Rudy "They're dangerous I tell you, just like tigers!"
Posted on 08/19/2007 3:30:23 PM PDT by hardback
Here's the statement of the founder of FR:
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.
(end quote)
There are 30 issues listed here, and I agree with 26 of them. Does that mean I shouldn't be here? As to your other point...
LOL Rooty is about as liberal as Joe Lieberman and the ACU gives old Joe a 17 lifetime conservative rating.
Why not use an organization that actually uses the same scale to compare the two? Here's Joe Lieberman:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Joseph_Lieberman.htm
And here's Giuliani:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Rudy_Giuliani.htm
As you can see, they're a considerable distance between them.
I agree, which is why I'm a Republican in spite of my liberal stands on some social issues. Foreign policy trumps abortion.
But think of the effect those pictues will have in the Middle East. The Muslim world will be shaking.
Rudy "They're dangerous I tell you, just like tigers!"
>>>>>>Here's the statement of the founder of FR:
LOL Yeah, I know it well. So, you're wrapping yourself in the words of a great conservative --- the Founder of Free Republic --- as you attempt to show that you agree with Rudy Giuliani and somehow this makes both you and him politically conservative. Have I got that right? LOL I think so.
Abortion happened to be the one issue I took up with you. Abortion carries a lot of weight with most FReepers, especially with the chief FReeper.
Btw, there is another part to that founders statement.
"Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life."
Not only do you defend Rooty you say you agree with him 85% of the time. So you're promoting liberalism on FR.
Along with being an opportunist and an authoritarian who has zero respect for the Constitution, Rooty loves big government and spending the taxpayers money; he's an abortion advocate and a gun control activist; he supports sanctuary for illegals and amnesty for law breakers; he also supports special rights for homos and civil unions. Rooty also believes in liberal global warming bunkum, confiscating personal property and exploiting the events of 9-11 for his political advantage. And he's a liar to boot!
Giuliani is the antithesis of Reagan conservatism.
So, you think it is appropriate for a mayor to override United States foreign policy and treat invited diplomats however they want (even if the diplomat is a murderer)?
“The war on terrorism is a big war, one that will most likely last for decades,...”
Probably longer than that. It started back in the 600’s.
It made its greatest advances - Spain, Byzantium, the Balkans, when its opponents were internally divided.
It’s the author of this article who’s “bat****.” My gosh! Say what you will about Giuliani, there can be no doubt — at least for me — about his strong position on defense and foreign policy.
It’s been posted around here several times that simply supporting Rudy won’t get you banned; you had to bash other conservatives in order for that to happen.
So that’s not true?
Do you know what you are talking about? Giuliani didn't override anything. Do you think Giuliani was obligated to invite Arafat to Gracie Mansion for breakfast? He denied Arafat admittance to a City function. And I believe Arafat was here for some UN meeting. The Federal Government had next to nothing to do with this.
ML/NJ
Arafat was an invited guest at the White House and then went to New York for the 50th Anniversary of the UN, Giuliani threw Arafat out of a Lincoln Center event to which the VIPs from EVERY UN member-state had been invited. This was hardly a “city function” other than that it was held in a city-owned building.
Nope, supporting Rooty Toot won’t get anyone banned, but being a liberal troll will. I know that seems like a very fine line, and it is, but there is a line.
What are you talking about?
Do you mean the fact that he was mayor on 9/11 (kind of like how Kerry was in Vietnam)? Should Husband E. Kimmel have been the GOP nominee for president back in 1944?
And what of this "strong" foreign policy, do you mean the "virtual" fence? Is this designed to catch "virtual" criminals? It sounds like a video game to me.
Look at posts #47 and #61 and try applying some common sense. Calling Rooty a conservative on numerous issues and agreeing with him is bad enough. Using the Founders Statement to back up a liberal RINO`s candidacy for Prez, I’d call that crossing the line. Big time!
I’ve given up trying to figure out FRiberal logic. We had a longtime FRiberal troll get zotted on a thread I started yesterday. The FRiberal seemed to think that conservatives wanted to kill homosexuals and illegal immigrants.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1883415/posts
The Rooty Rooters have still never been able to cite a specific principle upon which Rooty is a conservative (And for the record, the war IS NOT a conservative issue, foreign policy never has been a partisan issue. The left hated Nixon and they hate Bush, so they opposed Vietnam and the War on Terror, but not based on any political principles.)
That is one of the weakest replies I’ve seen.
Are you suggesting that it was wrong for him to have Arafat thrown out of Lincoln Center simply because other representatives from the UN were there? City function or not, the event was NOT taking place in the confines of an international area but in a public place. And Arafat being an invited guest at the White House has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the man was a cold blooded terrorist who was not welcome in NYC.
I’ve heard alot of craziness on this site but claiming that Rudy was somehow violating some sort of governmental protocol for kicking Arafat’s butt out of an event within New York City limits takes the cake.
When a person is extended diplomatic recognition by the State Department, that trumps what a mayor thinks. This was not a city function, it was a UN function to which he was invited. I agree that Arafat was a murdering terrorist, but that doesn’t change centuries of protocol.
lying liberal scumbags like Rooty Toot
Wow. Just wow.
Respectfully, I’m no longer going to debate my views on Rudy Giuliani. I won’t persuade you, you won’t persuade me, and each argument risks having the label of “liberal” cast upon me.
So, we’ll just leave it at that for now. Thanks.
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.