Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rudy must be stopped
World Net Daily ^ | 4/16/07 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 04/16/2007 9:09:11 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky

Rudy must be stopped

By Joseph Farah

In case you hadn't noticed, Rudy Giuliani is leading all the polls in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

This is scary to me.Given the likelihood of Hillary Clinton winning the Democratic nomination, Americans like me would have no choice. We'd be completely disfranchised from the presidential election. We would be morally prevented from voting for either major party candidate.

The good news is there's still time to stop Rudy.

My objections to Rudy are hardly confined to the issue of abortion. In fact, besides our shared passion for the New York Yankees, I can think of precious little on which I agree with Giuliani. But let's examine his extreme position in favor of killing unborn babies for any and every reason imaginable.

Giuliani began his campaign for the presidency by attempting to moderate his position on the life issue. He told nationally syndicated radio host Sean Hannity he favored parental consent laws, he opposed public funding of abortion, he opposed partial-birth abortion, he favored the appointment of strict constructionists to the U.S. Supreme Court.

All of this was meant to tickle the ears of soft-headed Republicans. It was meant to portray Giuliani as something other than an extremist, a zealot, the same so-called "Republican" who refused to support a moderate Republican candidate for governor of New York in favor of Mario Cuomo.

Giuliani even suggested his positions on the abortion issue had been consistent all along – that he was not modifying his stances in an effort to attract pro-life voters.

But, in this age of the Internet, there is just no hiding past positions on issues.

Indeed, Rudy has been consistent – consistently pro-abortion.

While saying he is personally opposed to abortion and thinks we should discourage it, he advocates every imaginable incentive for women to have them – discouraging laws requiring women to see ultra-sound images of their in utero babies before crushing their skulls, discouraging any cut in taxpayer funding of abortions and describing this hideous, abominable procedure as a "constitutional right."

I don't believe Rudy Giuliani is really personally opposed to abortion. I don't think he cares a whit about unborn babies. And, even if I am misjudging his heart, it really doesn't matter what he thinks. What matters is what he does, how he acts.

What would you think of someone who said he personally opposed slavery, would never own a slave himself, but fought fervently for the right of others to own slaves.

Would you believe that person is really opposed to slavery? Would you care that he was "personally opposed"? Would you grasp that this person was trying to have it both ways on one of the most crucial moral issues men can possibly ever face?

Here's what Giuliani said in 2000 on he subject of banning partial-birth abortions: "I would vote to preserve the option for women."

I believe that was the real Giuliani. That was a reflection of his heart and mind on this issue. He would preserve the option for women to kill their babies even at the very moment of delivery – when the child is "viable" in every sense of the word. This is a position even more extreme than the one taken by the muddled thinkers who gave us Roe v. Wade.

This is why I can never, under any circumstances, cast a vote for Rudy Giuliani as president, no matter whom he is running against.

He's unfit. He's immoral. He's got no standard of right and wrong guiding him. His positions are indecent, disgusting and abominable.

If he can't be trusted on a relatively simple issue of life and death, he can't be trusted on anything in my book.

We still have time to ensure that we have a real presidential contest in 2008. We still have time to ensure that Republicans offer us an alternative to Hillary Clinton in 2008. We still have time to find an alternative to Rudy Giuliani in 2008.

Let's get busy. We've got our work cut out for us. It's time to jump off this Giuliani bandwagon.

Take the pledge with me: "Under no circumstances will I cast a vote for Rudy Giuliani as president, no matter whom he is running against."


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: electionpresident; giuliani; rinorudy; rudy; rudy2008; stoprudy2008; stoprudygiuliani; worldnutdaily
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 321-328 next last
To: zarf

And you aren’t? YOu support a person just as liberal as Hitlary wh will split the party.


121 posted on 04/16/2007 11:41:14 AM PDT by Hydroshock (Duncan Hunter For President, checkout gohunter08.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: showme_the_Glory

I oppose abortion in all cases except to save the life of the mother (which would be very rare). On this issue I pray that Rudy is led to the right by the Lord, by his heart, or at least by his advisers.

I do though support Rudy for President. I think he has shown himself to be a strong leader, conservative in fiscal matters (contrary to many posts here). He would fight the WOT effectively in my view. He would use the bully pulpit to fight the dems and keep taxes going down.

2nd ammendment I support entirely. However, that does not mean there can be no laws regulating the sale of arms.

I thought Rudy opposed gay marriage but allowed for civil unions. And the cross dressing comments are stupid. Go Rudy. But I’ll vote for whoever wins the Repub nomination.


122 posted on 04/16/2007 11:45:15 AM PDT by cuky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
I'd much rather endure four years of Hillary than eight years of a liberal Republican ...

You must be completely out of your mind. You want Bubba back in the Whitehouse? Run, don't walk, to the nearest tall building and take a flying leap.

123 posted on 04/16/2007 11:46:54 AM PDT by Phlap (REDNECK@LIBARTS.EDU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
124 posted on 04/16/2007 11:52:05 AM PDT by TommyDale ("Rudy can win the War on Terror!" Perhaps, but for whose side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock
And you aren’t? YOu support a person just as liberal as Hitlary wh will split the party.

What the hell are you talking about?

The only splitters are the usual suicidal right wingers who love immolating themselves on the alter of philosophical purity.

Look, I'm leaning toward Romney or Thompson if he dives in but by God I will vote for Rudy...with vigor if he's the party's nominee.

You people talking about voting third party are absolute fools. I will not contribute in any way shape or form to Mrs Bitch having a second go round in the WH.

125 posted on 04/16/2007 11:54:04 AM PDT by zarf (Her hair was of a dank yellow, and fell over her temples like sauerkraut......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

“Rudy and his surrogates can spin their rhetoric and obfuscate his record forever, won’t change the facts”

They have to spin and obfuscate because Rudy’s record is horrible!


126 posted on 04/16/2007 11:54:09 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! Or Rudy/Hillary if you want to murder conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

I have my priorites right -— so why did you ping me with the “gibbering, frothing ignormauses?” LOL


127 posted on 04/16/2007 11:58:40 AM PDT by onyx (DEFEAT Hillary Clinton, Marxist, student of Saul Alinsky & ally and beneficiary of Soros.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr

Giuliani was much more popular here before you Rudy Rooters started promoting him. His popularity has declined on this site. Do you realize why?


128 posted on 04/16/2007 11:58:41 AM PDT by TommyDale ("Rudy can win the War on Terror!" Perhaps, but for whose side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Hillary is the one that must be stopped.Remember the eight years of the clinton’s.
129 posted on 04/16/2007 11:58:55 AM PDT by sam I am
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Hillary is the one that must be stopped.Remember the eight years of the clinton’s.
130 posted on 04/16/2007 11:58:59 AM PDT by sam I am
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zarf
"Under no circumstances will I cast a vote for Rudy Giuliani as president, no matter whom he is running against."

Done. In a Hillary/Rudy race, there would be no compelling reason to choose one of them over the other - Rudy has said as much.
131 posted on 04/16/2007 12:00:57 PM PDT by Old_Mil (Duncan Hunter in 2008! A Veteran, A Patriot, A Reagan Republican... http://www.gohunter08.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: onyx

I pinged you so that you could join in the fun of witnessing this latest act of lunacy. :)


132 posted on 04/16/2007 12:01:55 PM PDT by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
Ah, pretty pictures are so persuasive. :-D

If that's "no sale" on Rudy, cool. I feel that way about McCain.

If that's "no sale" to seeing how others view the "peasants with pitchforks" style of political debate, how funny! I know you must have noticed that ya'll are currently losing this political debate pretty handily!

133 posted on 04/16/2007 12:04:08 PM PDT by Dominic Harr (Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Most FReepers are social conservatives

To varying degrees, some moderately so, some radically so.

If you look at the polls you’ll see that most FReepers oppose Rudy Giuliani`s candidacy.

For most FR polls, of the 200k Freepers, less than 5% "vote" in these polls, hardly a referendum for anyone. I'd suggest a look at the scientific polls to see who is in front and who is not.

I don’t see any religious extremism on FR.

Not only religious, but several other areas are covered by extremists and radicals here on FR.

I see good old fashioned constitutional conservatism being promoted.

Trying to run off all the "trolls" who don't care for one's 1% candidate is hardly the conservative approach. I'm always amused at the social right every time they scream about moving to another party or not voting if they don't get their way. Truth is, they have nowhere else to go. In the end, they'll be there.

134 posted on 04/16/2007 12:08:36 PM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr
It's just that out here, in the real world, words are useful cuz they mean things to the people we're talking to.

Do you always feel the need to be condescending?

135 posted on 04/16/2007 12:09:05 PM PDT by airborne (Freedom is worth fighting for !! And I'm in a fighting mood !! HUNTER 2008 !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
Do you realize why?

Clearly, cuz you folks were never asked to support him before.

Ya'll have not minded having pro-choice Rs, as long as they knew their place and didn't try for positions of leadership. :-D

Rudy's just an uppity polycon who didn't realize that the socons have been made Emperors of the 'Conservative' movement!

136 posted on 04/16/2007 12:09:49 PM PDT by Dominic Harr (Conservative: The "ant", to a liberal's "grasshopper".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr

So if we here at FreeRepublic are losing this debate as you say, then why is your candidate so far down on the polls here?
He has dropped from double digits down to the single digits. I suspect that the conservatives here on this site reject Rudy Giuliani and his stands on abortion, gun control, homosexual agenda, global warming, illegal immigration and much more. Not to mention we reject his lack of moral standards and his personal character flaws. He would be an absolute last choice candidate.


137 posted on 04/16/2007 12:10:52 PM PDT by TommyDale ("Rudy can win the War on Terror!" Perhaps, but for whose side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Dominic Harr
>>>>> .... peasants with pitchforks ....

LOL

At one time I too thought Rudy was a fiscal conservative. Until I did some of my own research. On issues of spending neither Bush or Rudy can be considered fiscal conservatives, both are fiscally liberal spending the taxpayers money. Read on and get informed.

From the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research:

"Even with the tax cuts of the last several years, New York remains by far the most heavily taxed big city in the country."

TAXES: Giuliani did cut the marginal city income tax rates, reducing taxes by some $2.0-billion from 1996-2001, but those cuts only offset the $1.8-billion increase in city income tax rates put in place by Mayor Dinkins a few years earlier. In the end, income taxes were actually cut by a modest $200-million. Freezing the 12.5% surcharge on high wage earners was good, but Giuliani didn't attempt to abolish that surcharge. Nor did Giuliani attempt to make serious permanent changes to the city income tax code. The primary reason Rudy and the City Council agreed to cut taxes, was to make NYCity more appealing to new businesses thinking about locating/relocating to the Big Apple. A smart move, however, when Rudy left office he left NYCity straddled with some of the highest income taxes, property taxes and utility rates in the entire nation.

GOVERNMENT SPENDING: Spending under Rudy`s reign as Mayor went up 35.6%, compared to the inflation rate of 22.2%. Rudy left NYCity with a projected, pre-9/11 deficit of $2.0 billion and an increased debt total of $42-billion. Second largest debt after the federal government. Giuliani also added 15,000 new teachers to the city employment rolls. Increasing the membership of two major liberal organizations, the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT).

"The scope of government was not reduced at all. The mayor abandoned his most visible initiative in this sphere—the proposed sale of the city hospital system—after a struggle with the unions and defeats in the courts. He did cut costs in social services; even before the new federal welfare reforms took effect in 1997, the city had begun to significantly reduce caseloads. But money saved on social services has only helped to subsidize big increases in other categories. Today the array of social services sponsored and partially funded by the city—from day care to virtually guaranteed housing—is as wide as ever.

"In the final analysis, Mayor Giuliani sought to make the city deliver services more efficiently—not to make the city deliver fewer services. Gains in efficiency were offset, however, by a spike in the costs of outsourced contracts (see point 2 below). Thus, in two areas where inroads might have been made, the city instead failed to reduce spending."

"1. Personnel Increases. In 1995–96, the city entered into a series of collective bargaining agreements with its public-employee unions. In addition to granting pay increases that ended up roughly equaling inflation, the city promised not to lay off any workers for the life of the contracts. These agreements were expected to add $2.2 billion to the budget by fiscal 2001. But that estimate didn’t reckon with renewed growth in the number of city employees. After dipping in Giuliani’s first two years, the full-time headcount rose from 235,069, in June 1996 to over 253,000 by November 2000. Thanks largely to this growth in the workforce, the total increase in personnel service costs since 1995 has been $4 billion.

2. "Outsourced Services. The failure to shrink the scope of city government made it all the more imperative that Mayor Giuliani vastly increase its efficiency. In the attempt to increase productivity, the mayor farmed out some city services to private contractors. But as the number of outsourced contracts doubled under Giuliani, contractual expenses also nearly doubled—from $3 billion to $5.8 billion. While it may be argued that the city saved money by outsourcing these services, the net savings turned out to be marginal at best. In practice, outsourcing proved to be more of a bargaining chip in negotiations with unions than a serious means of pruning expenses."

Hard evidence that Rudy Giuliani was NO fiscal conservative. Another run-of-the-mill NYCity liberal.

138 posted on 04/16/2007 12:12:00 PM PDT by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: zarf

Wonder how much the DNC has paid Farah to write that?


139 posted on 04/16/2007 12:12:57 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
I suspect that the conservatives here on this site reject Rudy Giuliani and his stands on abortion, gun control, homosexual agenda, global warming, illegal immigration and much more. Not to mention we reject his lack of moral standards and his personal character flaws. He would be an absolute last choice candidate.

I only speak for myself ,but yeah, that about covers it for me.

140 posted on 04/16/2007 12:16:19 PM PDT by airborne (Freedom is worth fighting for !! And I'm in a fighting mood !! HUNTER 2008 !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 321-328 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson