Posted on 10/20/2007 10:21:39 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
The conundrum for the hair-on-fire right is going to be when Rudy swerves right if and when he wins the nomination...
Rudy was asked the question, by the way. He stipulated that he would appoint strict constructionist judges. There were no ifs, ands or buts in the answer. He may be a lot of things, but, based on his statements and positions, a liar isn't one of them.
Of course, the Hard (-headed) right will choose to disbelieve him to bolster their own argument.
“The division in the Rat party would be immense.”
As I have repeated a number of times on FR, even as a strong Rudy supporter, I understand and respect your doing everything possible not to have Rudy nominated in the Republican primary. I recognize that I will be unable to convince many with strong opinions to vote for Rudy. I am biding my time to get into the fray until the general election where I will do everything in my power to make sure Hillary does not get elected.
I do, however, feel that I must comment on your assessment of what would happen if Hillary became president.
The News media would be on her side full time. Distortions in the Iraq coverage will fade. They will buy her story hook, line, and sinker that she was put into this mess by Bush (this characterization would be hers and is not mine) and had no choice. Look at articles by Doug from Upland on FR showing videos of Hillary’s felonies. Is the press interested? Not at all. Consider the number of blacks that bought into the notion as Clinton as the first black president. Democratic dissention? Fat chance, not when it is time to enact socialist policies.
Now lets consider your proposition that the left will be angry about Iraq. (By the way in your premise if she is elected- it would be with full knowledge that she voted for the war. In fact, Hillary’s line already used, would be that if she knew Bush would make such a mess, she would not have voted yes.) What do you think Hillary’s actions would be - to further enrage that part of the base? She is not stupid politically. She would look to do things that will mollify these loonies.
Finally, if conservatives stayed home or went 3rd party, the fracture would be on our side. There are many of who would be hostile to those that we felt got Hillary elected. It would be hard to put a winning coalition back together.
Just some food for thought against a Hillary candidacy at all costs:
- Hillary is a corrupt politician with the press ignoring this on a widescale. If she were conservative and agreed with me 100% I would be vehemently against her because I feel so strongly about this issue. As Mark Steyn noted last night on Hannity & Colmes - one corruption would doom any candidate but multiple corruptions have no affect. The argument is that they pick out the most loony charge and classify all others with the loony charge. This works well for Democrats. By the way, notice how sensitive that she is to corruption by having Sandy Berger as her advisor. This shows amazing contempt.
- Hillary and a full Rat Congress would do irreparable harm to the country. Think of the judges that would be appointed.
Socialized medicine - a foot in the door will became a large chasm and force us into government run health care. Look at Hillary’s treatise in college and read about her advisors.
- The comments that there is no difference between Rudy and Hillary is patently absurd. As it is primary season, it is not relevant for us to engage in this at this time. I will engage in the discussion if this becomes our choice. There is no reason for you at this time to entertain voting for Rudy. Your focus should be to elect the nominee that you most want.
For now, go with your heart and passion in the Republican primary but be aware that regardless of the outcome Hillary must not become president.
As a Conservative, I believe that you have the ability to think. If Rudy becomes the nominee then, I look forward to getting into a good intelligent discussion.
Wrong. The solution is to keep our heads and not allow the thought of voting for third parties, or the thought of staying home next Nov.
Anything less than accepting the parties nomination helps Hillary, and that's a fact. Trashing Rudy will incite people to defect next Nov. and it's stupid to do it.
I have *not* made up my mind who to support, or even who I think has the best chances next Nov. But I *do* believe it is stupid beyond belief to trash Rudy now when it's quite probable that he may get the nomination.
“I once thought FR was a place where conservatives could come and quietly and intelligently discuss how we were going to defeat Democrats.”
You are mixing apples and oranges. conservative vs democrats? No, it’s conservatives vs liberals. One of which is currently running for the Repub nomination.
I think a lot of the problem with the pro-Trudy, anti-Trudy folks is this; You argue party vs party, and the antis (myslef included) argue ideaology vs ideaology.
You anti-Rudy types talk of how much damage Rudy will do to the pro-life cause. What about the damage Hillary would do? Face it, the only way to change the nations abortion laws is to overturn Roe v. Wade. How will electing Hillary, who will most likely get to appoint 2 or more justices, help this?
Again I ask, what makes you so confident that if Hillary is elected all of a sudden Republicans will sweep Washington? What are your facts to base this off of?
I feel very sorry for for you. You have no principles. That will be the defeat of us this time.
You have to be FOR something, not just against something.
You win against this woman by providing a clear cut opposition to her.
We will need our candidate to light the fire of his own party and light the fire of those that do not like her. Whoever points out that she is a nanny state, life controlling feminist socialist will be a winner.
You do that by having adult male, sane, leadership. You lose by running someone who is actually left of her on some issues.
“I think Rudy will pick up more centrists and liberals.”
And that is a good thing HOW exactly?
So we can survive Hillary, but not Rudy. Now that makes sense.
I'm trying to find the troll(s) around here working for Hillary, stirring up the divisions. Is it you?
“Rudy was asked the question, by the way. He stipulated that he would appoint strict constructionist judges.”
He would pay for the murder of his own grand child, and even raise taxes to force US to pay for more infanticide but you think he’s got a moral hang-up against lying?
On what issues is Giuliani to the left of Clinton?
When you find a candidate with a "C" after his name that has a chance of winning, let me know.
Well now there is an intelligent and well reasoned argument.
You mention Hell, and yet can't admit that Christianity is entirely conditional on ONLY one thing... the blood of Jesus Christ... otherwise... you know the answer.
"I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Inclusive yes, in that Jesus will take Black, White, Rich, Poor, Healthy, Weak, but only through Jesus's blood can one be forgiven, and that goes through the bottleneck of accepting the gift Jesus freely offers.
Inclusive in that Christianity accepts those that do not believe in Jesus. Nope..
Christianity is about love, but love is true love.
"Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil" (Rom. 12:9)
True love is not Hypocritical. True love point out wrong and points out the way correct it.
True love does forgive, but you can only forgive something that asked you to forgive. You can not forgive a sin that is not done directly to you, and to forgive means they come to you with repentive heart. If I owe you $50 dollars, you can forgive me of that dept, but JimRob can not remove that debt that I owe you, only you can. I can forgive someone that murders one of my kids, but I can not forgive someone that murders one of your kids, I am not in the position to do so. Forgiveness has in modern times come to mean things beyond what it was intended.
----------------------------------------------
Finally you say "That my FRiend, comes from a Jew"...
I value the advice of many people, including Jews... but your posts have rang only hollow on telling me how a Christian should behave. Perhaps next time you want to tell a Christian how a Christian should behave, you might consult something we hold in high regard.. The Bible.
How about dedicating some of that outrage to fighting Hillary?
Click on this http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1913952/posts
He has a higher rating with NARAL than Hillary. She will run to the right of Rudy and she will win by doing that.
They used it in 2006, and it worked. You keep on going with what you know will work and gets results.
Easy
“When you find a candidate with a “C” after his name that has a chance of winning, let me know.”
If I did I have a sneaking suspicion you would avoid him and go find some center/leftist to support.
So you don't want my vote. Now *there* is an intelligent way to win an election.
I agree with your sentiments, however, if we really took abortion seriously, as murder, we would all, tomorrow destroy every abortion clinic, nationwide. But, we wont.
Why? Do we choose the rule of our law over G-d's law? Is that right?
Klinton put on the court Ginsburg and Breyer. Two abortion advocates. The next Preeident will likely put on to more. We have "a chance" to end Roe VS Wade with Strict Constructionist Judges. Even then if it is overturned, it goes back to the States. There will be only, what, about 5 States that might outlaw it? That means that babies will be slaughtered for as far as the eye can see. Yet, some will be saved.
I don't care about ratings, show me the specific issues where he is to the left of Hillary.
I want your vote as you want mine. I won’t vote for the worst, that is not winning.
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.