Posted on 11/28/2007 11:56:43 AM PST by Fred
I’ve gotta know, are you a Thompson supporter and, if so, did you predict that way back in 1997 when you chose your screen name?
This might do him in ...
As someone willing to vote for Giuliani in the general election, I think he is a goner (assuming this report is true).
IN OTHER WORDS, LETS SWITCH FIRST AND LAST NAMES, RUDY KERIK, BERNARD GIULIANI...
That's your opinion. IMO he is NO BETTER and unworthy of an honest conservative vote just as the Democrats are.
LOL!
Now if your screen name was Fred2008 I would have been really impressed!
|
Giuliani | Clinton | Dem Platform | GOP Platform |
---|---|---|---|---|
Abortion on Demand | Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Partial Birth Abortion | Supports Opposed NY ban |
Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Roe v. Wade | Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Taxpayer Funded Abortions | Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Embryonic Stem Cell Research | Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Federal Marriage Amendment | Opposes | Opposes | Opposes Defined at state level |
Supports |
Gay Domestic Partnership/ Civil Unions |
Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Openly Gay Military | Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Defense of Marriage Act | Opposes | Opposes | Opposes | Supports |
Amnesty for Illegal Aliens | Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Special Path to Citizenship for Illegal Aliens |
Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Tough Penalties for Employers of Illegal Aliens |
Opposes | Opposes | Opposes | Supports |
Sanctuary Cities/ Ignoring Immigration Law |
Supports | Supports | Supports | Opposes |
Protecting 2nd Amendment | Opposes |
Opposes | Opposes Supports bans |
Supports |
Confiscating Guns | Supports Confiscated as mayor. Even bragged. |
Supports | Supports Supports bans |
Opposes |
'Assault' Weapons Ban | Supports | Supports | Supports | |
Frivolous Lawsuits Against Gun Makers |
Supports Filed One Himself |
Supports | Opposes | |
Gun Registration/Licenses | Supports | Supports | Opposes | |
War in Afghanistan | Supports | Supports Voted for it |
Supports | Supports |
War in Iraq | Supports | Supports Voted for it |
Supports Weak support |
Supports |
Patriot Act | Supports | Supports Voted for it 2001 & 2006 |
Opposes | Supports |
He owes the public a good explanation. Could be just to avoid chatter in the office about his personal life, if the billing pattern used resulted in different people processing the expenses, instead of one person or group if the billings had all been routed to the main “mayor’s office” account. Not too clear what the meaning is of “units of the mayor’s office”. If these are just subsets of the mayor’s office, I’m not sure why they would each need separate budgets and maybe they didn’t. If they did each have separate budgets, did they get billed for a portion of expenses each time the mayor went on some public outing that was related to a given unit’s function, but also related to other things?
I don’t have a problem with public figures getting taxpayer-funded security details for personal activities. Someone like a mayor of NYC is very definitely a target, and it would get pretty hard to find people willing to take these positions if they had to spend a couple hundred thousand a year in extra security costs just to stay reasonably safe while doing whatever they would normally be doing in their personal time (other thatn the occasional billionaire who gets an urge to take a huge pay cut and put up with all the crap that public office entails). But pending some good explanation, this sounds like a deliberate attempt to conceal expenses, and that is definitely not okay for public figures to do with taxpayers’ money.
So far, Fred looks fairly clean (apart from the fact that he took more than $5000 to push pro-abortion legislation as a lobbyist--an ethical breach of a different kind).
But Mitt's ethics background is spotless. In fact, Mitt is a hard-headed businessman, a notorious tightwad. He's never shown the slightest tendency to want to gorge himself at the trough of special interests and hidden slush funds. He's wealthy by his own effort but not greedy for filthy lucre.
The severely ethically-challenged and corrupt Hillary will likely be the Democratic candidate. Only Mitt and Fred can speak boldly to her many ethical failures without sounding like hypocrites.
I read it, and I'm still wondering what the story is. It seems that the Mayor's security detail is paid for by the city, and includes security costs for his personal trips and travel. Well... of course it does. Security details are all of the time, not just working hours.
Somebody want to tell me what the big deal is?
No he is just the damn same.
Read #52. Add onto that the fact that this was to see his mistress. It wasn’t kosher when Clinton was Governor of Arkansas and it wasn’t kosher when Giuliani was Mayor of NYC.
Rudy's personal life is an absolute 'train wreck'. That means, of course, that Rudy DOES benefit a great deal (more than anyone else in the campaign) from the Clinton VACCINE (the position that Clinton and the democrats made so strongly during the Monica fiasco--that personal life DOES NOT MATTER).
I bet that many of the Rudy-Apologists defending Rudy here on FR were the same ones attacking Clinton during the Monica fiasco--by saying that 'PERSONAL LIFE, CHARACTER and CONDUCT DOES MATTER'. How ironic is that???
High Infidelity What if three admitted adulterers run for president and no one cares?
It could have been to go to a whorehouse, and *still* the mayor's security detail remains on duty with him. Like a Presidential Secret Service detail... they go everywhere.
Look, I know that people around here hate Rudy's guts. I've got a few concerns myself. But this is just a lame attempt to spin up a controversy-- hoping that enough buzzwords and turn of lingo will make it sound like there's something interesting happening. But if you actually read the story... there's nothing but vague hysteria over things that when you think about it, aren't all that unusual.
It's like somebody hyperventilating because the Secret Service covers Bush out at his ranch when he's on vacation. Well... duh?
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.