Skip to comments.Giuliani Speaks at CPAC (CSPAN) LIVE
Posted on 03/02/2007 8:40:17 AM PST by areafiftyone
All day today we are covering speakers and panels at the 34th Annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, DC. This morning, we'll hear from Republican presidential hopeful former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. He will be followed by Reps. Scott Garrett (NJ), Tom Tancredo (CO), and others.
CLICK ON THE MAIN CSPAN PAGE HERE
See. Another lie.
Sign me up Mr Robinson. Here's hoping the Ghoulie-annies have to spit after they say my screen name by the time the primaries start.
Once again, please show me where I cannot respond to an FR post.
I didn't lie. You said you were going to leave the GOP. I figured you stood by your principles and followed your heart and leave. I didn't think you would become a flip-flopper. I shouldn't have to apologize for that, even though I remember you said you were leaving the GOP almost 2 years ago.
138 posted on 03/02/2007 11:23:50 AM MST by BigSkyFreeper (There is no alternative to the GOP except varying degrees of insanity)
Unfortunately, it probably won't.
Good post. Come back again.
Do you need a rule in order to act like a respectful person? And if so, isn't that the way liberals think?
Right on! Couldn't have said it better myself.
Coming from you, that's pretty funny.
Grown as in age, or emotionally? I see lots of college freshmen here.
Now I'm posting pictures.
Seriously, are you joking?
Oh, man, I am SO planning to be there. Is it rude for me to try to drop in on your party?
Reply all you want but the question was NOT posed to you.
It was a serious question posed to Jim.
He can answer for himself.
GROW UP --- not every post or question warrants a reply by you. I'll wager you wear out a set of knee pads every day.
Can't answer the question?
More the merrier.
Hang it up. Your twisting and lying is getting you nowhere.
All this from someone bemoaning the lack of civility.
Maybe you could edit the FR mission statement into something more acceptable for you and share it with us.
Of course no candidate, republican or otherwise, combines the perfect array of 100% conservative views with good speaking and writing ability, good leadership and good administrative skills -- and, unfortunately perhaps, good fundraising ability.
But the question always arises, Where do you draw the line? Is Rudy too far left to be supported (in the general, I mean)?
For some, probably including me, the answer is a reluctant no, a decision to go with "Democrat prevention." For JR and others, it's too unbearable as a matter of conscience.
I'm already there. *grin*
Coming from you, using your own words, that's pretty funny. Don't quite your day job, though. There could never be another Sam Kinison.
The answer is in my statements like these:
I've already stated that FR will probably become even more conservative than it already is, through attrition if nothing else. Besides continuing to champion the defense of America, FR just might become the "Conservative Conscience of the Republican Party," ie, we may become a real thorn in the side of moderate/liberal Republicanism. Someone has to try defend the party from completely tossing out traditional American conservatism. Might as well be us.
How many times must I say FR is a conservative site? We do not support abortionism, homosexualism, feminisim, environmentalism, gun control, liberalism, socialism, etc, etc, etc. When I say I suspect we will become even more conservative than we already are, possibly via attrition if nothing else, what do you think I'm referring to? When FR starts pushing hard and I mean hard against abortion, gay marriage, homosexual education forced on our school children, pandering to illegal aliens, gun control, McCaine-Feingold type usurpation, global warming, etc, etc, even if supported or advanced by the GOP, then I fully suspect certain types of moderate/liberal Republican supporters are probably going to be a little uncomfortable here. We will be fighting for traditional American conservatism no matter who we have to fight against and I'm afraid that's going to piss off some folks.
And I'll borrow a slogan used by the NFRA that I realy like:
"We are the 'Republican' Wing of the Republcan Party!"
Civility? You tossed civility weeks ago. Like I said, you're not only a nanny, you're the number one butt kisser and tattle tale and that's saying something, given the competition around here.
God, I miss Sam Kinison. A guilty pleasure.
I do too. Greatest comedian who ever lived.
That will be their decision to make not mine.
Gotta go. Will be back later tonight after the rally.
God bless our troops!!
How does going along with the leftward lurch of the Rudy boosters achieve conservative victories?
If I have learned anything about pubbie leaders in recent years, it is that they will try to run left and grab power if you don't give them a good swift yank on the leash from time to time. We failed to provide that yank enough times, and we got 2006 for our troubles. 2008, if Rudy is nominated, will make 2006 look like a minor setback.
Looks like you touched a nerve...LOL.
I doubt it. There are a few here who claim on a number of threads that either they or some mysterious "others" have turned to Giuliani as a result of the vitriol of the Hunter supporters. The fact that they have spewed more ugliness than the "Hunter" group seems not to affect their view of these threads.
I can't let the DEMs win the presidency. It's too scary a prospect to have Hillary as Pres.
Oh, I tried being civil. And saw bogus attacks on conservative organizations and candidates. And I don't recall you ever posting on the open forum that a few of your buddies doing such should stop. They declared war. And now they and you are whining about what resulted.
So it's a bit late to try and pretend you've taken the high road here.
I'm not whining about a damn thing.
I haven't decided if I could or not. If Rudy were nominated, I would have to see what he said and did in the runup to the general election.
I do know that I would have divots in my nose that dwarf those from 1996.
All you've done on this thread is whine about me. Get a grip. Seriously, chill out.
I agree with over 90% of how Jim defines this site -- that's why I'm here. There are a couple of issues I disagree with, but that doesn't bother me at all, and Jim has never struck me as someone demanding 100% compliance.
I hope that Jim continues to defend those principles and maintains Free Republic as a site that fights for those principles. I believe the vast majority of Freepers agree with that.
But when it comes to party politics and elections, neither Jim nor any of us get to define the candidates, the parties, who runs or who doesn't. We all have a free choice to support candidates and we all have the right to vote (except for MadIvan) -- but we usually do not get to vote in November Leap Years for candidates who agree 90% or more with the above. In some states, like Maine, 50% is the best that is politically possible.
In 1980, we had a great campaigner who was also quite conservative. I was 100% behind Reagan. That summer I met GHWB on my campus (senior year) after he was nominated at VP. Had Free Republic existed then, my guess is Reagan would have been the overwhelming choice.
This cycle it is more difficult. We're not facing an unpopular Jimmy Carter. We've had instead eight years of an increasingly unpopular Republican President. The 'rats are gaining ground -- although their perfomance in Congress so far shows that they are not ready for prime time. Winning the White House next year will not be easy.
We need a good candidate. Rudy is by far the best known, most popular, most able to appeal to the whole country (especially independents), most respected among elected Republicans, and the least conservative. McCain is viewed as a weasel. Romney has several problems. Gingrich may not run, and he has a lot of baggage. The other candidates are mini-mees.
Some Freepers -- like me -- believe Rudy is the clear choice despite his liberal views on some issues because his promise to appoint originalist Justices mitigates his personal social views, because he has the best chance to win, and because of his track record in NYC on issues like taxes, crime, economic growth, etc. I also believe there isn't another candidate out there with anywhere near as good a chance at winning.
Other Freepers -- including our illustrious Founder and Owner -- believe on principle that supporting Rudy is unacceptable because of his positions on issues of deep concern such as abortion and gun rights are unacceptable. They doubt his pledge on Justices -- fair point -- and/or refuse to support him even if he would appoint originalists because he is just personally not what they want to see in 1600 PA Ave. After eight years of Bubba that is understandable.
What I think needs to be said is that sincere, honest differences over the better strategery -- oppose or support Rudy -- should not be confused with the basic mission statement of Free Republic. I believe electing Rudy is the best chance to advance those principles -- given our other, limited choices. Others disagree. But at least for me, with only limited choices I do not accept that voting for any candidate means I endorse all of his views. I don't. And I suspect most of the Rudy supporters do not accept all of his views either.
I support Jim 100% sticking by his guns on the mission of Free Republic, and I hope Howlin and other Freeper Warriors stick to their guns too. Candidates and politicians come and go -- principles are timeless.
Well said. I just kicked in an extra donation to FR, and invite those who feel the same way I do to respond in the same manner.
I have done no such thing. I'll tell you what --- post to others and please ignore me.
You are a real piece of work
You tell us. How do liberals think, Sunsong?
But if you want me to not post to you, no problem. Please reciprocrate, however.
As I was telling Luis a few weeks ago, I haven't decided if I would vote for Rudy or join the Hari Krishnas.
Well, the Hari Krishna's are definitly more conservative than Rudy. Pick your poison.
Could I address a question to you about how the fight should be waged. As an anti-Rudy who has addressed and wont support the attacks made, particularly graphically, against Rudy supporters.
Since you mention the 2nd amendment, lets use that as an example, its less controversial here, and a clear Rudy loser. I should note there have been a couple threads on which there were quite rational conversations, I dont have the links handy, but maybe someone (or me later) will post them because thats a better case for a factual discussion.
Rudy has bragged about taking 70,000 guns off the streets of NY. At least 30,000 of those were from newly minted Rudy criminals, law abiding citizens with concealed carry permits, which were revoked, making them criminals unless they surrendered their handguns. My guess the lucky ones who had the option of taking them to their summer home in the Hamptons kept their permits.
Im not a photoshop person, if I was, how should I display this graphically?
Option 1, a picture of Rudy speaking, bragging about confiscating 30,000 handguns from law abiding citizens. Perhaps with commentary. I can support that.
Option 2, a pic similar to Elian being kidnapped, Rudy, jack booted thug, dressed in swat gear, grabbing guns from a citizens home (I can support the gungrabber charge) while kicking little children to the ground, as an accomplice (Kerrick?) molests the lady of the house.
Some people would like #2, I see its equivalent here every day.
Gun ownership is an important issue in America.
Its one I think worth voting on. Many people agree with me.
The GOA has 30,000 members, a significant number.
The NRA, Im a life member, 4,000,000, hopefully growing. Always in the top 5 lobbying groups.
Gunowners in America, estimated at 80,000,000 plus.
Option 2 might appeal to the GOA and some of the NRA members, and Ill kick the number to 5,000,000 to include other gun owning groups. And Ill assume option 2 will appeal to all of them.
Of course theyre probably on our side already.
My question is, not that we have 5,000,000 potential voters who recognize Rudy isnt a gungrabber, how do we approach the other 95,000,000.
I would suggest option 2 isnt the way to do it.
Anecdotal only. I dont have polls, and Im not going to pull out quotations about honey, sugar, vinegar, etc.
But I think its a mistake.
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.