Posted on 10/22/2007 11:51:09 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
And, if Giuliani should, by some twist of fate, win the presidency, it will mean the end of Reaganism. It will represent a turning point in the history of the Republican Party and our nation. It will mean the continued deaths of tens of millions unborn babies when we are closer than ever to defeating the abortion culture that Roe v. Wade initiated in 1973.
Should Giuliani succeed, it will represent the end of any hope for the Republican Party to serve as an alternative to the Democratic Party for millions of people like me and Dr. Dobson. That's bigger than two terms of Hillary Rodham Clinton. That's worse even than four or eight more years in the wilderness.
I actually believe it would be worse for America if Rudy Giuliani were elected president than Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If Hillary wins, the reaction to her predictable overreaching will be similar to what we experienced in 1994 – a "Republican revolution."
If Rudy wins, millions will simply defect from the Republican Party. If you want to see the rise of a third party, just be sure to nominate Giuliani and elect him as president.
The long-term consequences of a Giuliani victory are far worse than the consequences of a Clinton victory.
So let's avoid that dire choice now. There's still time to avoid such an unpleasant scenario. Let's just nominate a Republican the Republican base can support.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
I don't see anything in the Bible about supporting an adulterous man that used the power of government to kill the unborn and promote sexual sin that violates Biblical morality just in order to win an election for a political party.
What is STUPID is think voting for a liberal running as a Republican won't do more damage than putting a liberal Democrat in the White House.
Either way, you have been warned. Millions will stay home of Giuliani is the nominee and that will make Hillary Clinton the next President? Don't like that? Work hard to make sure the next GOP nominee is one that can unify the party.
Wrong. It is getting pretty clear that what the conservative movement may need is, in fact, a Hillary presidency. Giuliani as president means the end of conservatism. Hillary as president would strengthen the conservative movement as no one has ever done before. It took four years of Carter to give us Ronald Reagan. The nation endured those four years of hell and we are a better nation because of it. But for Jimmy Carter, we would never have elected Ronald Reagan.
Work hard to make sure the next GOP nominee is one that can unify the party.
__________________________
Like Duncan Hunter.
If the GOP makes abortion ‘the litmus test’ it will be a disaster politically.
That ‘war’ was fought, and lost, folks. The simple fact of the matter is a clear majority of Americans believe it should be an option.
Before anyone flames me for pointing out the reality, please note I’m not a ‘supporter’ of abortion. I’m male, middle aged, and its not something that will ever come up in my personal life.
I’m just noting the reality. This is to the GOP what overtly running on a gun control platform would be like for the Democrats in 2008.
Women will vote overwhelmingly against the GOP if this is highlighted once again. The Republicans will be playing into one of the few ‘strengths’ Hillary Clinton brings to the table.
Just my opinion.
Incredibly, you don't realize that is more true if Giuliani reaches the White House. It's dumb not to realize the damage done by turning BOTH parties over liberals.
All one has to do is look at the damage being done by Arnold Schwarzenegger out in California to a get a preview of what a Giuliani Presidency will be like and what he'd turn the GOP into.
That will be my policy if Giuliani is nominated. I believe a bible-believing Christian (there is no other kind of Christian) should do what he/she knows is morally right and leave the result to God.
America has spit in God's eye way too many times in the last 40+ years to get off scot free. Part of his inevitable judgment on us may include a Hillary presidency to finish the job that was started when America threw God out of it's national life and invited the enemy of our souls in.
There is no doubt a reason why America is not mentioned in bible prophecy while nations such as Israel, Iran, Syria, Russia, Turkey, the Euro Union, etc, are mentioned, and that could very well be because America won't be a major world power by the time those end time events take place.
Invalid comparison.
“That ‘war’ was fought, and lost, folks. The simple fact of the matter is a clear majority of Americans believe it should be an option.”
New Abortion Poll Shows Strong U.S. Public Opposition to Roe v. Wade
WASHINGTON, March 11, 2005 A Harris Interactive Poll on abortion released March 3 shows the strongest opposition to Roe v. Wade in years. The survey of 1,012 U.S. adults conducted February 8-13, 2005, shows Americans support Roe v. Wade by just a 52 to 47 percent margin, a significant change from the 57 to 41 percent margin in 1998. This weakening support for Roe is likely even more pronounced than the poll indicates because the Harris survey question understates Roe v. Wade by declaring “the U.S. Supreme Court decision making abortions up to three months of pregnancy legal.”
IMO Rudy is a much better example of the classic RINO than Ahhnold can ever aspire to be.
I have never lived in NYC, (in NY state but not NYC) but AFAIK the only thing Rudy did while in office that might qualify as even moderately illiberal was allowing NYC cops to vigorously enforce the law and thereby reduce violent crime in the city. Other than that, where is the difference between him and his crony Bloomberg?
Giuliani has never said that he is opposed to Roe v. Wade. The closest he came was during the first debate when he said that it would be ok with him if Roe is upheld and ok if Roe is overturned. However, in the past he has publically celebrated the anniversery of Roe v. Wade and was declared to be a Pro-Choice Champion by NARAL. He has also said that he thought that poor women had a constitutional right to have the government pay for their abortions. So, Rudy may pretend to be a strict constructionist but he has never sounded even remotely like one untill this past year.
Its not a matter of politics: it is a matter of right or wrong. I don’t understand why so many people are willing to sacrifice justice for political expediency. If we lived in Germany in the 1940’s and the Holocaust was popular does that mean that people here would say that we shouldn’t make opposing the holocaust a litmus test because it is a lost cause. Aren’t there some things worth fighting and dying to oppose even if you lose in the end.
I know, I know. Yuo can always find some poll that says otherwise.
Those polls existed throughout the 1970’s, the 1980’s, the 1990’s, and every year in this century.
How’s that worked out politically?
And thats my point.
I’m not happy about noting this, but a review shows this is the reality.
Then we need to push Guilianni to firmly state that he will not appoint judges who believe that Roe v. Wade was correctly decided. If he isn’t willing to commit, he can go jump in a lake.
I understand what you are saying. And I respect how you feel about this volatile issue.
I’m just pointing out the reality.
I won't try to make you believe that because I don't believe it either, President Hillary would be every reasonably sane American's worst nightmare. However, I do believe that nominating Rooty is the surest way to guarantee that Hillary will be the next president.
You can agree with the evangelicals who won't vote for Rooty under any circumstance or not agree with them, but that won't affect what they do or don't do on that first Tuesday in NOV of '08.
Sorry to upset your preconception with facts.
First James Dobson went after the moderate Republicans, and I said nothing because I wasn’t a moderate Republican.
Then James Dobson went after the libertarian Republicans, and I said nothing because I wasn’t a libertarian Republican.
Then James Dobson went after the national security Republicans, and I said nothing because I wasn’t a national security Republican.
Then Hillary Clinton was elected President by a vote of 48 to 47 percent, with various libertarian and social conservative third-party candidates getting 5 percent of the vote, and James Dobson said now the country will see how smart he is about politics, economics and national security, as everybody knows that self-annointed religious leaders are exceptionally knowledgeable about such things.
No upset here, sorry.
And the fact you claim there is goes to the heart of this discussion.
I’m not the ‘enemy’ here. Reread my first post. I’m not a supporter of Roe v Wade, and think it was horrible law.
I’m just noting each time the GOP uses abortion as a rallying cry, they get trounced. Whats great for the rabid anti abortion crowd simply doesn’t translate to the general voting population when its time to go to the voting booth.
Personally, I think this should have been decided on a state by state basis. Roe v Wade makes that virtually impossible, as we’ve seen.
How ‘bout one, ONE pro-abort President in the past 40 years?
Worked out rather well, politically, thank you.
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.