Oh, I'm sorry, I must have missed all the threads where we politely and tolerantly listen to people tell us why we should vote for liberals like Hillary and Obama. I'll have to do a search and find all those threads where our posters tolerantly listen to people tell us why we should vote pro-abortion, pro-gay rights and pro-gun control.
I really don't think I'm asking for any changes on FR policy. A liberal is a liberal and campaigning for liberals has never been allowed here and shouldn't be allowed just because a liberal has an R after his name.
I could not agree more with spkeytx86 [who said those supporting Rudy on Freerepublic are for the most part true conservatives with a pragmatic bent, and who are at worst misguided], with Melas [who asked what have we have gained by being so nasty to each other (and who comes across as a true gentleman, to his credit)] with justshutupandtakeit [who asked (paraphrasing, please forgive the liberty) how it is to Freerepublic’s credit to sink to the level of bile and incivility that run rampant on DU? [out of curiosity, what on earth is the Anthroposophical Society???]] and with EveningStar who questions the idea that fellow conservatives, however misguided in their support for a presidential candidate, are the true enemies. (I HATE it when Democrats relentlessly portray Republicans as the enemy. Republicans are (at present) the opposition party; terrorists, Al Qaeda, and various other Hate-America-First-and-Most entities are the enemy. Surely fellow conservatives with whom we disagree are not The Enemy, and it’s destructive and unhelpful to lose that focus.)
I am one of those people who is on the fence. I am still evaluating the field of Republican presidential hopefuls and trying to decide which one is best. I have to be honest, having read every single response on this thread: Melas was right. My revulsion with Giuliani’s pro abortion stance has been mitigated by the absolute rudeness and in a few cases downright hatefulness of the anti-Giuliani crowd that has mocked, taunted, belittled and otherwise demeaned fellow conservatives. [Unless of course the definition of non/anti-conservative is “pro-life, anti-gay-rights, pro-gun, pro-military, pro-defense, pro-WOT, pro-low taxes and smaller government, but leaning Giuliani for pragmatic reasons in ’08. Then I guess the shameful treatment of fellow “pseudo” conservatives was justified, at least in the minds of those who did it.] If the character of the anti-Rudy crowd is this nasty, then that is a point in Rudy’s favor. The opponents of conservatism in general are also extremely nasty; if you don’t believe me, just go over and lurk on DU for five minutes or so. If conservative opponents of Giuliani were more respectful and less quick to treat other conservatives like dirt, they make a more positive impression and would be far more persuasive.
On a personal note, I should mention that up until about a week ago I was one of those people who had vowed never to vote for McCain. His campaign finance reform abomination revolted me sufficiently to rule him at any cost. Well, I have changed my mind. If McCain becomes the nominee (which thankfully appears unlikely) he will get my vote in the general. The reason: the Supreme Court. The oldest and frailest members of the court are all flaming liberals. They are clinging to their positions in hopes of waiting Bush out. They will attend court in wheelchairs with portable oxygen if they have to, because they know what is at stake. Right now, the court is tenuously balanced between liberal and conservative, but leans liberal. If the flaming lefties can hold out until ’08, and if the Republicans and conservatives fail to unify around a candidate and win, the next Democrat president will appoint young far leftists to the court, and we will be screwed for a long time to come. Of course, God forbid worse could come to worst, and even one of the conservatives might be lost [accident, sudden major health crisis, etc.] and the court could swing far left moonbat liberal. For this reason, I will even vote for McCain if he is the nominee, because his judicial picks would have to be better than Hillary’s, Obama’s or Edwards’. Presidents come and go, but Supreme Court appointments are for a lifetime. We have paid too dearly already for the leftist/constitution-is-toilet-paper approach to Supreme Court rulings. If we can get a Republican elected in ’08, and if he can replace even one of those leftist jurists with a young or youngish originalist, the long term payoff would be worth even four years of McCain. Or so it seems to me. [One more originalist and Campaign Finance Reform is toast anyway, right?)
Final note: KATIE-O, I pinged you because I believe you are a true conservative and were not treated at all well. I don’t know if you continued to follow the thread after you were maligned, but if not I just wanted you to know that other decent, thoughtful people chimed in. I admire you for being a conservative in a liberal wasteland; I’ve had that experience myself. You displayed a lot of courage and your posts were admirably civil; thank you for elevating the level of discourse—it didn’t go unnoticed.