Skip to comments.
The Personal Is Political (Giuliani's propensity for the weird has GOP worried)
Newsday ^
| March 26, 2007
| Craig Gordon
Posted on 03/26/2007 5:50:04 AM PDT by garv
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
To: BurtSB; areafiftyone
You know what the latest smear against Rudy is?? That he will engage in some sort of world-wide financial manipulation, or other such evil provocation, possibly harmful to the US, in his mad lust for power. LOL!!!
This is the kind of kookery being pedaled.
41
posted on
03/26/2007 6:59:27 AM PDT
by
veronica
(Where some in the anti-Rudy crowd get their material > http://www.alternet.org/election04/19673/)
To: airborne
It's not unusual, or at least wasn't, for some ethnic groups to marry within the clan. The very wealthy too, back in the day. Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt were cousins.
42
posted on
03/26/2007 7:02:14 AM PDT
by
veronica
(Where some in the anti-Rudy crowd get their material > http://www.alternet.org/election04/19673/)
To: garv
There's only one possible way I'd vote for Rudy and that is if Hillary! is running. Even then I'd have to think about it.
43
posted on
03/26/2007 7:03:19 AM PDT
by
Lx
(Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
To: veronica
1993 was "back in the day"?
44
posted on
03/26/2007 7:04:32 AM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Combat Tested Vietnam Veteran! DUNCAN HUNTER !!)
To: Lx
The last time it was Hillary versus Rudy, Rudy bailed.
45
posted on
03/26/2007 7:05:38 AM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Combat Tested Vietnam Veteran! DUNCAN HUNTER !!)
To: libravoter
Yup, but remember, he can beat Hillary!. p>
46
posted on
03/26/2007 7:05:50 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(Rudy Guiliani: if his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
To: veronica
Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt are supposed to be a recommendation or an excuse for Rudy?
47
posted on
03/26/2007 7:09:46 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(Rudy Guiliani: if his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
To: airborne
Lesse now. John Edwards in an opportunist for running when his wife has cancer, but Rudy was a coward when he "bailed" due to cancer. Do I have that right??
48
posted on
03/26/2007 7:13:12 AM PDT
by
veronica
(Where some in the anti-Rudy crowd get their material > http://www.alternet.org/election04/19673/)
To: veronica
John Edwards in an opportunist for running when his wife has cancer,...Your words, not mine.
Rudy was a coward when he "bailed" due to cancer.
I never used the word "coward".
How interesting that you did.
49
posted on
03/26/2007 7:15:12 AM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Combat Tested Vietnam Veteran! DUNCAN HUNTER !!)
To: airborne
He did have prostate cancer. Supposedly, (this is from his campaign) it was touch and go for a while. Normally I don't believe these things but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on cancer. So, that is the only thing I'll give him the benefit off, unlike things like the 3nd amendment.
50
posted on
03/26/2007 7:17:20 AM PDT
by
Lx
(Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
To: veronica
"You know what the latest smear against Rudy is?? That he will engage in some sort of world-wide financial manipulation, or other such evil provocation, possibly harmful to the US, in his mad lust for power. LOL!!!" "This is the kind of kookery being pedaled(sic)."
We don't have to peddle this, Rudy has already done a fine job on his own. His ties to foreign enemies like Hugo Chavez and "security" contracts with foreign governments will be closely examined in the coming months.
51
posted on
03/26/2007 7:22:32 AM PDT
by
TommyDale
("Rudy can win the War on Terror!" Perhaps, but for whose side?)
To: TommyDale
52
posted on
03/26/2007 7:25:00 AM PDT
by
veronica
(Where some in the anti-Rudy crowd get their material > http://www.alternet.org/election04/19673/)
To: Lx
It was caught at "the early, early stages" (his words)
http://psa-rising.com/upfront/giuliani-dx2000apr27.htm
He had radioactive seed implanted in his prostate, and continued as Mayor, not feeling the need to step down..
It didn't stop him from doing much of anything else, except run against Hillary.
53
posted on
03/26/2007 7:25:53 AM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Combat Tested Vietnam Veteran! DUNCAN HUNTER !!)
To: alicewonders
What wild magical wet dream did you pull that statistic from? His unfavorables are that high?? Please quote your sources before spouting such stupid quasi statements.
To: TommyDale
To: airborne
Why didn't Rudy run last fall? Did he still have cancer then?
56
posted on
03/26/2007 7:39:29 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: noname07718; TommyDale
I wonder.
Is it irony that you compared Rudy to Teddy?
57
posted on
03/26/2007 7:40:33 AM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Combat Tested Vietnam Veteran! DUNCAN HUNTER !!)
To: wagglebee
Why didn't Rudy run last fall? Did he still have cancer then?
He would have been shellacked by Hillary in NY. Perhaps not 70-30, but at least 55-45. He didn't want to be embarrassed, as it would have ruined any chance he had at the '08 election.
58
posted on
03/26/2007 7:42:21 AM PDT
by
NYC Republican
(GOPs and Conservatives' Worst Nightmare - Myopic, Single-Issue Voters)
To: wagglebee
I can't answer for Rudy.
I could guess, but I'll leave that for each person to decide for themselves.
59
posted on
03/26/2007 7:42:31 AM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Combat Tested Vietnam Veteran! DUNCAN HUNTER !!)
To: sitetest
As has been made manifestly clear; the Church will waive any rule if the situation ($$) is OK. The Church flagrant violation and sell out on their own rules makes these rules meaningless.(Remember Teddy Kennedy?) The only things where the church teachings are theoretically non-negotiable are ex Cathedra rulings which are taken to be the voice of God.
Remember it used to be a mortal sin to eat meat on Fridays? I could go on a whole list of remember whens but that would be too tedious. All Im saying in most of the issues that every Rudy Basher offers to forward as a reason for his unsuitability are lame and not relevant. A more compelling argument would to promote your choice and not denigrate an opposing candidate. You should not have to advance the advocacy on the backs of an opponent. Your choice should be able to stand on his/her own merits to show their qualifications and electability.
Please dont try to emulate the democrat party tactics of dragging people to make a weak candidate look better.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson