Posted on 11/07/2007 1:34:34 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Robertson endorses Giuliani, Weyrich endorses Romney, Dobson says stop the madness, vote third party. Limbaugh sits on the sidelines but appears to be willing to accept the worst without so much as a whimper. This is what happens when a conservative party loses its way. Conservatism takes a back seat to liberalism. Conservative leaders start endorsing pro-abort liberals and RINOs because they're "electable." Conservatives flee to third parties or stay home in disgust. The party self-destructs.
!0, 9, 8, 7, 6...
“It’s outrageous to think that Rudy is the only (or even the best) Republican to aggressively fight the WOT”
They think he will be strong on this issue. I don’t know who will be the best at this, there is no way to know that.
“It’s absolutely outrageous to think that we need a LIBERAL to aggressively and successfully fight the WOT.”
They don’t think he’s needed because he is a liberal, but in spite of it. You have different priorities, I understand that.
I much prefer Fred, and have contributed only to his campaign, but it remains to be seen if he can catch Rudy. I suspended contributions to the Republican party some time ago, when things got disappointing as you know.
Who says it has to be at the expense of life & liberty? Cutting the federal government down to size and getting the judiciary out of the legislative business would go far in defending life & liberty. I think most states had laws against abortion before the federal judges took over. And I believe the people are certainly capable of self-government. It worked very well until the progressives and socialist liberals had there way with us.
Not really. More like this:
Giuliani Supporters: "Abortion? Gay marriage? Who cares? We've got more important things to worry about."
That's why Rudy is the front runner.
The Democrats have approx. 56%
The Republicans have approx 44%
We would like to think there is a small per cent of
moderate democrats who will vote Republican given who
the Democrats are running.
If you take away 10 to 25 % Republicans voting Third Party
Say hello to Pres. Hillary Clinton.
I am Conservative and will vote Republican.
I don’t want Hillary or any other Democrat.
Remember, we are at war and if we don’t win and with a
Democrat, there won’t be a next time to vote. WE are finished. Get real.
Trade would be simple to solve...but I hear very few people speak up against Bush’s trade policies (that are on the right)...which at times seems more bend-over than anything.
I don’t agree with Duncan’s ‘mirror’ trade policy (though), as that seems to sound like a mild threat to international trade. I think it’s effectual to enforce current mandate trade policy while reviving prudent slow trade deals...that act in concert with: safety, even low trade tariffs, and mutual regulation. This evolves the slow resinding of past mistakes.
Such wouldn’t be hard. Just saying, ‘If you’re high, I’ll be just as high,’ smacks of idiocy in trade. It could send people to the poor house immediately. No threats should be made.
I understand the underling purpose of Duncan’s position, but he needs to make it more prevalent to TRANSITION rather than his ‘mirror’ perspective. After all, we have deficits and bad trade policy with many...many countries. That being said, I think he’d still make an excellent president, and if he ever gets that position, I’m sure his advisors will tell him not to be rash.
Frankly, imho... I would make the best president on economic policy. Most presidents and politicians are useless in this area. A product of propaganda (on the left and the right).
As Pat Buchanan puts it “Rudy offers the Right the ultimate Faustian bargain: retention of power at the price of one’s soul.”
The more sophisticated people are politically (e.g., the more they know about an issue), the more able they are to develop complex rationalizations for dismissing data and opinions they don’t want to believe. Politically knowledgeable also tend to be fierce partisans; this gives them the strongest reasons for dismissing any reasoning except their own.
Virtually every pundit claims the informed voter is the least likely to be guided by emotion. The contrary is actually true. Study after study quickly and easily determine the emotional nature of most candidate preferences and especially by those who are the most informed. One widely used reference is Taber, Charles S., and Milton Lodge. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 755-769.
According to Westen and many others, "The political brain is an emotional brain." Westen surely is a leftist but I reviewed his book on FR. The citation for that is HERE. He is an exceptional psychologist, well versed in neuroscience and surely has something to say beyond his liberal screed.
The whole point is, across the poltical spectrum you will find many informed people holding contrary views. While they may point to this or that reason, underneath it all almost all fiercely held political opinions are emotionally determined. This does not mean this is wrong or that one can correct this, but it does mean that in the final analysis, like it or not, we are more alike than we are different when we select a candidate.
“If the war on terror is # 1, why would you support anyone other than Duncan Hunter? You can’t effectively fight the war on terror without sealing the border, and no-one is working the border issue with more force than Duncan Hunter!!”
Fair question. The border issue is only one component of this war. Hunter is not a viable candidate, he will not break into the top tier. Love him for VP or other high position. I don’t care for his trade policy, but that’s the only beef I have with him. I’m hard-pressed to find any important disagreements with Fred on domestic or foreign policy so far. Fred’s border control policy sounds fine to me.
Praise the lord, I'm coming home!!!
I keep waiting and waiting and waiting for some good little Giuliani apologist, somewhere, to attempt squaring that particular logical circle for me. Probably should have brought a lunch with me.
“He is not going to like Hillary Clinton’s appointments to the Supreme Court.”
I agree with your assessment, though I don’t often weigh in on the subject. It seems to bring out the very worst in my FReepers friends. I’m not a registered Republican, but I know what party I will be voting for in ‘08; the GOP, even if they managed to run John McCain up the flagpole.
While I strongly disagree with Guiliani’s personal beliefs on social issues I believe that he would serve his constituents well with continued pursuit and extermination of terrorists, tax cuts and judicial appointments.
The thing that I like best about the Mayor - and the reason that I refuse to register as a pubbie - the guy punches back, and he’ll continue to punch back hard. Republicans may carry the socially conservative cred, but they fall all over themselves apologizing for it. What good is that?
Personally, I’d much prefer a candidate like Fred Thompson, but it seems as though he is fading into the background.
Putting the best possible conservative spin on the Guiliani presidency; simply envision Duncan Hunter dedicated to task of defense as the Secretary of that department. Think “Law and Order” Fred seeing over the the AG job.
Just one term for Hilary will lay waste to our nation; universal healthcare, higher taxes, the continued influx of illegal immigrants, the deconstruction and debasing of our military.
Homosexual marriage will become the law of the land and I will most certainly die in a pro-abort country - and I am 44 years old. The primarie need to be hashed out, but I hope conservatives come to their senses when they’re standing in the voting booth.
I would prefer someone with more conservative cred compared to the Mayor, but I won’t be voting for a 3rd party loser and I won’t vote for Madame President either.
You mean every month or two, don’t you?
I don't see it as a threat, I see it as leveling the field. Everyone expects to import to us without any tariffs, but (or rather so) they tax the heck out of everything we try to sell there as a protectionist racket. The Japanese took over most all electronics and now automobile manufacturing from U.S. companies by the same type of protectionist empire-building tactics (even though the application was reversed). I think it's exactly the right approach to bring jobs back to the U.S.
I don’t think anyone is truly comforting. Hunter is a protectionist and big on pork (don’t try to compare with mccain because you’d cry) so even he’s far from perfect. And he’s not going anywhere... but I’d sure like to express some appreciation for his rock solid support on the other issues.
The pragmatic side of me says Romney as he is the best of all the candidates with executive experience (vs Rudy and Huck).
and dinner and breakfast... :)
the problem is I’m from NY and there is no way this state will restrict abortions unless the federal govt does something about it.
Jim, I want what you’re drinking.
when they take Robertson out in a straight jacket where will
Rudy be both Robertson and his son doesent always agree
he,s responsible for his own actions I wrote early about bush even though I don’t agree with replacement theology or emergent church people I don’t hate him and we should pray for him as far Robertson concerned anybody who say,s they had a word from God and it didn’t come to pass come is a false prophet the test is it in the Leviticus
what happens to him on election year no one knows
this what god says he not concerned with the nations he concerned with us you and me and want,s you to repent
he rules over them everyone even the devil has bow down
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.