Agree?: Rudy's public adultery & abortion advocacy disqualify him as a hero.

self ^ | 12-26-01

[Notwithstanding]

Just want to see what people think.

Rudy has been a "good leader" in the wake of 9-11. Men with shoddy morals can be "good leaders" - but is a leader really good if he fails to show remorse for his evil acts (abortion support and public adultery)? Is a man really a good leader if he publicly advocates serial killing of preborn babies? If he publicly parades his mistress before the cameras? If he never publicly expresses remorse about these two hugely important moral errors.

[oldvike]

Yes, you're right. Sorry for the confusion!

Ahhhh, it's all good! Don't worry about it.

[GB]

I am quite pro-life. However, I also do not base my voting or political philosophy on one issue. And I am not going to fall on my sword like King Saul over the issue of abortion, on which absolutely nothing is going to change until hearts and minds in this country change ... Steve Forbes pegged that well ... or use that single issue as a litmus test for the candidates I support. As a pro-life person, I am naturally going to gravitate toward a pro-life candidate. All things being equal, I'll support the pro-life candidate.

But if there's a scenario where you have candidate A and candidate B, and candidate A is right in line with me on 99 of 100 issues, with the 100th issue being abortion, and candidate B is out of line with me on 100 out of 100 issues, I will unapologetically and unashamedly vote for candidate A.

Because as important as the abortion issue is ... there is a whole pile of other stuff, whether political, social or cultural, on this country's plate right now, and I'm not going to toss away 99 percent of what I want when the alternative is getting zero percent of what I want, in a Quixotian quest for a perfection that is unattainable.

If you want to call me a compromiser, or read me out of the conservative movement (which I've been a proud member of for three decades) because of those sentiments, feel free. But I'm sorry, I have no use for single-issue zealots even when that issue is one I support.

[tgiles]

If Bill Clinton went to Afghanistan by himself, tracked down Osama, and shot him in the head, I think that would be considered a heroic act by most people.

If Osama went to Arkansas, tracked Bill Clinton down, and... oh geez, now I've written myself into a corner.

[Notwithstanding]

By all means I would vote for Rudy - but not because he is a hero, though, as so many seem to think he is now.

I would vote for him to defeat her.

[Notwithstanding]

This thread was not about "man of the year" until some people assumed I had it in mind when posting the thread.

Man of the Year is always a big joke - except for the PR mongers and those who faun over them.

[Notwithstanding]

Please note my original post in this thread in which I cleraly laud Rudy's performance post-9/11.

I merely wanted to prompt a discussion about serious character flaws so that the hero-worship might be tempered with the reality of his human frailty.

[FF578]

I love how everyone compares Christian Conservatives to the Taliban. Were the Puritans Taliban too? I want to return to the Puritan form of Government.

[angcat]

she was jealous of him anyway, she wanted no part of him or being the mayors wife, ms. hanover as she changed her name back from guiliani and did her little stunts on the food network, give me a break, i don't blame him one bit. now she parades around with teenage hair and clothes some women never grow up.

[Notwithstanding]

what did she do on the food network - what stunts?

[GB]

My sentiments exactly. That's the only scenario in which I could conceivably support Rudy for president. I only wish we could conjure up a conservative Rudy, someone who was more in tune with us on the issues, but had the gumption, chutzpah, coglioni (check your Italian dictionary) or whatever that Rudy has to get things done.

And I didn't mean to sound so contentious on the post on abortion. I am pro-life to my very bone marrow, and I don't recall ever voting for a pro-choice candidate ... but I'm also pragmatic enough to realize that the only place we're going to get complete purity on things is when Jesus takes us home. Which means, again, that if I should ever be faced with that choice, between a pro-choice candidate who's wrong on that issue but is going to give me 80 or 90 percent of the rest of what I want, and someone who is going to give me absolutely nothing of what I want, I'm not going to let that issue be the overriding litmus test.

[Notwithstanding]

I am pragmatic enough to hold the same position as you do. I just wanted to force people to ponder the serious nature of this man's flaws as a politician before turning him into a knight in shining armor.

[angcat]

hello, she stood there and shook her head up and down and ate and asked questions about the food that was being cooked, it is bizzare because she looks so out of place.

[GB]

He's no knight, but if he should decide to seek the presidency in 2008 ... after G.W.'s two terms ... I think he would be a formidable candidate. Not a conservative candidate, of course. And not a candidacy I could support unless, as I proposed, he was running against Hillary or Daschle. It would basically be John McCain redux, the same kind of coalition of diverse elements. The only difference, I think Rudy has much more substance politically and as a leader (with all due respect to McCain's admirable military record). Plus people are going to remember 9/11/01 for a long, long time.

[Fred]

Please try practicing your faith here are the basics...

"Love one another as I have loved you"
"Love thy neighbor as thyself"
"Forgive 7 times 70"
"Pray for your enemy"

Give Rudy to God, Satan enjoys your wrath and anger. Do not let him win...

[Fred]

"Do you know how to make God laugh? Tell Him your plans"

Mother Teresa

[Notwithstanding]

Cute - Nice try.

Theology 101: Snippets pulled out of context from the Bible are generally not good theology.

Adults Christians understand that love is not merely warm feelings and acceptance of another's choices. Some choices are NOT acceptable. True love holds people accountable - it is not love to paper over serious moral flaws as though they did not matter.

[Penny1]

TIME is full of it...

The only one who was being consistently described as "Churchillian" after 9/11 was George W Bush (except for this author they dug up to provide the necessary quote for Rudy). The person who rallied the nation and the world and provided that belief that "we would win" against the terrorists was George W Bush.

It's almost as if they took the things that people have been saying in praise of the President and simply applied them to Rudy.

Whatever.

It won't hurt President Bush, he looks to a different Source for his "approval."

-penny

PS: I think Rudy did a great job too, and provided a much-needed service to NYC, but the only reason he got this designation from TIME was because they would die before they'd give it to one of the most popular conservative Presidents in American history.

[Notwithstanding]

Publicly dating while married is breaking one's marriage vows. You call it what you like. I call it adultery - as do most political writers (conservatives and liberals alike). Go figure - practically speaking, you are just wrong.

And the whole problem with Rudy is that he flaunted his mistress in public - it was in on way a private matter or just his private life. It was wholly public.

If a man screws his young son by publicly showing off his mistress - well that is a mark of a man's character.