, I'm detailing what you're doing.
Just like all the other rudy boosters.
Ask them a tough, direct question - they ignore it or try to change the subject.
Just like you did.
You do realize what you're doing, and how it's just like what liberals do when they're confronted, right? How does that make you feel to know that in order to defend Rudy you have to adopt the tactics of the left?
Didnt he also refuse to attend some dinner that Castro was at and his explanation was that he wouldnt break bread with a murderer?
Take all of these individual examples of a backbone and standing up for what he believed was right and I see no other possible candidate matching him in the Leadership and Courage facets of character assessment. There is one other point I would like to make. With everyone is making much on his number of marriages.
There is a very healthy body of rumors out in the world that people should explore. A lot of stories are floating around that Donna Hanover was no picnic to live with. Ive heard the words: shrew, witch, hell, irrational and a lot worse in describing her behavior. Ive not heard one word about Donna from Rudy though. Since the kid, Andrew lives with her, there appears to be no softening on her part of his perception of his father. I just wonder that along with all of the stories about Donna, if poisoning the Child against the Father is out of the realm of possibility.
Excuse me, but your direct question was whether or not Hillary would be criticised for saying those things? Hello? look around, she is criticised for everything. You are are asking questions you already know the answer to in an attempt to bait people. You are over simplyfying issues to make a shallow point. I dont answer questions like that because I find them to be counter productive and a complete wast of my time.
This is so funny.
Rudyites criticize conservatives for being being staunchly opposed to compromise on key conservative issues, telling us in so many words we need to be willing to compromise for the sake of the party.
But in the next breath, so to speak, they are gushing admiration for Giuliani because they say he has demonstrated the same 'my way or no way' behavior.
Hahahahahaha. You guys are a riot, you're so funny.
...and he don't give a damn about it, that's why he ignored and violated it.
I beg to differ.
That would be me.
How wonderful it would be to have a president who stands up and fights the media giving no quarter. I would love to see a bad tempered Rudy vs the pressitutes.
"...it now sounds like the RNC will not support Mr. Thompson,..." Why would the RNC support anyone? It doesn't and won't until a nominee is selected.
We wouldn't want an "annointment" now would we?
LOL. You rudy people are a hoot.
I was asking a question because the answer would reveal where you stand. You refused to answer on several occasions for that very reason. When you finally address the question, you don't answer for yourself, instead you resort to the non answer of "Hello? look around, she is criticised for everything."
Let me ask you another direct question, which you will likely ignore because it is a "waste of your time" (even though you take longer to explain why you won't answer than it would take to actually answer the question.)
If a democrat candidate supported:
1. Roe v wade as "good constitutional law"
2. Public funding of abortions
3. Massive gun control at both the local and federal level
4. Campaign finance reform laws
5. "hate crime" laws
6. Global warming hysteria
7. Mccain / kennedy "amnesty" for illegals
8. Having sanctuary cities for illegal aliens - providing them with benefits and not reporting them to the federal government
If a democrat did all that, would you support them, be against them, or just look the other way?
Now I really don't expect you to actually answer that question. You will likely either ignore it or try to change the subject. Perhaps you will try the "the WOT is more important than any of that" or "I just don't want hillary or obama to win" tactics. Neither of which are actual answers, but they qualify in the minds of the rudy boosters.
Maybe you will go back to (incorrectly) insinuating I'm paid to be against rudy.
You see, the rudy boosters are predictable. They all fall into a pattern that's easy to see and expose. You know why? Because they do exactly what liberals do when you confront them. The rudy boosters have adopted the tactics of the liberals when it comes to defending rudy - maybe because that's the only way they can back rudy since when it comes to the issues, he's indefensible.
I await the next episode of "beansox spin."
You cherry pick statements.
I'll defend his conservatism - welfare reform, education choice, national security..
Hillary is a proven liar. Do you put Giuliani in the same group?
That would be Duncan Hunter.
He's a master at the sharp stick approach.
Although lawmakers didn't want to make a judgment call on Berger's fate until all the facts are known, they agreed that the situation doesn't look good for Berger, or even for Kerry.
"There's an ethic here -- that is of strict discipline, of not letting the fact you're working on a political campaign start to color your actions when it comes to national security," Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., told FOX News on Tuesday.
PI Pentagon Correspondent Pamela Hess had this report: " California Republican Duncan Hunter held a press conference to discuss the treatment of detainees at the island jail, and spent his opening statement going over a daily menu for prisoners that included oven-fried chicken and fresh fruit.
"This is what Osama bin Laden's bodyguards will eat several times a week. Lemon chicken, rice, broccoli, carrots, bread and two types of fruit," Hunter said, inviting a reporter to come eat with him.
Actually I dont have to answer you at all. And I will tell you this...yor attitude is exactly what will cost your candidate the election.
Good luck and Godspeed. Youll need it.
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.