Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/13/2006 3:01:04 PM PST by screw boll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
To: screw boll

hes far from perfect but Id rather have him than McLame or Hitlerly


2 posted on 11/13/2006 3:03:12 PM PST by LC HOGHEAD (BOYCOTT TARGET and its French owners for their Anti-military Anti-American ways)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

We WILL keep the White House!!!


3 posted on 11/13/2006 3:03:13 PM PST by JustPiper ("It's one thing to authorize. It's another thing to actually appropriate the money and do it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

What are his greatest failings with conservatives?
I am not intimate with the details on this.


4 posted on 11/13/2006 3:03:18 PM PST by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll
Well we got to have someone. But talk about someone the Social Conservatives will never love! McCain appeals to the Establishement types only no one else will back him. Rommny is wind vane politican.

Man has the party of Ronald Reagan got NO one better then this?

5 posted on 11/13/2006 3:04:32 PM PST by MNJohnnie (The Democrat Party: Hard on Taxpayers, Soft on Terrorism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

Has he seen the light regarding at least 2A yet, or do his hopes need to be dashed now?


6 posted on 11/13/2006 3:04:55 PM PST by M203M4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll
First McCain, now this...

Now that the 06 elections are over...

...It has begun.

10 posted on 11/13/2006 3:09:01 PM PST by pcottraux (It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

A lot of die-hard "we hate Rudy" social conservatives are going to be very surprised at the stances Rudy believes in and the conservative viewpoints Rudy will bring to the table. It is gonna be a long campaign and all that we Rudy-ites ask is that you LISTEN to what the man says on all the issues and then decide if you'd rather have Rudy or McCain or the Hildebeest as your next President in '08.

Coz all the wishing in the world aint gonna make Tancredo or Geo Allen viable nationwide, no matter how congenial they may seem to the "I hate Rudy no matter what" crowd.


17 posted on 11/13/2006 3:16:06 PM PST by UncleSamUSA (the land of the free and the home of the brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

It's kind of like Tyson-Holyfield, there was supposed to be this big fight, then it gets called off and comes back years later.

Hillary vs. Rudy 2008 - This time it's personal.


19 posted on 11/13/2006 3:17:06 PM PST by word_warrior_bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

Forget it. If he wins the nomination, he'll go down like Dole or Bush-41


25 posted on 11/13/2006 3:23:29 PM PST by lowbridge (Got my own set of keys to the Rovian Weather and Earthquake Machine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

Conservative Case Against Rudy Giuliani

by John Hawkins
Posted Aug 30, 2006 Rudy Giuliani, a contender for the presidency in 2008, is receiving an inordinate amount of positive attention. That's quite understandable since Rudy is charismatic, did a great job on the campaign trail for President Bush in 2004, and his phenomenal performance after 9/11 was much appreciated. However, likeable or not, having Rudy as the GOP's candidate in 2008 would be a big mistake. Here's a short, but sweet primer on some of Rudy's many flaws.

Rudy's Strong Pro-Abortion Stance

As these comments from a 1989 conversation with Phil Donahue show, Rudy Giuliani is staunchly in favor of abortion:

"I've said that I'll uphold a woman's right of choice, that I will fund abortion so that a poor woman is not deprived of a right that others can exercise, and that I would oppose going back to a day in which abortions were illegal.

I do that in spite of my own personal reservations. I have a daughter now; if a close relative or a daughter were pregnant, I would give my personal advice, my religious and moral views ...

Donahue: Which would be to continue the pregnancy.

Giuliani: Which would be that I would help her with taking care of the baby. But if the ultimate choice of the woman - my daughter or any other woman - would be that in this particular circumstance [if she had] to have an abortion, I'd support that. I'd give my daughter the money for it."
Worse yet, Giuliani even supports partial birth abortion:
"I'm pro-choice. I'm pro-gay rights,Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. "No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing," he responded." -- CNN.com, "Inside Politics" Dec 2, 1999
It's bad enough that Rudy is so adamantly pro-abortion, but consider what that could mean when it comes time to select Supreme Court Justices. Does the description of Giuliani that you've just read make you think he's going to select an originalist like Clarence Thomas, who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade -- or does it make you think he would prefer justices like Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy who'd leave Roe v. Wade in place?

Rudy's abortion stance is bad news for conservatives who are pro-life or who are concerned about getting originalist judges on the Supreme Court.

An Anti-Second Amendment Candidate

In the last couple of election cycles, 2nd Amendment issues have moved to the back burner mainly because even Democratic candidates have learned that being tagged with the "gun grabber" label is political poison.

Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani is a proponent of gun control who supported the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapon Ban.

Do Republicans really want to abandon their strong 2nd Amendment stance by selecting a pro-gun control nominee?

Soft on Gay Marriage

Other than tax cuts, the biggest domestic issue of the 2004 election was President Bush's support of a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani has taken a "Kerryesque" position on gay marriage.

Although Rudy, like John Kerry, has said that marriage should remain between a man and a woman, he also supports civil unions, "marched in gay-pride parades ...dressed up in drag on national television for a skit on Saturday Night Live (and moved in with a) wealthy gay couple" after his divorce. He also very vocally opposed running on a gay marriage amendment:
His thoughts on the gay-marriage amendment? "I don't think you should run a campaign on this issue," he told the Daily News earlier this month. "I think it would be a mistake for anybody to run a campaign on it -- the Democrats, the president, or anybody else."
Here's more from the New York Daily News:
"Rudy Giuliani came out yesterday against President Bush's call for a ban on gay marriage.

The former mayor, who Vice President Cheney joked the other night is after his job, vigorously defended the President on his post-9/11 leadership but made clear he disagrees with Bush's proposal to rewrite the Constitution to outlaw gays and lesbians from tying the knot.

"I don't think it's ripe for decision at this point," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"I certainly wouldn't support [a ban] at this time," added Giuliani..."
Although Rudy may grudgingly say he doesn't support gay marriage (and it would be political suicide for him to do otherwise), where he really stands on the issue is an open question.

Pro-Illegal Immigration

As Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics has pointed out, Rudy is an adherent of the same approach to illegal immigration that John McCain, Ted Kennedy, George Bush, and Harry Reid have championed:
"While McCain has taken heat for his support of comprehensive immigration reform, Rudy is every bit as pro-immigration as McCain - if not more so. On the O'Reilly Factor last week Giuliani argued for a "practical approach" to immigration and cited his efforts as Mayor of New York City to "regularize" illegal immigrants by providing them with access to city services like public education to "make their lives reasonable." Giuliani did say that "a tremendous amount of money should be put into the physical security" needed to stop the flow of illegal immigrants coming across the border, but his overall position on immigration is essentially indistinguishable from McCain's."
That's bad enough. But, as Michelle Malkin has revealed, under Giuliani, New York was an illegal alien sanctuary and "America's Mayor" actually sued the federal government in an effort to keep New York City employees from having to cooperate with the INS:
"When Congress enacted immigration reform laws that forbade local governments from barring employees from cooperating with the INS, Mayor Rudy Giuliani filed suit against the feds in 1997. He was rebuffed by two lower courts, which ruled that the sanctuary order amounted to special treatment for illegal aliens and were nothing more than an unlawful effort to flaunt federal enforcement efforts against illegal aliens. In January 2000, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal, but Giuliani vowed to ignore the law."
If you agree with the way that Nancy Pelosi and Company deal with illegal immigration, then you'll find the way that Rudy Giuliani tackles the issue to be right down your alley.

A More Charismatic Version of Arlen Specter

Rudy Giuliani may have many fine qualities, but he is not a conservative, nor has he always been a loyal Republican.

For example, back in the mid-nineties, when he was actually running New York City, Rudy could have fairly been said to have governed as a moderate at best and to the left-of-center at worst:
The New York Observer also had a very interesting selection of quotes from and about Rudy over the years that may give his conservative supporters more than a little pause. Here are a few of those quotations: Does this really sound like the sort of candidate we want as a standard bearer for the Republican Party?

He Can't Keep His Pants Up

There has only been one man who has ever made it to the White House after being divorced and that was Ronald Reagan, who had been married to Nancy for more than 25 years before his campaign in 1980. Rudy, on the other hand, is on his third wife.

Furthermore, his second divorce from Donna Hanover was extremely ugly. Hanover accused Rudy of "open and notorious adultery." She also claimed Rudy had an affair with a staffer, Christyne Lategano-Nicholas, which both Giuliani and Lategano-Nicholas denied. However, Rudy has acknowledged that he started seeing his current wife, Judith Nathan, before his divorce from Hanover was finalized in 2002.

Given how recent this divorce was, Rudy's adultery, and the fact that he married, "the other woman," the press can be expected to cover Rudy's marriage to Hanover exhaustively if he gets the nomination and needless to say, Rudy, quite deservedly, will not come off very well.

Does He Have The Judgment To Be President?

As you've just seen, Rudy hasn't necessarily made the best decisions in his personal life. Unfortunately, the Bernard Kerik incident shows that Giuliani's poor judgment can spill over into political matters as well.

Rudy recommended his friend and business partner, Bernard Kerik, for the position of Homeland Security Secretary and the Bush administration, perhaps because Rudy vouched for him, didn't do a very thorough job of vetting him.

Soon after Kerik's nomination became public, allegations surfaced that Kerik was having two simultaneous affairs, had ties to a construction company "linked to the mob," and had an illegal alien nanny whose taxes hadn't been paid. Under fire from the press, Kerik withdrew his name from consideration for the Homeland Security position and the Bush administration was left with egg on its face for putting up such a scandal ridden nominee.

While the whole debacle was embarrassing for the Bush Administration, it raised even more serious questions about Rudy. After all, if Bernard Kerik is the sort of person Rudy sees as an appropriate friend, business partner, and nominee to run the Homeland Security Department, it makes you wonder what kind of people he is surrounding himself with on a day to day basis.

How Electable Is Rudy Giuliani Really?

One of the biggest selling points for Rudy Giuliani is supposed to be that he's "electable" because a lot of independents and Democrats will vote for him. The problem with that sort of thinking is that if he becomes the Republican nominee, the very liberal mainstream media will spend nine months relentlessly savaging him in an effort to help the Democrats. Because of that, Giuliani's sky high polling numbers with non-Republicans are 100% guaranteed to drop significantly before election time rolls around in 2008.

That is not necessarily a problem; after all the mainstream media is always against the Republican nominee, if -- and this is a big "if" -- the GOP nominee has strong support from the Republican base.

The big problem Rudy has is that he isn't going to be able to generate that kind of support. For one thing, as a candidate, he offers almost nothing to social conservatives, without whom a victory for George Bush in 2004 wouldn't have been possible. If the choice in 2008 comes down to a Democrat and a pro-abortion, soft on gay marriage, left-of-center candidate on social issues -- like Rudy -- you can be sure that millions of "moral values voters" will simply stay home and cost the GOP the election.

The other issue is in the South. George Bush swept every Southern state in 2000 and 2004, which is quite an impressive feat when you consider that the Democrats had Southerner Al Gore at the top of the ticket in 2000 and John Edwards as the veep in 2004. Unfortunately, a pro-abortion, soft on gay marriage, pro-gun control RINO from New York City just isn't going to be able to repeat that performance. Even against a carpetbagger like Hillary Clinton, it's entirely likely that you'll see at least 2 or 3 states in the South turn from red to blue if Rudy Giuliani is the nominee.

Also, the reason why George Bush's approval numbers have been mired in the high thirties/low forties of late is because he has lost a significant amount of Republican support, primarily because his domestic policies aren't considered conservative enough. Since that's the case, running a candidate who is several steps to Bush's left on domestic policy certainly doesn't seem like a great way to unite the base again.

Conclusion

Despite all of his charisma and the wonderful leadership he showed after 9/11, Rudy Giuliani is not a Reagan Republican. To the contrary, Giuliani is another Christie Todd Whitman, another Arlen Specter, another Olympia Snowe. He's a throwback to the "bad old days" before Reagan, when the GOP was run by moderate Country Club Republicans who considered conservatives to be extremists. Trying to revive that failed strategy again is likely to lead to a Democratic President in 2008 and numerous setbacks for the Republican Party.
27 posted on 11/13/2006 3:24:49 PM PST by Spiff (Death before Dhimmitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll
"The former mayor is a moderate who supports gun control, same-sex civil unions, embryonic stem-cell research and abortion rights — stands that would put him at odds with the majority of the GOP conservative base."

a moderate who supports gun control, same-sex civil unions, embryonic stem-cell research and abortion rights?

Which makes him an unelectable liberal turd that was afraid to run against Hildabeast in this past election because he knew he would lose.
29 posted on 11/13/2006 3:26:46 PM PST by Beagle8U (Angry voters tend to make poor choices politically.....Unfortunately we all have to live with them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

Not just no, HELL NO!


30 posted on 11/13/2006 3:27:32 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (MAY I DIE ON MY FEET IN MY SWAMP, BUAIDH NO BAS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll
As an Upstate New Yorker, I remember when Giuiani endorsed Mario Cuomo over Pataki and when he came into town with Mario, many Republicans were waiting at the airport with a change of voter registration card.
33 posted on 11/13/2006 3:31:00 PM PST by GinaLolaB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll
If Rudy is the 2008 Republican presidential candidate then my family and I will not only NOT vote for him, but will ACTIVELY recruit others to not vote for him either.

He has no evident moral foundation that I can see.

Are you listening Republican party???

In our state of Colorado, all of the Republicans took a beating EXCEPT for those that entered their race clinging to strong Christian principles!

We succeeded in keeping Tom Tancredo, Marilyn Musgrave, and bringing Doug Lamborn to the U.S. Congress.
34 posted on 11/13/2006 3:35:42 PM PST by politicket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll
Wait I'm confused; Rudy can run even though he is divorced but Newt Gingrich is damaged goods for the same reason? Yeah run another compassionate conservative/liberal light. At this rate the republican party will be out of power for the next two decades.
40 posted on 11/13/2006 3:48:50 PM PST by samm1148 (Pennsylvania-They haven't taxed air--yet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

Republicans Should Stay Optimistic and On Offense
By Rudy Giuliani


RealClear Politics, Nov 5 -

For the past six months, I've been traveling across the country campaigning for Republican candidates. Conventional wisdom from Washington predicts a tough year for the party. By playing offense, solidifying our ranks and reaching out to Reagan Democrats and Independents, I believe that Republicans have reason to be optimistic. Because on the big issues Americans care about - from national security to the economy to the Supreme Court - Republican leadership has delivered time and again on its promises.

Republicans are united by our belief in going on offense to win the war on terror. Five years ago, our nation learned a painful lesson about the dangers of an inconsistent approach to dealing with the evil of terrorism. In his speech to Congress on September 20th, 2001, President Bush declared that we would go on offense against terrorists, and he has made good on that promise. Terrorists have been destabilized and put on defense around the world - including Afghanistan and Iraq.

Americans should remember the positive impact of tax cuts on our economy. Most Republicans agree with Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush that tax cuts are a powerful stimulus to the economy - that's why I cut taxes 23 times as Mayor of New York. Most Democrats disagree with that philosophy - it's an honest disagreement. But let's look at the results: Today, we have a 4.4% unemployment rate in our country - lower than the average in the 70's, 80's and 90's. The stock market recently hit 12,000 - an all-time high. And the lower tax rate is generating more revenue than the higher rate did before - $250 billion more than last year. Republicans stand for lower taxes; Democrats stand for higher taxes - it's as simple as that.

Finally, let's look at the Republican record on judges. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito are models of what judges should be in this country. They are principled individuals who can be trusted to defend the original intent of the Constitution rather than trying to legislate their own political beliefs from the bench. The successful appointments of Justices Roberts and Alito are signs of promises kept.

But there is still more work to do: more promises that need to be kept.

When I talk to people across America, I hear their frustration with the gridlock and scandals from Washington. As a former U.S. Attorney, I spent much of my career bringing corrupt government officials from both parties to justice. Neither party has a monopoly on virtue or vice - but we do have legitimate differences in terms of our ideas and vision for the future. And those principled differences should guide Americans' decisions on Election Day.

The people I've been talking with on the campaign trail want to see government get serious about fiscal discipline by cutting wasteful spending. American families want to see a revitalized education system with accountability, putting the focus on the students, increased school choice and higher standards, so that the United States can continue to be economically competitive throughout the 21st Century. They want us to do more to secure our borders while working to ensure that the virtues of legal immigration and assimilation are respected. They want us to move more aggressively toward greater energy independence.

But of course, the most important piece of unfinished business facing the nation is winning the war on terror.

In the era of President Truman and President Eisenhower, people used to say that "Partisan politics should end at the waters' edge." But lately some influential political voices seem to have forgotten this American tradition. The war on terror is not about "red" versus "blue" states - it is about right versus wrong; it is about good overcoming evil.

That's why these mid-term elections are so important. That's why we can't turn back. That is why Republicans need to solidify our ranks while reaching out with confidence. Because the issues that unite us as Republicans are the same issues that unite the vast majority of Americans: a commitment to winning the war on terror; a core belief in fiscal conservatism; and a faith in individual freedom. Advancing these principles, while staying on offense, can help keep the GOP a strong majority party in the United States


41 posted on 11/13/2006 3:50:55 PM PST by motife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll
Go Rudy! Knock McCain out of the race!!!

That said, if he gets the nod, I'm afraid that he'll lose New York to Hillary, and that would be a damn shame.

And the South would go third party, which will give Hillary the landslide.

42 posted on 11/13/2006 3:50:56 PM PST by Tanniker Smith (I didn't know she was a liberal when I married her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

The Midwest, Northeast is slowly but surely slipping permanently into Democrat Blue for electoral votes.
Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, New Jersey may be permanently lost.

Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Missouri, New Mexico are VERY dubious. Even Colorado is slipping away.

The electorate in the above states is really majority conservative regarding low taxes, reduced spending, limited government, pro-growth, pro-Israel and anti-Islamofascist and has its home in the GOP, NOT with the Democrats.

The GOP needs to LEAD with the issues that attract the rust belt voters who should be voting Republican, issues which are consistent with a government that LEAVES PEOPLE ALONE and doesn't preach to them.

I am not a member of the fundamentalist right, although I am a Christian. I think that bottom line, some of the fundamentalist hot button issues are "quixotic". Work for these values in your community. How are they issues that Congress and the President, the Federal government should be sticking its nose in?

Look at South Dakota. What happened to the abortion referendum there? If it can't win in S.D., where can it win?

As for 2nd amendment issues, if anti-gun laws are passed that are unconstitutional, the Supreme Court will overturn it. I don't see the big paranoia here as something where there no compromises can be made.

Giuliani supports an originalist court, as a former prosecutor, his ideal justice is Antony Scalia, and he's praised John Roberts and Sam Alito as judges he would appoint. What else can the fundamentalist right ask for in a candidate as far as practical action?

The GOP needs to come to grips with losing MN, WI, OH, PA, NJ, NH, IA, NM, MO, CO, and MI or ALL will soon be lost.

Rudy Giuliani is a candidate who has great promise of turning those states red again on a consistent basis, and not with a "me-too" Republicanism of Arnold Schwarzenegger or of the 1950's and 1960's country club GOP of Evertt Dirksen and Gerald Ford, but with true Reaganite policies across the spectrum of issues that make the GOP the Less Government/ More Freedom party.

I'm an extremely conservative libertarian hawk. BECAUSE I am so extreme I'm determined to WIN in the long term and to create a PERMANENT majority with a conservative message that also sells/ suceeds.

Now is not the time to play around.

Hillary Clinton could easily win every state Kerry did, with Iowa, New Mexico, and Colorado on top. Don't underestimate her.


43 posted on 11/13/2006 3:52:15 PM PST by motife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

I have to wonder if he's thinking that his way to the White House is through the VP slot. I guess he figures if he has any chance of being picked for VP he will have to keep his name in the news by running for President.

I dont like his gun control stance, but Im ok with all his other positions. Id be very happy with him being the nominee.


44 posted on 11/13/2006 3:55:03 PM PST by OmegaMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: screw boll

The Republicans better come up with somebody for 2008 besides McCain, Guillani, or Newt Gingrich. Unless we just want to surrender to the democrats like in 1996 with Bob Dole.

All 3 of these have been pushed as good candidates but all come with so much baggage that a large part of the Republican base will not vote.

McCain - Keating Five, think we won't hear it. Plus hes insane. Lots of folks can't stand him period, no matter what the media and his fans here at FR say.

Guillani - cheats on wife, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-gun and people HERE on FR are actually pushing this guy. By 2008, it will have been 7 years since 9/11 and hes been out of the public eye too long. The tales of the heroic mayor will be ancient history. Plus he choked and dropped out of running against Hillary twice.

Gingrich - cheats on not one, but two wives. That'll get the base going TO STAY HOME. Plus the book deal and other general crap, plus he choked and then quit also. Been out of politics too long. He has some good ideas but does anyone really think he is electable nationwide?


47 posted on 11/13/2006 4:08:04 PM PST by packrat35 (guest worker/day worker=SlaveMart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson