Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Giuliani fears ex-wife will hit presidential bid
London Times ^ | 1/7/07 | London Times

Posted on 01/07/2007 11:46:24 AM PST by wagglebee

THERE is one woman who could cause Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor, more problems than Hillary Clinton in the race for the White House: she is Donna Hanover, his second wife, writes Sarah Baxter.

Hanover, an actress and broadcaster, was enraged by Giuliani’s flagrant infidelity towards the end of their 18-year marriage and the divorce case was vicious. Giuliani’s advisers fear that she could be a loose cannon in the 2008 campaign.

Giuliani was acclaimed as the “mayor of America” for his heroic role during the attacks on September 11, 2001 and is revered for his leadership. At the time he was living in the spare room of an apartment belonging to gay friends after Hanover forced him out of Gracie Mansion, the official residence.

Hanover refused to confirm that she would vote for Giuliani as mayor of New York even when she was married to him. “What kind of wife is that?” Raoul Felder, Giuliani’s lawyer, fumed. “She’s essentially saying she’s not going to vote for him.”

Hanover once stood outside a shower at Gracie Mansion, expecting to confront Judith Nathan, Giuliani’s mistress, now his third wife. In the event, a startled golfing friend of Giuliani’s emerged.

Hanover was also accused of a lack of sympathy while the former mayor was battling prostate cancer, by banishing him to a spare bedroom and exercising noisily on a treadmill at 5am.

New Yorkers relished the details of Giuliani’s larger-than-life personal story. But conservative “values voters” could be different, as Giuliani’s own aides noted in a 140-page memo leaked last week by supporters of a rival candidate.

The campaign dossier suggested that Hanover could be one of several potentially “insurmountable” vulnerabilities that could cause him to drop out of the race. It was an embarrassing start to a campaign that is not yet officially under way.

Giuliani’s record in fighting crime and terrorism has placed him at the top of several polls for the 2008 Republican nomination, edging out Senator John McCain in popular support. But the party base may be turned off by his support for abortion, immigration, gun control and gay rights (although not gay marriage). It is their votes that he needs to secure the nomination.

“It would be one thing if Giuliani could say, ‘I’m a strong social conservative in my private life’, but he can’t even say that,” said Ramesh Ponnuru, a conservative commentator and author of The Party of Death, an attack on social liberalism. “It’s not just the fact of his multiple marriages, it is the way the Hanover marriage melted down. It was operatic.”

When Giuliani met Hanover on a blind date in the early 1980s, his first marriage to Regina, his second cousin, was already over. Hanover, who went on to appear in the television series Ally McBeal, was a glamorous soulmate who seemed to enjoy the spotlight as much as he did.

They had two children, Andrew, 21, and Caroline, 17, but in 1996 Hanover stopped calling herself by his last name and a year later Vanity Fair magazine said that he was having an “intimate relationship” with a senior member of his staff.

In 2000, without telling Hanover first, Giuliani announced at a press conference that he was separating from her. She retaliated by accusing him of being unfaithful with the employee, but he was already with Nathan.

Maggie Gallagher, a family values campaigner, was outraged by Giuliani’s “scummy” performance, accusing him of making Bill Clinton “look good as a husband and father”.

New Yorkers learnt during the divorce case that their cancer- afflicted mayor was temporarily impotent and Hanover demanded a huge settlement, including £760 a month to care for Goalie, the family’s golden retriever.

Felder struck back, accusing Hanover of being an “uncaring mother” who was “howling like a stuck pig”.

In the end Giuliani, who was beginning to earn big consultancy fees after September 11, agreed to a settlement of $6.8m to avoid the full horror of a court case.

Hanover has married Ed Oster, her university sweetheart, and written a book, My Boyfriend’s Back, about rekindling an old romance. Even if she stays mum, there is enough in the public domain to rattle conservatives. Yet however vicious the personal attacks on Giuliani, they are unlikely to dent his reputation for competence. He did, after all, handle the September 11 attacks while bunking with gay friends in the midst of an affair and a divorce battle.


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008election; corrupt; donnahanover; exwife; giuliani; hitpiece; letch; nothanksrudy; rino; toomanywives
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 301-350351-400401-450451-475 next last
To: oceanview

Too many Freepers are of the 'turn your brain off at the door' school of being principled.


401 posted on 01/07/2007 7:56:08 PM PST by HitmanLV (Rock, Rock, Rock and Rollergames! Rockin' & Rolling, Rockin' with Rollergames!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
First of all, have you EVER been around anyone with cancer? There is NO guarantee that you will not die of it or even make it out of the hospital. I'm going up Wednesday to collect the belongings of someone who went into the Vet hospital at Prescott with a small lump. He was told they could remove it with no problem at all. He died on the operating table.

If you think telling someone in the hospital with cancer that you're divorcing them is OK then you are as much a creep as Newt is. If you don't know about cancer and what fighting it can do to a person, then I strongly suggest you find out before it strikes someone you love, or even yourself.

402 posted on 01/07/2007 7:56:54 PM PST by McGavin999 (Don't be a Freeploader, contribute to the upkeep of FreeRepublic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool

sure, you know for an absolute fact that Edwards never cheated on his wife. look at Edwards, look at his wife, tell me with a straight face you believe that.

but Edwards doesn't have any republican private detectives following him around, so we don't know. that's the difference.


403 posted on 01/07/2007 7:58:46 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Thanks for the explanation.

Here's some info from your same Field Poll. Note that in passing Prop 22 in 2000, 61% of voters opposed same sex marriage, yet Field would probably have been reporting somewhere in the low 50s in the same year. Not much has changed since 2003. Their polls are definitely slanted in favor of the liberal agenda.

Field Poll Online
Gay and Lesbian Rights Issues
March 2006

Trend of opinion about allowing same-sex marriages 
where regular marriage laws apply (among California adults)

               Disapprove Approve Undecided

February 2006
Total adults      51%       43      6
Registered voters 50%       44      6

2004*             50%       44      6
2003*             50%       42      8
1997              56%       38      6
1985              62%       30      8
1977              59%       28     13

404 posted on 01/07/2007 8:01:50 PM PST by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 379 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

..........anybody BUT Hillary.


405 posted on 01/07/2007 8:06:07 PM PST by 2dogjoe (Have a Blessed Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Today in CA, I suspect if only whites were allowed to vote on Prop 22, the anti-gay marriage ban would fail. perserving Prop 22 would depned on support from blacks and latinos.


406 posted on 01/07/2007 8:07:49 PM PST by Kuksool (I learned more about political science on FR than in college)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
BTW ansel, just so you know, she had Uterine cancer, it wasn't some little skin lesion she had removed, and it was her SECOND surgery.
407 posted on 01/07/2007 8:11:05 PM PST by McGavin999 (Don't be a Freeploader, contribute to the upkeep of FreeRepublic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999

"First of all, have you EVER been around anyone with cancer? There is NO guarantee that you will not die of it or even make it out of the hospital. I'm going up Wednesday to collect the belongings of someone who went into the Vet hospital at Prescott with a small lump. He was told they could remove it with no problem at all. He died on the operating table.
If you think telling someone in the hospital with cancer that you're divorcing them is OK then you are as much a creep as Newt is. If you don't know about cancer and what fighting it can do to a person, then I strongly suggest you find out before it strikes someone you love, or even yourself."





Don't know why you would attack someone out of the blue like that, but I don't understand any of those posts you have been sending me, I would feel better if you just left me out of whatever is going on with you.


408 posted on 01/07/2007 8:12:26 PM PST by ansel12 (America, love it ,or at least give up your home citizenship before accepting ours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

ROTFLMCO!


409 posted on 01/07/2007 8:13:35 PM PST by McGavin999 (Don't be a Freeploader, contribute to the upkeep of FreeRepublic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
From year 2000---->>

Giuliani's wife quits "Vagina"
New York polls stagnate as Hillary picks a new fight. Gore's base shakes and Bush's backyard grumbles. Union ponders Nader nod.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Alicia Montgomery

May 2, 2000 |   Rudy Giuliani's wife, actress Donna Hanover, is postponing her stage run in "The Vagina Monologues" because of "family circumstances," according to the New York Post. The decision comes less than a week after Senate hopeful Giuliani announced that he had been diagnosed with prostate cancer. Hanover's initial decision to take the part brought considerable attention as a result of the play's graphic sexual content and author Eve Ensler's outspoken support of Hillary Rodham Clinton. The incident also revived talk about the strained Giuliani marriage, which has been rocky in the years since rumors surfaced of the New York mayor's infidelity.

Although Hanover vows to assume the role at a later, unspecified date, Giuliani himself won't have to exchange any tickets. He had previously announced that he would not attend the show.

 

410 posted on 01/07/2007 8:15:58 PM PST by dennisw (Don't let your past become your future -- Georges Gurdjieff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

CA has closed primaries. Also GOP primary voters are more conservative than the rest of the state as a whole. Ex-LA Mayor Richard Ridoran (Sp?) couldn't win the 2002 primary. Arnold could only win by jumping into a bizarre, free-for-all recall election. Also Brian Bilbray won the CA-50 primary special only because Roach and the K-Man split the conservative vote. Rudy could very well win the CA primary, but he would have to spend a lot of time explaining himself.


411 posted on 01/07/2007 8:16:09 PM PST by Kuksool (I learned more about political science on FR than in college)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool

Half of GOP voters favor gay marriage or civil unions. California is a live and let live state. I think Rudy sweeps in the GOP primary. It likes a savvy guy who keeps the tax bill low, seems competent, favors a strong defense, and seemingly keeps the religious nutters, both foreign and domestic, at bay. We shall see.


412 posted on 01/07/2007 8:20:02 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 411 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
How about strictly addressing what I posted, instead of going off on some silly rhetorical tangent. I oppose Giuliani because he is a liberal. Period!

Foreign policy is important to all conservative Republicans and its the major reason Bush`s job approval hasn't sunk lower then it has in the last 1-1/2 years. At the same time, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever, to indicate that Rudy Giuliani has some special ability when it comes to national defense and national security issues. All the possible major candidate names being thrown around are committed to finishing what we started in Iraq, committed to staying the course in the WOT, committed to our alliance with Israel, and at home, fostering a strong homeland security effort. The GOP should be nominating the most conservative candidate, not the most liberal candidate.

One more time. Reagan built a coalition that included both social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. It was a winning coalition in 1980, 1984, 1994 and 2000, and it can be a winner in 2008. Your attempts to undermine that coalition and throw out social conservatives will only help lead to another election day failure by the GOP in 2008. Republicans can't win without the votes of social conservatives and fiscal conservatives.

413 posted on 01/07/2007 8:29:40 PM PST by Reagan Man (In 2007, its Conservatism versus Liberalism..... the choice is yours.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

Comment #414 Removed by Moderator

Comment #415 Removed by Moderator

To: oceanview
sure, you know for an absolute fact that Edwards never cheated on his wife. look at Edwards, look at his wife, tell me with a straight face you believe that. but Edwards doesn't have any republican private detectives following him around, so we don't know. that's the difference.

Do you really think that the Republicans didn't bust out the OR machine in 2004? I mean, come on. That's beyond naive.

416 posted on 01/07/2007 8:38:44 PM PST by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

no, I don't. I don't see this in the republican playbook at all - where is any evidence that Dem personal scandals were rooted out by republican private investigators?

The Dems even were able to get DOJ to wiretap Jeannie Pirro, as she attempted to get information on her husband's infidelity. where did that come from? I'll tell you where - she was supposed to be Hillary's senate opponent, that's where.

our side doesn't play this game - but we eat our own as soon as the first hint of scandal is "revealed". The Dems learned that from the # of votes lost to the Bush DUI revelation in 2000.


417 posted on 01/07/2007 8:44:06 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

Yep. I like Rudy. I think he's a good leader, I think he's fiscally conservative, I'm not concerned about his stand on social issues (since I believe most should be handled at state and local levels, anyway), and although his infidelities give me pause, they aren't enough to rule him out for me absent a more compelling candidate. I'm flexible.

But any candidate who doesn't hew to the BOR is out of the question in my book -- that is where I draw the red line. And unfortunately, that includes Rudy (2nd Amendment) and McCain (1st Amendment "reform" with his vile CFR bill).


418 posted on 01/07/2007 8:52:45 PM PST by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Republicans can't win without the votes of social conservatives and fiscal conservatives.

**America** won't survive without someone to willing to take the fight to bloodthirsty Islamic revolutionaries plotting to kill millions of us as we speak. As President, I, J.H. Bowden, would be willing to do what it takes to protect the country. But like Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo and others who take security seriously, I can't win.

If you think a feminized America under the leadership of Pelosi, Hillary!, and Dingy Harry will survive (with letters of help from the UN, of course), you have more faith in the Democrats than I do.
419 posted on 01/07/2007 8:55:26 PM PST by JHBowden (President Giuliani in 2008! Law and Order. Solid Judges. Free Markets. Killing Terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 413 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude

Here's my take on the White House contenders.

McCain will implode after the primaries. He is so used to media fawning that he doesn't know how to handle criticism.

A McCain vs Obama will be a redux of Brown vs DeWine.

Rudy is indistinguishable from a liberal RAT on social issues. With Rudy's past marital troubles, Obama could claim moral superiority over Rudy.The media will say nothing bad at all about Obama. The media will even claim that Obama is a moderate or even conservative RAT. Fair and balanced media means 90% favorable stories for Obama and only 50% favorable for Rudy.

Rudy vs Obama will be a redux of Corker vs Ford. The critical swing group in the election would be the GOP primary voters who did not vote for Rudy.

Mitt is a wildcard candidate. He's best looking and most articulate of the bunch. He could either win narrowly or lose in a landslide.


420 posted on 01/07/2007 8:58:41 PM PST by Kuksool (I learned more about political science on FR than in college)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I still don't understand why, as per this article, Donna irrationally insisted on the dog's support payment to be made in British pounds. :-)


421 posted on 01/07/2007 8:58:49 PM PST by supremedoctrine ("Talent hits a target no one else can hit, genius hits a target no one else can see"--Schopenhauer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn; Reagan Man

I put illegal immigration squarely in the national security category.


422 posted on 01/07/2007 9:05:20 PM PST by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: UWconservative

Because the rinos on this site know nothing else but RUUUUUUUUUUdy.


423 posted on 01/07/2007 9:08:15 PM PST by HANG THE EXPENSE (Defeat liberalism, its the right thing to do for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
>>>>>If you think a feminized America under the leadership of Pelosi, Hillary!, and Dingy Harry will survive (with letters of help from the UN, of course), you have more faith in the Democrats than I do.

WTF! I don't have any faith in liberals of any party affiliation, Democratic or Republican. My point was pretty straightforward. Attempts to purge the GOP of social conservatives, or fiscal cosnervatives for that matter, will only lead to utter failure and another win for the bad guys in 2008. Breaking up the old Reagan coalition is sure death for the GOP.

Rudy Giuliani is not the answer to the GOP`s problem. Rudy has supported liberalism his entire life. Rudy is the antithesis of conservatism.

424 posted on 01/07/2007 9:09:35 PM PST by Reagan Man (In 2007, its Conservatism versus Liberalism..... the choice is yours.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Rudy did two great things while he was Mayor: made sure Arafat knew he was not welcome and had him removed from some event in NYC, and told the Saudi Arabians to shove their multimillion dollar "aid" check after 9-11/ If he had a creative hard-line approach like that as President, I might almost be enticed to vote for him, regardless of the fact that he is otherwise not a "Conservative". If ANY candidate could be enticed to have as part of his platform, the absolute BAN on building new mosques in the United States, I would vote for him. A step like that is ESSENTIAL. Without it, we are permanently back to Square One, no matter what else we do. Unfortunately, the ONLY candidates who would even consider doing that, will be on the Republican side, and they would first have to be anointed by the RNC, and the RNC would never certify such a plank/ but it is the only one that matters.


425 posted on 01/07/2007 9:14:30 PM PST by supremedoctrine ("Talent hits a target no one else can hit, genius hits a target no one else can see"--Schopenhauer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I do think Rudy would push for more gun control. And I think he would do so more successfully than Carter and the 'toon, precisely because he's a Republican. It's along the lines of "it took Nixon to go to China."


426 posted on 01/07/2007 9:21:42 PM PST by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: ellery

Let me amend that last post -- I'm working to train myself not to use the term "gun control." It's a misnomer, and is the language of our opponents. I should have said: I think Rudy would push for more anti-Second-Amendment legislation.


427 posted on 01/07/2007 9:23:13 PM PST by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
You're bound and determined to work at destroying the winning coalition of social and fiscal conservatives that Reagan built the GOP into during the second half of the 1970`s.

No, the last Republican congress, aided by POTUS, was bound and determined to destroy that coalition. If they had just controlled their ridiculous spending, I daresay libertarians and independents would have looked the other way on social issues.

428 posted on 01/07/2007 9:26:29 PM PST by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: ellery
>>>>>No, the last Republican congress, aided by POTUS, was bound and determined to destroy that coalition.

Agreed. Bush&Company wanted to purge the GOP of fiscal conservatives. This current crop of libertarian minded Republicans, want to purge the GOP of social conservatives. Either way, the GOP can't survive. That was the unique political foundation of factors to the Reagan coalition. The modern Republican Party can't exist without both voting contingents.

429 posted on 01/07/2007 9:35:04 PM PST by Reagan Man (In 2007, its Conservatism versus Liberalism..... the choice is yours.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 428 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna
Isn't it a sad state when we consider someone's marital history more important than their leadership and intellectual ability?

In this case, his marital history points to a character problem. And character means a lot to many voters.

430 posted on 01/07/2007 9:37:45 PM PST by technochick99 ( Firearm of choice: Sig Sauer....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

A scorned woman and a relative?

Drop off the radar for the good of the country. /Next


431 posted on 01/07/2007 9:38:54 PM PST by MaxMax (God Bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaxMax

The 2008 Race will and All New York Affair. A Choice between a Liberal New Yorker ( Giuliani) and A VERY Liberal New Yorker.( Hillary Clinton.)


432 posted on 01/07/2007 9:50:11 PM PST by tomcorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 431 | View Replies]

To: tomcorn

Sad prediction.

I'll support only a conservative with national (media) gonads.


433 posted on 01/07/2007 10:18:06 PM PST by MaxMax (God Bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 432 | View Replies]

To: snugs

In my own extended family I have seen this problem up close: not people directly related to ME, but my father's brother's wife was from a family where the other two sisters married two brothers who were cousins with them. The two sisters had 6 children among them, two of whom had various degrees of mental retardation. It just ain't wise: there is a higher degree probability of birth defects AUTOMATICALLY, though, of course it doesn't always happen/\
Marrying a cousin, on the face of it, always seemed to be to me just a very LAZY thing to do, kind of creepily convenient, like Woody Allen falling in love and marrying his and Miaa's adopted Asian child, technically his "daughter" , whatever her name is.


434 posted on 01/07/2007 10:36:38 PM PST by supremedoctrine ("Talent hits a target no one else can hit, genius hits a target no one else can see"--Schopenhauer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: tomcorn

You left out the all-important detail that adds so much to the picture you carefully crafted: dressing more than once in drag, notably on SNL.


435 posted on 01/07/2007 10:40:14 PM PST by supremedoctrine ("Talent hits a target no one else can hit, genius hits a target no one else can see"--Schopenhauer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

I think you're right. It's very difficult for social conservatives and libertarians to find common ground -- Reagan was so gifted that he managed to overcome the natural animosity between the two groups. Now, without a Reagan, I think our best bet for common ground overall is Constitutional adherence, fiscal conservatism, plus pushing social issues at a state and local level. That way social conservatives don't have to live with a porn emporium on one side and a crackhouse on the other, and libertarians can do what they like in the privacy of their own homes without having to worry about the JBTs breaking down their door.

And if they don't like the social mores of their current home, there's undoubtedly another city or state that will better suit them. That's what the founders had in mind, anyway -- a whole bunch of little laboratories of liberty (as defined by the local residents).

Of course, that won't happen, because everyone on this site is too busy pointing fingers at everyone else, and the rest of our less-interested-in-politics potential allies have fallen asleep in front of Dancing with the Stars.

:)


436 posted on 01/07/2007 11:14:46 PM PST by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

I should have added two things to the list of things we should be able to agree on at a federal level: Constitutional adherence, fiscal conservatism, and the two things that Reagan embodied: national defense, and the wonderful promise of American freedom and enterprise. Add social issues at the state and local level, and I bet we could forge a new coalition.


437 posted on 01/07/2007 11:19:18 PM PST by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
How about you let states worry about gay marriages...

STATES RATIFY Constitutional Amendments.


If you cut taxes and limit government, people will make the right choices themselves.

Illegal immigration...

438 posted on 01/08/2007 3:27:56 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
You honestly believe Rudy will repeal the 2nd Amendment or push for more gun control laws?

I know what Julie-Annie has said and done. I also know what he has not done. My Constituitonal rights do not end at the New York city limits, no matter who is mayor...

439 posted on 01/08/2007 3:31:26 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: ellery
I should have added two things to the list of things we should be able to agree on at a federal level: Constitutional adherence...

Add social issues at the state and local level,...

States ratify Amendments...

440 posted on 01/08/2007 3:36:02 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 437 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I believe that it was Harry Truman who said, "How can I trust a man, if his wife can't?" Of course, adultery shouldn't be that big a deal, if the MSM were to treat republicans the same as dems, but we know that won't be happening...

No, you can pretty well bet that the media will make her their "wounded girl" and will have a field day with Rudy.

Mark

441 posted on 01/08/2007 3:55:36 AM PST by MarkL (When Kaylee says "No power in the `verse can stop me," it's cute. When River says it, it's scary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer

You'd have to document for me that Rudy met her at a family reunion, otherwise I'd have to think that you were making a joke. =)


442 posted on 01/08/2007 4:12:20 AM PST by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool

There is no Obama. Repeat. There is no Obama. He is a media phenomenon. He will not even run. That is all.


443 posted on 01/08/2007 6:41:40 AM PST by AmishDude (It doesn't matter whom you vote for. It matters who takes office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 420 | View Replies]

To: panthermom

Fist cousin marriage is legal in New York. So What?


444 posted on 01/08/2007 6:48:41 AM PST by CholeraJoe (Spork weasels ain't afraid of nuthin' but running out of sardines.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Guiliani is no social conservative period. Don't want him for president.

that said.

This is a story out of london, (sidney blumenthal?) It seems hitlary's friends are at it now with the hit pieces.

The ex wife comes across as a screw and a nut job no wonder there was a divorce in the end. But the MSM will keep her around for free untill they have to pay her to be on camera.


445 posted on 01/08/2007 6:55:17 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

NH will be first no matter what.

I see another Super Tuesday fieasco. A national one day priary.


446 posted on 01/08/2007 7:05:01 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: rodeodrive3


He can get away with it now---but if he decides to run, there will be questions about her absence.


447 posted on 01/08/2007 8:34:38 AM PST by Liz (Nearly all men can stand adversity, but to test a man's character, give him power. Abe Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Collier

Eleanor and Franklin were fifth cousins, once removed. They were both descended from the Dutchman Claes Martensz van Rosenvelt (Roosevelt).


448 posted on 01/08/2007 8:38:13 AM PST by Liz (Nearly all men can stand adversity, but to test a man's character, give him power. Abe Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: Liz; rodeodrive3

I don't think anyone can get nominated by either party unless their spouse is constantly beside them playing the supportive spouse. Look at what happened to Howie Dean, his wife never showed up and he went from being the supposed front-runner to last place almost immediately. sKerry's wife/benefactor (or whatever the hell she is) also hurt him by opening her mouth. They need to stand there, smile, wave and every so often give a "canned" speech.


449 posted on 01/08/2007 8:39:51 AM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 447 | View Replies]

Comment #450 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 301-350351-400401-450451-475 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson