and I am voting for Fred Thompson.
Posted on 11/25/2007 9:55:24 AM PST by dano1
Rudy Giuliani told FOX News on Saturday that GOP rival Fred Thompson has "no record," after Thompson repeatedly took shots at Giuliani for supporting gun control legislation and bringing up his record as mayor of New York City on the campaign trail.
"Fred has no record to talk about ... I have a good record to talk about so I am very proud of it," Giuliani said while campaigning in Nashua, N.H. "If you didn't have a good record you would want to run away from it. And if you had no record at all, you would want to attack somebody else's record, which is what I think some of my opponents are doing. They don't have the record of results that I have so instead ... they attack you."
The accusation came after Thompson chided Giuliani Friday while visiting a New Hampshire gun store.
"(Giuliani) simply supported just about every gun control legislation that came down the pike. And I just disagree with him on that.... over the years and he's been very outspoken about it. Of course he's not outspoken about it anymore," Thompson told reporters with a smile. "It's a major differentiation. He relates everything to New York City ... Well, New York City is not emblematic of the rest of the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
All I can tell you is that the lawsuits he initiated and now claims he doesn’t support are still in motion in the courts
Better to have no record than a cross dressing one
Hummm, ought to be somthing to work with there.
The Thompson campaign response from spokesman Darrel Ng:
“Unlike other candidates in this race, Fred Thompson has a strong record of supporting the second amendment and has earned an A rating from the NRA. Unlike other candidates in this race, Fred Thompson has a strong record of being pro-life, and has received the National Right to Life endorsement. The strong record that Rudy brings to the table is one where he joined liberal Sen. Chuck Schumer at a press conference calling for more gun control.”
There would be snowballs in h*ll before I voted for either of these men.
Rudy because, well, this thread will define that.
But as for Fred, his approach to the Clinton impeachment case marks my concern. He ultimately decided to part with the Republican majority by voting to acquit Mr. Clinton on one of two impeachment counts.
I'll never forgive him for that act. Never.
And I will post no more to Rudi or Fred threads.
HAHAHAHAHA! Good one there Darrel!
Rooty Tooty is bound to crash and when he does it's gonna be like a sonic boom.
Rudy’s record is not all that hot.
dano1 appears to be more of a Rudy shill. He knows full well that Rudy has no shelf life on a conservative site. Thus, he promotes Huckabee in an effort to divide conservatives and advance the cause of his real objective: Rudy.
and I am voting for Fred Thompson.
I don’t care what you say so long as you don’t try to infect others with a pro-Rudy agenda. He’s a pervert and if you want to support him, I don’t want to hear about it.
I don’t think this thread turned out as you expected!
This rebuttal by Rudy G is lame....so freaking lame.
I mean...come on. Fred’s right as rain on this! New York ain’t nothing like the rest of the country and Fred dared to point out the obvious.
The rest of the country does NOT think that poor women should get abortions on the public dole. The rest of the country does NOT think that guns should be removed from citizens that the criminals may have them run amok. The rest of the country does NOT think that illegal aliens should be allowed to run roughshod in our cities and partake of public housing, food stamps and taxpayer-paid medical care via trips to the emergency room.
And to all Rudy G fans I may have offended, that paragraph above is but the tip of the iceberg on how your guy doesn’t represent most of America.
Yay on Fred for daring to say it and boo on Rudy for his really insipid response.
Rudy should get back on his cell phone and talk to his wife.
“Terri Van Dyke, Treasurer” You can’t make this stuff up!! LOL
Will Rudy agree to take an HIV test and make the results public?
Do you have anything to add to the debate except pointless libel? Your posts have indicated you are either a troll or a juvenile idiot, either way you add absolutely nothing of any intellectual value to the debate.
If you are going to make homosexual accusations against Giuliani you damn well better have facts to back it up or you are nothing but a disgusting lier.
I doubt Fred is afraid of going one on one with Rudy on the subject of each of their records. I’m glad Rudy is proud of his because he’s going to have to be defending it [or perhaps “spinning it” would be a better term] quite a lot during this campaign.
When has he ever renounced them? I wasn't aware that he had.
He was yammering that he had changed his position on RKBA a few weeks back and said that the lawsuits had taken on twists that he hadn’t anticipated and that he no longer supported them.
Yeah, that makes it all better Rooty.
The lawsuits are still in motion.
According to Mr. Thompson, he voted to acquit on one of the counts because the Impeachment Committee did not present its case in legitimate fashion. By my recollection, the law that would have been applicable in a criminal trial required that a prosecutor provide enough evidence to convince a jury that the defendant was guilty of at least one specific action. While a prosecutor would be free to bring up a number of allegations, jurors would have to agree which allegation or allegations they believe the defendant committed. If the prosecutor brings 12 accusations, and each juror happens to believe the defendant guilty of eleven but innocent of one, and each juror believes the defendant not guilty of a different accusation, the prosecutor doesn't score a conviction (at least not unless/until a juror flips his vote).
While the Senate is not bound to follow those rules in an impeachment proceeding (they would be free to use whatever rules they like, provided that 2/3 vote for removal) Fred Thompson did not believe it proper to totally ignore the rules relating to criminal trials. Had the prosecutor presented its case properly, he might have voted to convict. But what the Impeachment Committee tried to do was argue that Mr. Clinton must have done something illegal sometime. That's not kosher in criminal law, and Mr. Thompson didn't think it kosher at an impeachment trial either.
Sounds like his opposition to the lawsuits is about as strong as his support for the RKBA.
Bingo!
Deeds speak volumes
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.