Posted on 04/17/2007 6:25:48 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Rudy Giuliani would make a superb president. he combines Reaganesque vision with extraordinary attention to detail. He is strong on national security and also has the principles and policies to strengthen the economy. He is a tax cutter and a foe of the federal income tax's complexity.
He is a fervent free trader, much needed, as global protectionist pressures are rising. He has also demonstrated an antipathy toward unnecessary regulation. If Sarbanes-Oxley hasn't been amended by the time Giuliani takes office, he will push hard to remove its counterproductive elements.
While I disagree with him in certain areas--I am pro-life, and he is pro-choice--he has made it abundantly clear that he would appoint John Roberts/Samuel Alito-type judges to the federal bench.
Giuliani cut or eliminated 23 taxes. The top rate for the city income tax, for instance, was knocked down by 21%. The overall tax burden for a New York City resident went down a remarkable 17%.
During Giuliani's tenure the Big Apple's economy blossomed: 423,000 new jobs were created. More people were moving into the city than leaving it. That he achieved so much going against a generations-old spend-tax-welfare political ethos is astonishing.
(Excerpt) Read more at members.forbes.com ...
Is this the best the anti-Rudy people can offer to lead the Republican Party into the second decade of the 20th Century?
The Republicans must 1) like losing elections, and 2) enjoy being the laughingstock of Hillary and her Democratic minions.
Stay strong, those of us who can look upon this issue with clarity of thought.
What is it about the Supreme Court upholding the congressional ban on PBA that you don’t understand??????
Those same two conservative justices are exactly the type of jurist that Rudy says he’ll appoint to the courts. Stay strong in your support, Katie-O; the tide of history is lifting Rudy’s boat.
Ah, now you’ve said it right “upholding the congressional ban.”
Before, when you said SCOTUS had banned PBA, you were wrong. Now you’re saying it right.
If Rudy believes SCOTUS was right on this decision, it’s a reversal of what he told Tim Russert in 2000. However, agreeing with SCOTUS on this decision is NOT the same as supporting a ban on partial birth abortion. There is a huge difference.
I keep reading negative attacks on Rudy saying, this is what he really means. Let's allow the man to say himself what he really means. Isn't that the fair thing to do?
I agree. And you KNOW the Dems are going to use Abortion as a political football in this election. They’ll be saying “A vote for a Republican will take away a woman’s right to choose.” Since the majority of the population don’t want Roe overturned, they might fall for it. Rudy is the ONLY candidate who has a chance of beating the Dems over the head with their own issue. I can almost bet that the "conservative" candidates will soften their rhetoric on abortion, so as not to turn away the moderate voters.
Already done.
He has previously indicated his support for partial birth abortion. In his statement today, he did not say he opposed partial birth abortion.
Well there you go.. Steve Forbes is a flaming Moonbat..
Rudy Giuliani—yawn. Ha ha. He’s an actor! He acts like he’s a republican when the truth is, he’s a democrat. He’s not a good actor because everyone knows he ain’t no conservative—even his momma knows...
“He only became a Republican after he began to get all these jobs from them. He’s definitely not a conservative Republican. He thinks he is, but he isn’t.”
— Rudy’s mother Helen
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
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.