Giuliani doubters in for Rudy awakening

The Boston Herald ^ | 03/18/2007 | Deroy Murdock

[JohnSheppard]

The same Beltway experts who declared Sen. John McCain of Arizona the GOP front-runner, even as he under-polled fellow presidential contender Rudolph Giuliani, now parrot equally dodgy concepts. When Republicans meet “the real Rudy,” they will abandon New York’s former mayor like cattle fleeing a burning barn. Then, the wobbly Washington wisdom continues, Giuliani’s three marriages, and his less-than-solidly-right-wing views on gays, guns and gametes will torpedo his buoyant presidential hopes.

These seers now detect unhappiness with the GOP aspirants. They cite a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in which 26 percent of Republican primary voters were dissatisfied with Giuliani, McCain and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, among others. However, 56 percent called these choices satisfactory. This mirrors the 57 percent of conservative Republicans who preferred Giuliani, versus 31 percent for McCain. More broadly, Republicans backed Giuliani by 38 percent to McCain’s 24, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s 10, Romney’s 8, and 2 percent each for Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

But what if voters like Giuliani better upon understanding his pre-9/11 performance? Educating Republicans on his complete mayoral record - and soon - may be Giuliani’s best bet for extinguishing the lingering grumbling about his candidacy.

[JHBowden]

Pimping the economic ideas of Howard Dean and Ralph Nader is considered "conservative" here at freerepublic.com lately.

[freedomfiter2]

At its core and in its essense, trade is capitalistic. Just food for thought.


Trade which builds up our enemies and diminishes our ability to wage war hurts our country and the world as a whole. Trade with free nations is a positive influence at home and abroad.

[ken5050]

Chris Matthew's Sunday show just showed a 2 minute video of Rudy in drag, in a falsetto, kissing, then slapping, Donald Trump..

[Fishrrman]

Anyone that supports a liberal candidate that is pro-gay, pro-late term abortion and anti-2nd Amendment should not be allowed to call themselves a FReeper.

Let's change just a few words to your statement:
"Anyone that supports a moderate or conservative candidate that is anti-gay, pro-life and pro-2nd Amendment should not be allowed to call themselves a Democrat."

So, what are your words for Freepers who care to exercise something called freedom of thought and opinion?
"Aus!", perhaps?

- John

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Free trade does not sell out your country...

A welfare plantation for illegals is not capitalism...

[ziravan]

It would be similar only IF the Libertarian candidate had a chance at winning.

Look, America has survived liberal Democrats in office before, and will do so again. Can the Republican party survive a liberal Republican in office? That's a more vexing question.

The heart and soul of the Republican party should be contended in good faith. I'd rather LOSE when losing means no substantial difference than 'win' when winning means the destruction of that upon which I stand.

Whether a Republican party, headed by Rudy wins or loses, the result is STILL a liberal is in the White House. IF the party loses, then, to quote one of Rudy's peers, the party at least will learn that you have to 'dance with them that brung ya'.

THAT lesson would be worth the price paid, since that price by comparison of Rudy vs. Hillary (or name your loser here) would be minimal.

The issue however, doesn't come down to 'teaching a lesson'. It comes down to personal principle. I cannot vote for such a person, no matter what party label he or she chooses to wear. It is a matter of integrity. In the end, it's the agenda that matters, and NOT the label.

You can quote 'Rudy is good for the war' or some other stuff if you like. In reality, there is every bit as much a war going on over values and I will not purposely choose which war is more important to win. They both are. If it takes being temporarily lost in the wilderness to bring down the walls of Jericho, then that is a price that would need to be paid in order to learn the value of faith.

Rudy is a feckless choice. Indeed, it would be no choice at all. Run, Newt! Run!

~faith.

[antisocial]

"I wonder if there might be some pushback against the overly self righteous single issue voters that many think are hurting the republican party."

Which "single issue" are you so worried about?

[Fishrrman]

"...but Rudy supporters will be in for a shock after he's in office a while."
You are so right. They have noooooooo idea.

Could not EXACTLY the same thing be said about G.W. Bush?

I voted twice for him, expecting a "conservative" or at least someone who would enforce the laws of the land (such as immigration law). And what did we get?

I would prefer a Giuliani, who is liberal on his surface but who [in office] persues modestly conservative policies (they certainly seemed that way to the NYC left and media, who HATED him), to an "all dressed up" conservative-on-the-outside [such as Bush] who hobnobs with Mexican Presidents, eating their chili for them!

- John

[Polybius]

........hasn't been any more effective at getting his points out than President Bush. The problem with that is for me, he'd be just as effective as President Bush at defending himself against liberal attacks. We all know how President Bush has done...nothing but silence in response. It's just maddening.

That, in a nut shell, is why George W. Bush will go down in History as a mediocre President at best or a failed President at worst.

Lincoln and Churchill saved their respective nations by inspiring the Home Front in spite of numerous early military defeats.

Bush has almost lost a war that is of vital strategic interest to America by yielding the Bully Pulpit to Copperheads and by waging a war designed not to displease Copperheads in any way in spite of stunning early military victories.

American political dynamics being what they are, with the Sheeple of the Center tipping the balance in Presidential elections, makes the election of a true Conservative possible only after the unmitigated disaster of a liberal such as Jimmy Carter.

Likewise, the election of a Hillary is only possible after the disaster of a Home Front that has been allowed to be thoroughly demoralized during war time.

Because of the Sheeple of the Center, a Conservative cannot and will not be elected President in 2008.

Hoping to get Hillary in the White house so that a Conservative is elected in 2012 after a disasterous Hillary Presidency is playing games with America's very survival as America cannot afford to abandon 70% of the World's known oil reserves to a nuclear armed Iran. In addition, for those who use abortion as a litmus test, a Hillary White House would pack every vacancy in the Supreme Court with Ruth Ginsburg clones and keep late term abortion as the U.S. law of the land for decades to come.

Come November 2008, I would be extremely surprised if Giuliani is not the Republican candidate. At that time, I will not stay home and I will vote for Giuliani to ensure that the next President will not surrender America's vital interests in the Persian Gulf and will not pack the Supreme Court with Ruth Ginsburg clones.

Those who want to stay home or throw their vote away in a protest vote have a First Amendment right to do so but they will have hurt America with their political irrelevance just as Bush has hurt America by choosing to be politically irrelevant.

[JHBowden]

I'll say up front that immigration is a beautiful thing and I want to see more of it. Coming to the United States to live long and prosper is the most noblest of motives.

The problem isn't the illegals, who are good for the North American economy. In a rational society, we would welcome them in openly and legally. The problem is the ridiculous minimum wage laws we have here in the United States.

If we give illegals some sort of legal status, then they will have to be paid above the market price by government law. We will simultaneously throw working illegals out of a job and into government dependency at the same time.

On the other hand, we would be doing irreparable harm to our economy by deporting 12,000,000 people.

Bush's proposals, which split the difference by putting people on a path to citizenship, make the best out of a generally bad situation.

[LowCountryJoe]

Define our enemy. Are the people of Hong Kong or Tiawan (the people who are pressuring mainland China to liberalize internaly) our enemies? Is India, Chile, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Japan, South Africa, etc. our enemy? Oh, I know...it's those filthy Arabs at the U.A.E. That wanted to buy an ownership stake in U.S. ports operations that are the enemy. Probably some of the most tolerant business people in the world where Christians, Muslims, and Jews routinely engage in commerce with one another without violent incident and where they all benefit from the exchange of goods and saervices. Yep, that free trade sure is some scary stuff

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The problem isn't the illegals, who are good for the North American economy.

Bankrupting public and private health institutions is good for the economy?

Filling our prisons is good for the economy?

Affirmative action in citizenship for illegals from Mexico is good for the economy?

Selling our country out to illegals who have no allegiance to the United States to start with is good for the economy?

Are you a joke or just a traitor?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The problem isn't the illegals, who are good for the North American economy.

Bankrupting public and private health institutions is good for the economy?

Filling our prisons is good for the economy?

Affirmative action in citizenship for illegals from Mexico is good for the economy?

Selling our country out to illegals who have no allegiance to the United States to start with is good for the economy?

Are you a joke or just a traitor?

[freedomfiter2]

It's funny that you had to dance all around Communist China. Obviously, mainland China is our enemy. You could at this point in time add Russia N.korea, Syria and Iran. I'm not saying that trade should be banned with these countries, but it should be a negotiating tool not a given.

[JHBowden]

Francis--

There are solid, economic reasons why things are screwed up. You, like many paleocons, try to make things into a personal culture war.

Am I in favor of getting government out of the health care business, and allowing medicine to choose who they provide coverage for? You bet.

Am I in favor of putting criminals in prison? Absolutely. Blacks are far more likely to commit crime than Latinos in the United States, but I am certainly not in favor of deporting them wholesale.

As far as the allegiance nonsense, Nativists were saying the same thing about Germans and the Irish back in the 1830s and 1840s-- they were more loyal to the Pope than they were to the Republic, blah blah blah.

Given Carlos Mencia is not a menace to the United States, I think the border bots suffer from something very similar to Bush Derangement Syndrome. Revolutionary Muslims killed 3,000 people during an astonishing attack on our own soil, and radical revolutionaries like Ahmadinejad are planning to follow up the attacks with nukes. Rather than face this existential danger, many have displaced the emotion on things more innocuous-- Bush is destroying us, immigrants are destroying us, global warming is destroying us, the beliefs of Christians are destroying us according to atheists.

All of this is nonsense, and is really amazing considering the real people who plan to do some real harm to the Republic with the weapons of Armageddon.

[spectre]

"Chris Matthew's Sunday show just showed a 2 minute video of Rudy in drag, in a falsetto, kissing, then slapping, Donald Trump.."

We all know by now, how Trump feels about the WOT and Bush. Anyone think he won't influence Rudy? LOL.

BTW, the Rats are saving the best of the worst about Rudy till AFTER he gets the GOP nomination..IMHO.

sw

[Dog Gone]

Are you a joke or just a traitor?

I think you should apologize. There used to be a time at this forum where every post didn't have to end with a blistering insult.

We were free to engage in discussion, even disagreement, without insults.

People were free to be corrected and enlightened without being called idiots.

Take it out of the gutter. We can do better.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Blacks are far more likely to commit crime than Latinos in the United States...

Our prisons in the West and the gangs on the streets have more Mexican nationals in them than American citizens.

More Americans are killed by illegals than have been in the war on terror and the Iraq war.

Give it a rest... stop selling us out and betraying this country...

---

Revolutionary Muslims killed 3,000 people during an astonishing attack on our own soil, and radical revolutionaries like Ahmadinejad are planning to follow up the attacks with nukes.

LAX IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT YOU IDIOT!!!

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Hey, if you want to excuse the lax immigration enforcement that gave us 9-11, go ahead...

I will not...

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Oh, and by the way....

If you did not see the huge illegal immigrant protests in the streets when immigration policy was debated in D.C.; where signs that glorified Bin Laden were all over the place, I'll call you plain stupid as well...