Replies

If he wore sackcloth and ashes, and walked down Broadway, loudly wailing and lamenting his previous crimes,...etcetc

Which, of course, he would of course have to do in any case since he is a popular former Mayor in the most liberal city on earth, so he's got some things that make him popular with "eeeevil" people, thus he smells to high heaven tored staters, just because! [Neew York Sitteee!?! Gitarope!]

I'm fine with any of those that you've got in your list, like I told Narses, I'm an ABH.

Look down on me all you want, but I have one principle, and that is that this country cannot be handed over to an open Marxist like Hillary, because it can NEVER be undone, and it undermines the hopes for every other fiscal and socially conservative principle for the rest of my life and most of our kids'. That is my one principle that narses won't give me any credit for.

BTW I still can't understand what anyone ever saw in Geo Allen. I had heard so much hype about him and then I heard him on MTP or something, and I thought, "Good Lord what an uninspiring milquestoast muddle-feet." Sure nuff, he got taken out by the wit of a college kid.

Dear sam_paine,

"Which, of course, he would of course have to do in any case since he is a popular former Mayor in the most liberal city on earth, so he's got some things that make him popular with "eeeevil" people, thus he smells to high heaven tored staters, just because! [Neew York Sitteee!?! Gitarope!]"

Not sure what your point is here.

If you have one, you may wish to try to rephrase.

"Look down on me all you want, but I have one principle, and that is that this country cannot be handed over to an open Marxist like Hillary, because it can NEVER be undone, and it undermines the hopes for every other fiscal and socially conservative principle for the rest of my life and most of our kids'. That is my one principle that narses won't give me any credit for."

I understand what you're saying but disagree for a variety of reasons.

First, I don't view Mrs. Clinton as the Dem's strongest candidate. And rumblings from folks I know suggest that a lot of Dems don't think she's the strongest candidate, either.

Second, I think that a second Clinton regime would provoke a second 1994, and that a Republican Congress would likely hold Mrs. Clinton largely in check.

Opposition to the first President Clinton gave real life and heart to Republicans, and created a stark contrast between conservative values and liberal values that resulted in a significant shift in the electorate toward conservative values.

Third, I think that a Giuliani presidency would take the life out of conservative Republican opposition to liberal legislation and government. As we see with President Bush when he's pushing liberal crap, it's tough for Republicans in Congress to oppose even the most liberal acts of a Republican president.

It is unlikely that the Republicans could get the same sort of traction against the liberal crap of a president of their own party to try to regain a congressional majority. The continuing Democrat majority would likely offer up plenty of liberal legislation, and why the heck wouldn't President Rudy sign it? Why the heck not go for federal Medicaid funding of abortion, federal funding of Planned Barrenhood, more gun control, federal ENDA for homosexual special rights?

Do you honestly think that if a Democrat-controlled Congress offered up this stuff, stuff with which Mr. Giuliani agrees, that he'd VETO IT?? Do you honestly think that the Republicans in Congress could get traction to oppose him when he responded favorably to feelers from the Democrats on these issues??

I suspect that a Giuliani presidency would result in a generational (or worse) setback for the cause of life, of protection of the family, of other social conservative issues.

I think that a Giuliani presidency could be fatal to the United States.

"BTW I still can't understand what anyone ever saw in Geo Allen."

I saw him govern as Governor of Virginia for four years, and he did a pretty good job.

sitetest