Posted on 11/07/2007 5:51:19 AM PST by rightwingintelligentsia
Pat Robertson, one of the nation's most influential Christian leaders, plans to endorse former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani today, the Politico has learned.
Giuliani has struggled to win support of social conservatives because of his moderate views on abortion and gay rights. But now he has one of the most resonant imprimaturs with Christian voters.
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), meanwhile, plans to announce his surprise endorsement of former Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president on Wednesday, a campaign official told Politico.
The endorsement is to be announced in Dubuque, Iowa.
The alliance gives McCain — once a front-runner, now struggling — a crucial bridge to social conservatives, an important constituency that has remained suspicious of him despite his opposition to abortion.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
The Republican party is not the Conservative party. It (Republican party) is just the other side of the big government coin, with the ‘rats being the larger of the two.
I am but one small individual. I don’t have the answer to shrinking the size of government. I can’t, won’t vote for ‘rats ... so I’m stuck supporting Republicans. And I’ll continue to support the Republican nominee - whoever he is.
Hopefully, it will be Giuliani.
Agreed. (But notice you assume this won't happen under pro-abortion Republican leaders)
4-6 supreme court justices will be appointed by the next president.
As another FREEPER has pointed out, you're banking on somebody who has said "I do" and "I will be faithful" to now three wives (his most important personal commitments) to stay true to us on mere judgeships? If he thinks Roe is already a proper precedent, which he has gone on record saying, that how do we know that he doesn't already embrace Roe as something that's not re-constructionist?
To claim if your guy doesn’t win the nomination that you will work to defeat them...
Hey, I might camp out with someone whose pro-abortion. I don't think I choose them as a cohabitation partner for 4 years. So, just how long have you had this penchant for not opposing those who espouse the killing off of the next generation?
...which ensures Hitlery is the president means you are working toward ensuring the slaughter of 1.2 BILLION more children at a minimum.
When you get in a philosophical groove of picking the "lesser of two evils," you still wind up picking "evil." If you're going to start on a pure numbers' game (and again, I'm not going down this route...this is your chosen path)...Well, then Pol Pot only killed off about 1/3rd of his people. Hitler, when you include the European Jews and his opposition, a much higher %. So, you're going to tell me that just because a pack of serial murderers combined with the worst violent street gangs is but a dent compared to the above leaders, that someone who is pro-violent street gangs & pro-serial murder is A-OK as long as we can keep a reincarnated Pol Pot or Hitler out of office?
There is no way you can claim to support social conservatism and then hand the presidency to Hitlery.
Hey, I'm not the one who put forth an unelectable candidate, now am I? When a RINO loses in November, we have only the RINO voters and the conservative-turned-temporary RINO voters to blame.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face is not going to accomplish anything.
I think a more accurate "cutting off" picture is what Jesus says: If your hands causes you to sin, cut it off. Better for you go to your grave handless than for the whole self to be cast into hell. Better to stand up before God, saying, "My hand did not favor a pro-abortion politician than to have to say, 'Yeah, I know, God, I spited your Holy Face as our Creator by killing off your worksmanship, but really, I only had the best of political intentions.'"
Whoever the R nominee is, gets the support.
Well, this kind of open-ended covenant with the devil guarantees that if the anti-Christ were ever to run with an (R) [and since he'll be a miracle-worker, who knows?], well, I guess we know where your vote would go.
If you decide to not do that, then I fully expect you to delete your accounts here, and keep your mouths shut about everything that Hitlery will do to this nation for the next 8 years, and the decades beyond her policies will influence.
So, the RINOS put a RINO as nominee; he loses; and it's those who bucked the RINOS' fault. [I guess that's a good way of reversing the blame in advance].
Why do you support an alleged GOP candidate when there are more fiscal conservative (and socially conservative) ones out there?
We seem to have a difference of opinion here.
Giuliani’s accomplishments in shrinking the size of New York City’s government is well documented, just see George Will’s comments praising Giuliani.
He has gotten endorsements from noted fiscal conservatives, including Steve Forbes. His record on fighting crime, cutting taxes, cutting welfare and reducing bureaucracy is unmatched by any of the other candidates.
We simply disagree that a president’s primary role is to end abortion. That, unfortunately, is in the hands of the federal judiciary and not the people - at least, not yet.
Great, at least one conservative gets it.
John
Charles Martel said: How, exactly, did that "speak volumes"? This seems to be one of the current RudyBot talking points, so I'd like a thorough explanation.
My personal view is this: By the time that payment was offered, we'd already discovered that some of the hijackers were Saudi nationals and that most of the visas were issued in Saudi Arabia. Accepting any payment from a nation that was responsible, however peripherally, for the attacks would've been a political blunder of historic proportions.
It's worse than that. Giuliani very publicly turned down a big Saudi check on behalf of 9/11 victims. But then he very quietly turned around and accepted big Saudi checks when they were made out to Giuliani Partners.
And when Rudy himself is quoted as saying he's not a Republican, yeah, I have a problem with that. If Rudy had a D behind his name, every single one of us would be slamming this guy to the ground.
What little bit of respect I had for Mr. Robertson just flew out the window. :*(
A joke? Pat for an abortionist????
“If Rudy had a D behind his name, every single one of us would be slamming this guy to the ground”
BINGO!!!!
“It’s worse than that. Giuliani very publicly turned down a big Saudi check on behalf of 9/11 victims. But then he very quietly turned around and accepted big Saudi checks when they were made out to Giuliani Partners.”
You nailed it!
Sounds to me as if Robertson has gone soft in the brain in his old age, like Barry Goldwater did.
You are right. This doesn’t help Rudy but it sure could hurt Pat. I have issues with Robertson’s religious beliefs, but I have always appreciated his political efforts. This doesn’t change that for me, though it will for some. I say so what. It is his right as a citizen to give his opinion on the matter. I don’t agree with him. Life goes on. I’m not about to kick around one of the best pro-life advocates around. Hopefully he will learn from this eventually.
Pat is quickly becoming the Jimmy Carter of Conservative Christians. If it fits for Carter, it applies equally to Pat- SFUP!!!
How many are left on your ‘good-guy’ list?
Will he blubber and cry and ask forgiveness [again] while he does it?
HamiltonJay = CINO
My carry permit in the state of New York was not affected in the least after 8 years of Giuliani as mayor.
Each state regulates gun laws. The courts have seen to that. Some states are more restrictive than others. As president, even if Giuliani wanted to restrict guns at the federal level, he couldn’t possibly get around the second amendment.
As Mayor, Giuliani was able to reduce murder from approximately 2000 a year to just under 700 a year by enforcing exiting laws. Do the math. That’s 1300 more people alive - each year. Talk about a great mayor that delivered on his promise to reduce crime and make life safer for the average New Yorker. And we New Yorkers appreciated his toughness on this issue.
“Well, this kind of open-ended covenant with the devil guarantees that if the anti-Christ were ever to run with an (R) [and since he’ll be a miracle-worker, who knows?], well, I guess we know where your vote would go.”
Colo, I believe your sentence here is insightful. I’d personally love to be able to support the Republican nominee. That isn’t, however, a blank check. I am a conservative. There are darned few of those in the other party and a number who are Republicans.
I’m a capablist - an intersect with conservativism. Fewer and fewer of those since Reagan, yet every time one appears, America stands up and rallies around that candidate. None of those in this race to choose.
And I’m a Christian who has a conscience. And this must trump all other decisions. There are choices I could not support - even if they get the other two correct. To do so would violate my conscience.
As I said, I think you expressed it well.
ampu
Which includes a woman's right to tear her unborn child limb from limb?
I hope Pat is senile, for the sake of his soul.
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.