Posted on 03/24/2007 1:03:12 PM PDT by veronica
Former U.S. Rep. Bill Zeliff is joining Rudy Giuliani’s presidential campaign.
A source in the campaign told UnionLeader.com that the former Jackson innkeeper “will help with federal and New Hampshire issues as an adviser and will help raise money in Washington, D.C.”
Zeliff, a Republican, was first elected to New Hampshire’s 1st District U.S. House seat in 1990. He left the House after three terms and ran unsuccessfully for the GOP nomination for governor in 1996.
Zeliff has been a Washington lobbyist for the past 10 years, currently employed by The Livingston Group, headed by former Republican Rep. Bob Livingston of Lousiana.
The Village Voice is known to publish "less than honest" materials. Weren't they involved in a scandal in 2005?
A man that can't stay faithful to his wife can't be trusted to keep campaign promises that contradict his record. Slick Willie proved that.
Sure. Now posting the truth about Reagan is an attack.
You all really go bananas when I rmind freepers that he signed an amnesty bill. He's become such a myth in your minds that the truth about him is like a little slap of reality.
Can't handle it, can you? BUT you have NO problem dishing your crap - so you shut your pie hole! Mud slingers are all alike, unresolved issues buried within and take no resposibility for their actions..
You can blame your guy Rudy for the sewer talk. He brought it on himself, just as Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton did.
It would not do any good. People do not want to hear the truth about Rudy and his past. I do not want anyone in the WH who has his kind of past.
The only mud being slung here is the mud created by your candidate. Please tell us where any of it is untrue.
I do read it on occasion, though that article popped up on a search.
I read a number of Islamic sites as well, and terror sites though I don't post from them.
If you're suggesting I'm a homosexual I'll tell you the same think I tell the occasional moron who accuses me of being a terrorist.
I've got a lot of posts here, make your case.
Otherwise you simply highlight the stereotype of bigoted right wingers.
I realize you rarely post on candidates or in any depth on issues, you're a cut'n'paste anti kind of guy. But do you really think this is effective.
Peach is absolutely right, you move the undecideds toward Rudy.
The moral posturing of the anti-Rudys aside, reasonable people don't view this vein of attack as, well, moral.
I did not refer to you as anything. I merely asked if you frequent the site of a known dirtbag publication. They have been caught in the past publishing forged stories.
Why should we support a liberal candidate when we are conservatives?
Though I tend to agree with him on the issues, yes, he did. He also endorsed required training and licensing as a condition of gun ownership. Close to Rudy's position, and in my view clearly anti 2nd amendment.
I'll stop with facts now.
The small mindedness around here is really something to behold, isn't it. Next stop: you'll be accused of being a terrorist.
And I guess these people have missed the number of freepers who come forward on these threads and say they've been lurking but now they support Rudy openly and want on the ping list.
bbl - I think there's a break in the basketball action in the other room :-)
I don't support him, I wouldn't suggest you do. I was commenting on the level of criticism, much of which is from the gutter.
Reagan supported the Brady Amendment and after he left office he publicly endorsed the bill. Oops - now I've posted another inconvenient fact for the mythmakers.
Exactly. A party can't withstanding alienating a large percentage of its base -- social conservatives, gun owners and those opposed to illegal immigration -- and not expect to suffer catastrophic consquences. Millions will stay home, vote third party or, at the very least, not be motivated to donate and tell others to vote for the GOP if they are alienated.
It's not possible to be a majority party and win elections by frightening voters into voting against members of the other party.
Thanks for that insight. You are exactly right. This isn't about the multiple marriages, it is about the adultery and mistrust he created.
Yes, I do, I already told you that. I frequent worse publications than the Village Voice. What is your point?
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.