Posted on 02/21/2007 6:29:30 AM PST by areafiftyone
Rudy is not going to touch your guns (what he did for NYC - which worked very well - he knows does not apply to the U.S. and he knows it.)
Rudy does not believe in Gay Marriage - that has been said over and over again
What do you mean Freedom of Religion? Rudy is a Catholic is there a problem with that?
As far as abortion is concerned Rudy said he will nominate anti-abortion judges. That is all a president can do.
Anything else?
Careful--Rudy is Catholic in name only--truth is, I'm not voting for someone's religion. I think Rudy's "Catholicism" should be left out of the conversation, it's irrelevant.
To me it's irrelevant too. But I was trying to figure out what he/she meant by freedom of Religion.
Not if it means that we allow the democrats to shred the 2nd Amendment, redefine marriage, raise taxes, expand government control over areas like health care, and otherwise advance the socialist agenda, emboldened by the fact that the GOP nominated a candidate who has given us and them every reason to believe he will not stand up against them on ANY of those issues. But somehow he will be strong in the war on terror (with a democrat congress opposing him ALL THE WAY on that issue as well) and he will appoint and fight for strict constructionist judges (again with the democrats controlling the senate and never letting any of those nominees see the light of day) so we should jump on the Rudy bandwagon now? I don't think so. You need to pull your head out of the sand (or wherever else it is lodged),
He hasn't had an ACTUAL opportunity to nominate an appellate judge during his political career, either. Holding him to your proposed standard is silly.
Not pushing him on you, but what is it about Romney that makes you think he won't stand up to terrorism?
I think the general level of discourse on FR lately has been in the sewer. Not just here but on a lot of different threads and topics.
I know I've taken a few shots at Tancredo, so I'm not guiltless.
FYI, when people use the term "Freedom of Religion" they are likely referring to the current trend to remove anything of a religious nature from the public's view.
They may be asking where Rudy stands on the removal of the Ten Commandments from government offices for example, or the cross from the government property in San Diego. Or the crosses from Arlington National Cemetery. I think that one will be the next target.
I'll listen to positive comments about other candidates......gladly. I will not listen if those comments are prefaced with outrageous slams against Rudy.
By Freedom OF Religion, I mean a reading of the First Amendment that recognizes that the establishment and free exercise clauses go together and that the concept of Freedom of religion does NOT mean there is some inalienable right to never be confronted by a religious symbol on public property. It really goes back to the issue of judicial activism and standing up to the likes of the ACLU, etc. to prevent the courts and religion-hating attorneys from telling local communities what kind of themes and symbols they can use in observance of holidays, memorials to fallen soldiers, etc.
He understands the meaning of: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States" and consequently will not help find things that are not there - and that will reflect in the appointment of replacements in the SCOTUS.
Romney could very well be a good candidate down the road, and the only thing I don't trust about Hunter is that he is one of 'them.' I distrust legislators, Newt being an exception. Thankfully, McPain won't make it through the first few primaries.
"I know I've taken a few shots at Tancredo, so I'm not guiltless."
I will give you a pass on that one! :)
But looking at his performance in the appointment opportunities he HAS had is not silly. Blindly accepting a statement that he supports strict constructionists (when he knows that he has to say that if he wants the GOP nomination) and ignoring his history IS silly.
What does that have to do with abortion? Are you looking for a history of nominating anti-abortion people in nyc? Your point is valid as a general principle, but specifically what does that have to do with the abortion issue?
Rudy cut taxes 23 or 24 times in NYC and is pretty well known for being a fiscal conservative. As well, he is completely for individual responsibility and cutting the nanny/welfare state and he succeeded beautifully in both regards in NYC.
What does the abortion issue have to do with this discussion? I'm talking about strict constructionist judges, which is important for SO MANY reasons beyond the abortion issue. The funny thing is that I have demonstrated that my reluctance to jump on the Rudy bandwagon is NOT a one-issue problem with Rudy, and yet here you are trying to bring it back to the abortion issue.
...because you're a damned sellout.
Define Sell Out.
Sell Out - a conservative who does not agree with me?
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.