Posted on 03/15/2007 11:22:59 AM PDT by areafiftyone
I will post the schedule of the feasts when they are finalized......see, we heve a few things in common! LOL.
I'm an Italian NYer so whenever there is Italian Food - I'm there! LOL!
Anyone who doubts the power of the secular left in America today needs to remember what just happened to General Pace. Criticizing gays is just no longer permitted, at least in the circles of the elite governing class. The way things are going, it will soon be banned in GOP circles too. These are the people who claim they are going to stand up to terrorists . . .
as if God only pays attention outside cathedrals...?!!?
Boy, that Rudy sure is a politician with convictions!!!
/sarc
Yes, but apparently that was just because Arafat didn't have a strong voting block on his side.
And you know, as much as I cheer that move, it really smacks of an authoritarian streak to treat a public forum as your own private plaything to be controlled like that.
Too bad he didn't see fit to throw abortionist and abortion supporters out of public events because they were implicated in the murder of americans.
Oddly, I agree that compromise is necessary.
However, there is no need to compromise a year out of an election when picking your own party's nominee.
And we are not holding lousy cards, we are holding the correct philosophy to make our country strong. If Republicans do not stand for the right policies, what's the point of electing them at all?
Yes, indeed.
Was he afraid someone would see him and strike him down? Or does he just feel uncomfortable walking by Catholic churches?
Yeah. Any second now. His support will collapse.
You're right and now we have, at best, a sympathizer with the secular left being trumpeted as the savior of Republicans. Luckily, there's plenty of time to expose him for what he is.
Remember the Values Voters? I think they will vote Democrat this time around.
Funny, I'm almost the opposite. I don't really like Rudy. I think he'd probably win the election, because he's enough of a democrat to draw them over, and I DO think that conservatives are so scared of losing the white house that enough would show up if we absolutely had to to put him over the top. I don't think it would be a blowout.
I think he'd have problems as President, he doesn't seem to have the qualities necessary. He seems to lack "leadership" but have "stubborness". We here he will compromise with democrats and how important that is, then we here how he kicks people out of places because he doesn't like them, and he'll stand up to the right people and get along with the right people.
On the other hand, if I have to vote on November 7 between a guy who SAYS he'll appoint a good judge even though I don't believe him, and a woman who I know won't appoint a good judge, I think I'll vote for Hope rather than Despair.
I'm not sure though -- it's hard to vote for a man who stands for so little, and I'd rather have a conservative in 4 years than have to put up with Rudy's hand-picked successor in 8 years.
Further, I think Rudy brings out social liberals who are pro-war. That gets him votes, but once they are at the polls, I think they vote democrat down-ticket. Without Rudy they stay home. I think Rudy gets conservative republicans voted out of office, helps hold some liberal republican seats I'd just as soon lose to clear the path for more conservative candidates, and in general promises to give us a more liberal congress than even a guy like Romney.
I don't see Rudy standing up to the Democrats, I see him marching in their parades, and working with them to pass legislation that supports his philosophy of abortion, gay rights, and gun control.
Nice fantasy you got going there.
So, one of the ways Rudy was able to keep the tax rate growth down was to sell off fixed assets: - Rudy sold WNYC radio for $20 million, WNYC-TV for $207 million, and NYC's share of the U.N. Plaza Hotel for $85 million.
- Rudy divested the City from the New York Coliseum adding $345 million to city coffers.
I wonder what U.S. assets he'll sell to balance the budget?
And it isn't a big deal that he kept the growth rate to 2.6%, given how bloated the budget was when he got there. Almost anybody could have cut that pig down to size.
Any republican candidate NOT talking tough on Iran and promising to get things down on fiscal issues?
Did Romney not govern as a fiscal conservative?
Is Hunter not calling for fiscal restraint, and for keeping Iran from having Nuclear capability?
Is McCain not for controlling spending?
Did Gilmore not cut tax rates as Governor, and impose fiscal retraint? Did he not talk tough on Terrorism immediately after 9/11 when working for the President?
Who are all these republican candidates for President who you are "contrasting" with Rudy's positions on these issues?
Jeeze I guess Bill Clinton, Hillary and the rest of the Democrats in power in NYC and the U.S. who howled their rage at Rudy at the time weren't enough of a voting block?
Jeeze now what Rudy did is a bad thing? What do you want him to kiss Arafat on both cheeks like Hillary did to his wife?
Mixing apples and oranges is not a convincing way to show your knowledge of fruit salad. (Pun intended).
I don't think we should demoralize ourselves by grouching about how lousy our position is.
I think the other side is actually holding worse cards, since they don't seem to have a clue what to do besides gesture and posture. In the two years they have to run the House(*), I don't see them as accomplishing much other than getting a better jet for Nancy than the previous speaker. I suggest we give it to her. The easier she is to ridicule, the better.
I know the other side hates President Bush very, very much, and that is their right, but where's their program? Where's something fresh and new and optimistic?
Rudy would get our side a genuine mandate, and I think that would help enormously. Someone like Duncan Hunter would most likely lose badly but even if he won he would stand in front of a polarized Congress and would be unlikely to enact much of anything.
D
(*) I don't think 51-49 is sufficient to run the Senate, given the fillibuster and all the other procedural tools that can be used against them.
Based on your screen name and comments on this thread, I am assuming that you went mad in 1998. Was it because they refused you tenure or because you actually got tenured?
-from a former academic who is still relatively sane, and not obsessed with hating Rudy and gays
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.