Posted on 01/30/2007 5:41:01 AM PST by areafiftyone
Dismiss this matter at electoral risk.
Oh, and regarding needing tons of money - attack ads are now dirt cheap - they can just be dumped on YouTube. Kerik crash-and-burn videos are perfectly suited for that medium.
Hopefully we will see many new techniques but last election showed that the media still is in control of the American "mind".
The pubbies gave the MSM the hammers to hit them with.
I did not "speak" for you I MOCKED you. Laughing at your absurd statement is not speaking for you. Had I been speaking for you I would have said "You believe Kukinch is the GOP's biggest fear."
Logic is not "ignorant" or "knowledgeable" either. And the logic in mocking you was perfect.
You apparently live in a world where the electorate is intensely patriotic and pro-military. It is NEITHER. That electorate came very close to electing an OUTRIGHT TRAITOR and military fraud last election. Almost 50% of the voters did not give a shiite. Only the Swift Boaters kept that fool out of the White House.
Hunter will never be in a debate with Hlllary or Obama. He has NO chance of being the candidate. Unless it is VP debates.
Not true. The Treason Media has been attacking the President relentlessly for the things he has done correctly and finally the brain dead fell for it.
justshutupandtakeit is always right and everyone else is wrong or haven't you noticed.
Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between some freepers and a dem operative.
Wow. I feel like FR returned to pre November 2006 when people swore up and down that Dana Ivy was going to win and even worse that Katherine Harris was a lock. I would say that instead of worrying about Duncan Hunter or anybody else we wait until we see who ends up on the Primary vote in the state we are from. By then we will certainly lose a few of the names and then we can make an intelligent pick. After the primary, according the the FR Bible everyone MUST support the Republican Candidate NO MATTER WHAT!!! lol.
I don't care to leave the image-making of Duncan Hunter or other conservatives to the MSM, thank you.
OK.
So you are speaking and do NOT believe you are right? Anyone I have argued with can tell you I admit it when I have been shown to be wrong when it comes to facts. However, your opinion will not cause me to change mine when it is ONLY that.
It is easy to figure who the operatives are. They are the ones encouraging the nomination of SURE FIRE losers rather than one who could win all the while pretending to be conservatives.
I feel like FR returned to pre November 2006 when people swore up and down that Dana Ivy was going to win and even worse that Katherine Harris was a lock. [Interesting comparison but you will be unable to find even ONE comment from me indicating I believed either would win. But you are right in that some of these candidates will not last past the summer others will not run in every state. But I think these threads are fun. AND I will definitely support whoever is running against Hillary.]
"They are the ones encouraging the nomination of SURE FIRE losers"...I don't consider electing a Rino like Rudy McRomney much of a victory.
Being from Illinois, perhaps you can explain how well it worked out when lyin' rino, George Ryan was elected governor over Glenn Poshard.
1.respected the 2nd amendment
2.overturned roe v wade
3.cut the size and scope of power of the government
4.acted as a sovereign nation with interests separate from those of other nations or groups
....than they would be exercising their civic duty in running for office against two candidates who turned a blind eye to those issues.
How far would the Republicans have to fall away from their traditional views before you would abandon them? What if Hillary came out tommorow and said she wanted to become a Republican, would you support her?
tony snow for president
A military background isn't everything.
Ever hear of James Stockdale?
From Human Events:
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?
I will blame Rinos like you who contrary to your tagline "believe the treason media." McGuiliRomney is at the top of the pile not based on their conservative credentials but because fools believe Wolf Blitzer when he says they are the leading candidates. It is a self fulfilling prophesy.
That is right. Now what you need to do is bow down and kiss the boots of the "suits." As you cast your vote for them ask them to be kind but you should ultimately accept whatever their will shall be. That is what the framers intended./SARC
Ryan was a crook, Guiliani is not. He puts crooks AWAY. But distinctions are clearly not your strong suit.
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.