Oh, yeah. The GOP "progressive" standard bearer: pro abortion, pro gay rights, pro gun control, pro illigal immigration, pro environmentalism. Go Team!!
Giuliani Addresses Global Warming, Immigration
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1784518/posts
(CNSNews.com) - Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani told a Silicon Valley business group on Monday that he "definitely'' believes in global warming, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. He also praised Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for being a "progressive'' leader on the environment and calling for immigration policies that welcome "people who make contributions" to America's economy.
Jim, if the candidate you are supporting in the primaries, still a year away, wins they will have my support. I'm for Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani at this point. As far as I can see no other candidates officially in the race have the capability of leading this nation. They have great ideas like Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter do, but not have the necessary leadership experience, IMHO of course.
So now Rudy is pro-choice, pro-gun-control, pro-gay-rights, pro-amnesty, pro-CFR AND pro-global warming.
But trust us, he's a conservative! /Joe Isuzu mode
I'm not sure I understand what is wrong with either of those two statements. The globe is warming up over the past few years. The question is whether it is man made or a naturally occurring event. To me the evidence looks like it's naturally occurring and while part of it may be man-made, that part is relatively insignificant. As far as immigrants, this country has been built by immigrants who can make contributions. If a person can contribute to the US Society, let them in.
I can understand the MSM's push for this candidacy. I can even understand the push from radio pundits. What I cannot understand is the enthusism for Rudy displayed on this forum. It seems as if many FReepers - perhaps even most - are eager to concede defeat in the Culture War and are turning on those who still think it is worth fighting. On some of these threads, it looks as if FreeRepublic has morphed into FreeAbortions (at taxpayer expense). How do you account for it?
With all due respect to the normally well-informed Ann Coulter - is that who A.C is? - that is a false analogy. Gerald Ford was never "elected" to anything in the first place. He was basically a sacrificial lamb. Likewise, I don't know anyone who considered Dole "electable". He was about as uncharismatic as they come. He got the nomination because he was the elder statesman and had the establishment behind him. Again, he was more like a sacrificial lamb because Clinton was going to coast anyway. I don't think there was a soul in America who thought he would actually win. And, while I was too young to remember, I don't think Reagan was ever considered a "kook" by the GOP establishment. (Maybe Goldwater was?) "Electability" is more about personality than it is about policy. When are people going to wake up and realize it wasn't merely Reagan's policies that made him popular -- it was his personality?