Posted on 11/07/2007 6:41:35 AM PST by xzins
Molly, this is such an insane move on his part.
He is actively injuring the possibilities of pro-life candidates.
The only explanations I have are:
a. senile
b. blackmailed
c. traitor
d. fraud
e. money
Notice that “word from the Lord” is not on that list.
To compare Reagan and Giuliani’s marriages shows a complete inability to discriminate.
Rudy is a serial adulterer....a bald bill clinton.
Reagan and Nancy were married for decades.
Given his past antics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_robertson#Controversies_and_criticisms ) I think Rudy might be wise to reject the endorsement.
Well, Rudy now has it posted proudly on his website.
pragmatism = sell-out
______
Now that’s funny.
By your calculus, in some fashion, every single human being that is, was, or ever will be, is a sellout.
“Well, Rudy now has it posted proudly on his website.”
Well, let’s hope it is the kiss of death for his campaign then.
Well. I'm really not concerned with what you think of me actually. So does that strike me out? Just wondering?
No (You know the "rules"...need a "third"...and even then, guys get up 3-5 times per outing with a fresh start each time!).
Ok then.
I am not posting who I am voting for, or even who I prefer, other than to say that I will NEVER vote for Ron Paul, and I’d have an extremely difficult time voting for either McCain or Romney. I am still weighing the options, but I believe that the primaries are where we need to make our choice. So I’m weighing all the candidates — not just the most well known ones. Rudy has some positives for me, but he also has some negatives. As do the other candidates. It’s a long road, and I see no benefit in chewing each other up at this point.
Well, I'm in perfect agreement w/you here. (And that's always a good note to close out a convo. :) )
-—Many on this site (including me) criticize Rudy; and for good reason. But the important question that is swept under the table is: Who would you rather be President? Rudy or Hillary?-—
Hillary! Because then I still have a party left to belong to.
So, then, it’s all about you?
I assume you were joking.
This supports my agument that when people reach age 70 1/2 not only MUST they begin withdrawing Individual retirement Account assets, they MUST retire from politics and take up golf, gardening or reading.
It’s no joke. If Rudy becomes the head of the Party, conservatives and the conservative movement are out in the cold. It’s about considerably more than me.
Would rather have an enemy in front of me than at my back. Don’t think for a moment that if Rudy is the chosen one things are just going to go on their merry way. Take a lesson from the Whigs.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the election isn't about you.
You forgot the one actual reason:
Robertson forsees the serious and genocidal intent of Arab and Islamist Muslims to attack and destroy Israel.
He sees in Giuliani a kindred spirit in supporting Israel (though G gets there from an entirely different direction), and the only candidate who speaks seriously of the threat and has demonstrated the backbone to actually fight it to the bitter end.
When Pakistani and Iranian nukes are pointed at Haifa and Jerusalem and Bombay, lots of people are going to wonder what kind of stupid-drugs the Values Voters and alleged Social Conservatives were taking in 2007 and 2008.
BTW, I’ve heard Tony Perkins speak twice in the last week. Not once did he mention the Islamist threat, or even allude to any potential problem. This is exactly why Values Voters have their values upside down, and why I hope they leave the Republican Party forever as they’ve threatened.
With Giuliani the Republicans will pick up huge numbers of Reagan Democrats to replace them.
If he really believes this then he has never listened to Fred. And how could he believe that Rudy "has demonstrated the backbone..." when the only backbone he has shown was when he was fighting the Feds in order to set NY up as a sanctuary city?
I refuse to engage and mollycoddle you anti-Giuliani sound-bite slammers on your own terms.
Your statement above is ignorant and stupid.
No - really - where has Rudy shown himself to be strong on defense or able to come up with a plan to protect the US against terrorism? Just because he was in NYC on 9/11 does not make him an expert on terrorism for pete’s sake! In fact, it could very well be that his actions to undermine our national security by encouraging illegal immigration may have helped to bring it about. Sheesh!
You simply made that part up.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who is in lala Land on this issue.
It's hard to take the rest of your post seriously, when you say things like the above.
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.