Posted on 03/22/2007 11:28:22 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
If I've offended you, I apologize.
I was just having fun.
Spot on, flashbunny. Most strongly agreed.
"I very seldom see any liberals on this forum. Lately, however, I do see a lot of people terrified that a good man like Rudy Giuliani might get the GOP nod. And a lot of these people show their fear by getting really snippy with other freepers. "
You're right, the dissolution of the Republican party scares the heck out of a lot of people...since it was the last hope we had against liberal mania.
Your Duncan Hunter tag was great! ;)
Pesky tagline...
Funny - I was always under the impression that Rudy cleaned up New York by starting at the childhood level - you know, the part where parents are supposed to be holding the children responsible for what they do? Except the parents weren't held responsible themselves, so what can you expect from the kids. So there are kids who've never known a day of discipline in their lives, and Rudy talks about respect for authority.
I gather your oppose someone taking authority over anybody's kids? What if someone else's kids come in and start destroying your property? Do you want a law-and-order community where those little hellions are held responsible for their actions, or do you want someone who says we have to "respect their culture" and "not profile anyone."
Can't using the word "authority" just be what it is? Enforcing the law at smaller offenses so the larger ones don't happen?
That's one of the reasons for the second amendment.
I don't need Rudy to tell me how to deal with that situation.
Depends on context. In this case, it means more than you would presume, I think.
Read further and you will see this - "Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."
Do you believe that freedom means ceding (yeilding, surrendering)) to authority and allowing them the discretion to do what they think is lawful?
Fred Thompson will clean the amoral greaseball's clock!
I think you're overanalyzing it. But yes, I think we have to surrender to authority to a degree. I can't drive down the left side of the road just because I want to.
And as for the character who wanted the second ammendment rights to defend his house against graffiti "artistes," come on. You're going to shoot a 10-year-old who comes on your property with a can of spray paint?
I admit on its face that it looks hypocritical to excuse Rudy while pillorying Hillary, but look a little deeper, and you'll see her philosophy is more of a "share the wealth," turn over all your cash to her because she can then buy more votes from your lazy neighbor by giving it to him.
Rudy's is much more from a law and order philosophy, almost in direct opposition to Hillary. He would teach the underpriviledged to pick themselves up and do something about their condition, respect the property of others, work for what they get instead of demanding reparations, a government gimme, or whatever.
Now I'm probably overanalyzing it as well.
"Fred Thompson will clean the amoral greaseball's clock!"
Look lady...I happen to be a Fred Thompson supporter myself. So I'll give you some advice on which you are failing: Try not to be so obnoxious in your support of Thompson that you drive people away.
How do you know that Rudy isn't just as anti-gun as Mrs. Clinton? His record on the subject is worse.
Did I say anything about guns?
Even Democrat President, Democrat Congress (I think that's what you meant for #2) would be less of a disaster than some here surmise. The anti-gun legislation that passed in 1993-1994 was if anything less bad that what passed in 1995-1996.
I would think the Second Amendment is a major part of any real conservative agenda, and undermining it certainly seems to be a major part of the liberal agenda.
So how can one advance the conservative agenda with a gun-grabber?
"So how can one advance the conservative agenda with a gun-grabber?"
You tell me. You're the one who would rather have Hillary or Obama than the guy with the R in front of his name.
Were it not for decades of refusing to hold people accountable for their actions, any vandal who was confronted by an armed individual would recognize the need to either surrender or be shot. The likelihood that such vandalism would have such consequences would serve as a very strong deterrent. Were such policies accepted, the average number of dead vandals would most likely soon fall well below one per year, since few people would be inclined to try it.
Why would that be a bad thing?
Surrender to whom? And how much?
If it is necessary, I'd rather a conservative be in charge than Rudy.
And as for the character who wanted the second amendment rights to defend his house against graffiti "artistes,"
Even I know that's excessive.
But when it comes to setting policy that affects the 2nd Amendment, I'd rather have a conservative setting policy than Rudy.
I admit on its face that it looks hypocritical to excuse Rudy while pillorying Hillary,
Here's something that really bothers me.
How about we compare the Republican candidates and pick the best man for the job.
After we do that, then we can all unite and take on Hillary.
This "only Rudy can beat Hillary" is a lie repeated often enough.
If the base picks a strong leader that we all believe in, that man, no matter who, can beat Hillary.
Now I'm probably over analyzing it as well.
Well, maybe we both are. But this soon before the primaries start is the time to 'over analyze' everything.
My point is, stop looking ahead to Hillary and pay attention to the race at hand.
We need a strong leader, preferably one with military training and conservative values that represent the majority of the Republican base.
From 1993-1994 the Democrats controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. How disastrous were those years?
If Hillary wins, there's a reasonable chance for a congressional swing our way in 2010 and for a presidential swing in 2012. If Rudy wins, he'll likely have negative coattails in 2010, and will prevent anyone good from being on the presidential ballot until 2016.
"Schools exist in America and have always existed to train responsible citizens of the United States of America."
Read much?
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.