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

Skip to comments.

Giuliani doubters in for Rudy awakening
The Boston Herald ^ | 03/18/2007 | Deroy Murdock

Posted on 03/18/2007 1:31:23 AM PDT by JohnSheppard

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-202 next last
To: tkathy
I'd rather lose to a liberal Democrat than lose to a liberal Republican. I will NOT vote for Rudy, in any election. At least with a liberal Democrat in office, their destruction of our national values wouldn't amount to a personal apostasy for my complicity in that election.

Indeed, when Democrats go about their efforts to bring our nation down, at least they bear the complete blame. I will not have the same results attributed to me and my vote.

I've already seen ENOUGH Supreme Cabal members bear Republican genesis and liberal rewriting of the Constitution. I will NOT see that again. I will not vote for it. I will not convince myself that Rudy will hold true to MY colors instead of his.

At least, Hillary will be more honest about her intent, even as she lies through her teeth about it. THAT's saying something.

If Rudy gets the nod, my vote goes to Tancredo or whatever third party candidate runs, or if none do, then the Libertarian candidate. Rudy supporters NEED to realize that Rudy WILL cost Republicans the election. When a sizeable percentage of your OWN party will not vote for YOUR man, then you have put forth a loser.

I'd rather see the other side win than see my side 'win' in title only. It's not about 'which side wins'. It's about which agenda leads. With a contest of Rudy vs. Hillary (or fill in your loser here), America's best agenda loses, no matter the outcome. I could NEVER support that.

You can cry all you won't that Rudy is better at least than Hillary. I don't see it. In fact, he's worse because he would tag the responsibility of the fallout of liberal socialism with MY label. NO way, no how. Not on my watch.

~faith,
Timothy.
51 posted on 03/18/2007 6:37:29 AM PDT by ziravan (winning the lotto one vote at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

Thankfully its a while till D Day.....and we all know that lots can happen between now and then......Hopefully we won't have to make a choice regarding Rudy

I'm still hopeful for Fred or Duncan....

But if it does come down to a Rudy-Hillary vote....in order to have a clear conscience I will write in Duncan or Newt or Fred....


52 posted on 03/18/2007 6:44:59 AM PDT by Halgr (Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
Actually, the one issue voters are the "anyone but Hillary/Obama" crowd.

I'm a one issue voter...one issue at a time which includes big government, RTBA, abortion, WOT, political correctness, CFR, entitlements and the list goes on and on and one. I'm a Conservative first and foremost. If the Republican party can't serve up a Republican candidate that is a conservative I'll either vote third party (if there is a candidate that is a conservative) or write myself in again as I did in 2004.

53 posted on 03/18/2007 6:46:11 AM PDT by politicalwit (Family values don't stop at the border...but Federal laws do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden

Here is a list that will help in assesing the candidates. I know it's a surprise that this isn't a pro or anti-rudy list. Some of the emphasis on nuclear war may seem a little out of date but overall it's a good guide to go by.


On Jan. 10, 1963, Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. of Florida read a list of 45 Communist goals into the Congressional Record. The list was derived from researcher Cleon Skousen’s book “The Naked Communist.” These principles are well worth revisiting today in order to gain insights into the thinking and strategies of much of our so-called liberal elite.
1. U.S. should accept coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. should be willing to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.



3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the U.S. would be a demonstration of "moral strength."

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.


5. Extend long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China and admission of Red China to the U.N.


8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the Germany question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the U.S. has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the U.S.


16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights.


17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations that are under Communist attack.


20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV & motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings," substituting shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. " Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24.Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural and healthy."

This is the Gramscian agenda of the "long march through the institutions" spelled out explicitly: gradual takeover of the "means of communication" and then using those vehicles to debauch the culture and weaken the will of the individual to resist. Today those few who still have the courage to advocate public morality are denounced and viciously attacked. Most Americans are entirely unwitting regarding the motives behind this agenda.

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."


28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state"
Replacing belief in the creator with belief in the earthly man-controlled State.

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
And replace our nation of "laws, not men" with royal decree emanating from appointed judges and executive orders. Replace elected officials with bureaucrats.

30. Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of "the big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.


32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture – education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
Public ownership of the means of production, the core principle of totalitarianism.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.


38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand or treat.


39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.


41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.


42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special interest groups should rise up and make a "united force" to solve economic, political or social problems.


43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally Reservation so the U.S. cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.


54 posted on 03/18/2007 6:52:14 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Duncan Hunter: pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-border control, pro-family)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: KDD
the liberal Boston Herald

Read much?

55 posted on 03/18/2007 6:55:07 AM PDT by BfloGuy (It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we can expect . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnSheppard

Rudy may be peaking too early. If I were Rudy I'd be looking over my shoulders at Fred Thompson, who may be the next POTUS.


56 posted on 03/18/2007 6:58:11 AM PDT by KenmcG414
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ziravan
Hey, Timothy, wouldn't voting for a libertarian candidate be just like voting for Rudy? Seriously, just swap two issues -- support for the WOT [rudy for libertarian against] and gun control [rudy for libertarian against] -- and you have, essentially, voted for the exact same platform.

I am not convinced that Rudy is going to be tough on guns at the federal level as an executive...I believe that he tried to clean up NYC because the people of that city clamored for it and he took a misguided approach but one that, surprisingly, netted positive results. It should have but perhaps there were other factors that reduced violent crimes and perhaps without gun control the results would have been even better.

57 posted on 03/18/2007 7:00:50 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax
"Anyone that supports a liberal candidate that is pro-gay, pro-late term abortion and anti-2nd Amendment should not be allowed to call themselves a FReeper."

those views are not conservative or liberal they have more to do with the culture of the small town and evangelical churches. Rudy is in fact the only true Conservative in the race.
58 posted on 03/18/2007 7:04:01 AM PDT by bilhosty (to hell with ABCNNBCBS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

Free trade -- that is, commerce that is free from regulation -- is not even close to being Marxist. At its core and in its essense, trade is capitalistic. Just food for thought.


59 posted on 03/18/2007 7:05:57 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: tkathy

The reason many do not support Rino Rudy is not just one issue. He is on the wrong side of guns, gays, abortion, global warming, etc.....


60 posted on 03/18/2007 7:07:16 AM PDT by Hydroshock (Duncan Hunter For President, checkout gohunter08.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

Pimping the economic ideas of Howard Dean and Ralph Nader is considered "conservative" here at freerepublic.com lately.


61 posted on 03/18/2007 7:07:53 AM PDT by JHBowden (President Giuliani in 2008! Law and Order. Solid Judges. Free Markets. Killing Terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

At its core and in its essense, trade is capitalistic. Just food for thought.


Trade which builds up our enemies and diminishes our ability to wage war hurts our country and the world as a whole. Trade with free nations is a positive influence at home and abroad.


62 posted on 03/18/2007 7:12:57 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Duncan Hunter: pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-border control, pro-family)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: LS

Chris Matthew's Sunday show just showed a 2 minute video of Rudy in drag, in a falsetto, kissing, then slapping, Donald Trump..


63 posted on 03/18/2007 7:14:32 AM PDT by ken5050 (The 2008 winning ticket: Rudy/Newtie, with Hunter for SecDef, Pete King at DHS, Bill Simon at Treas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax
Anyone that supports a liberal candidate that is pro-gay, pro-late term abortion and anti-2nd Amendment should not be allowed to call themselves a FReeper.

Let's change just a few words to your statement:
"Anyone that supports a moderate or conservative candidate that is anti-gay, pro-life and pro-2nd Amendment should not be allowed to call themselves a Democrat."

So, what are your words for Freepers who care to exercise something called freedom of thought and opinion?
"Aus!", perhaps?

- John

64 posted on 03/18/2007 7:15:09 AM PDT by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden; LowCountryJoe

Free trade does not sell out your country...

A welfare plantation for illegals is not capitalism...


65 posted on 03/18/2007 7:16:48 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
It would be similar only IF the Libertarian candidate had a chance at winning.

Look, America has survived liberal Democrats in office before, and will do so again. Can the Republican party survive a liberal Republican in office? That's a more vexing question.

The heart and soul of the Republican party should be contended in good faith. I'd rather LOSE when losing means no substantial difference than 'win' when winning means the destruction of that upon which I stand.

Whether a Republican party, headed by Rudy wins or loses, the result is STILL a liberal is in the White House. IF the party loses, then, to quote one of Rudy's peers, the party at least will learn that you have to 'dance with them that brung ya'.

THAT lesson would be worth the price paid, since that price by comparison of Rudy vs. Hillary (or name your loser here) would be minimal.

The issue however, doesn't come down to 'teaching a lesson'. It comes down to personal principle. I cannot vote for such a person, no matter what party label he or she chooses to wear. It is a matter of integrity. In the end, it's the agenda that matters, and NOT the label.

You can quote 'Rudy is good for the war' or some other stuff if you like. In reality, there is every bit as much a war going on over values and I will not purposely choose which war is more important to win. They both are. If it takes being temporarily lost in the wilderness to bring down the walls of Jericho, then that is a price that would need to be paid in order to learn the value of faith.

Rudy is a feckless choice. Indeed, it would be no choice at all. Run, Newt! Run!

~faith.
66 posted on 03/18/2007 7:20:25 AM PDT by ziravan (winning the lotto one vote at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: tkathy

"I wonder if there might be some pushback against the overly self righteous single issue voters that many think are hurting the republican party."

Which "single issue" are you so worried about?


67 posted on 03/18/2007 7:20:28 AM PDT by antisocial (Texas SCV - Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dmw
"...but Rudy supporters will be in for a shock after he's in office a while."
You are so right. They have noooooooo idea.

Could not EXACTLY the same thing be said about G.W. Bush?

I voted twice for him, expecting a "conservative" or at least someone who would enforce the laws of the land (such as immigration law). And what did we get?

I would prefer a Giuliani, who is liberal on his surface but who [in office] persues modestly conservative policies (they certainly seemed that way to the NYC left and media, who HATED him), to an "all dressed up" conservative-on-the-outside [such as Bush] who hobnobs with Mexican Presidents, eating their chili for them!

- John

68 posted on 03/18/2007 7:20:55 AM PDT by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob
........hasn't been any more effective at getting his points out than President Bush. The problem with that is for me, he'd be just as effective as President Bush at defending himself against liberal attacks. We all know how President Bush has done...nothing but silence in response. It's just maddening.

That, in a nut shell, is why George W. Bush will go down in History as a mediocre President at best or a failed President at worst.

Lincoln and Churchill saved their respective nations by inspiring the Home Front in spite of numerous early military defeats.

Bush has almost lost a war that is of vital strategic interest to America by yielding the Bully Pulpit to Copperheads and by waging a war designed not to displease Copperheads in any way in spite of stunning early military victories.

American political dynamics being what they are, with the Sheeple of the Center tipping the balance in Presidential elections, makes the election of a true Conservative possible only after the unmitigated disaster of a liberal such as Jimmy Carter.

Likewise, the election of a Hillary is only possible after the disaster of a Home Front that has been allowed to be thoroughly demoralized during war time.

Because of the Sheeple of the Center, a Conservative cannot and will not be elected President in 2008.

Hoping to get Hillary in the White house so that a Conservative is elected in 2012 after a disasterous Hillary Presidency is playing games with America's very survival as America cannot afford to abandon 70% of the World's known oil reserves to a nuclear armed Iran. In addition, for those who use abortion as a litmus test, a Hillary White House would pack every vacancy in the Supreme Court with Ruth Ginsburg clones and keep late term abortion as the U.S. law of the land for decades to come.

Come November 2008, I would be extremely surprised if Giuliani is not the Republican candidate. At that time, I will not stay home and I will vote for Giuliani to ensure that the next President will not surrender America's vital interests in the Persian Gulf and will not pack the Supreme Court with Ruth Ginsburg clones.

Those who want to stay home or throw their vote away in a protest vote have a First Amendment right to do so but they will have hurt America with their political irrelevance just as Bush has hurt America by choosing to be politically irrelevant.

69 posted on 03/18/2007 7:23:07 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

I'll say up front that immigration is a beautiful thing and I want to see more of it. Coming to the United States to live long and prosper is the most noblest of motives.

The problem isn't the illegals, who are good for the North American economy. In a rational society, we would welcome them in openly and legally. The problem is the ridiculous minimum wage laws we have here in the United States.

If we give illegals some sort of legal status, then they will have to be paid above the market price by government law. We will simultaneously throw working illegals out of a job and into government dependency at the same time.

On the other hand, we would be doing irreparable harm to our economy by deporting 12,000,000 people.

Bush's proposals, which split the difference by putting people on a path to citizenship, make the best out of a generally bad situation.


70 posted on 03/18/2007 7:24:15 AM PDT by JHBowden (President Giuliani in 2008! Law and Order. Solid Judges. Free Markets. Killing Terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

Define our enemy. Are the people of Hong Kong or Tiawan (the people who are pressuring mainland China to liberalize internaly) our enemies? Is India, Chile, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Japan, South Africa, etc. our enemy? Oh, I know...it's those filthy Arabs at the U.A.E. That wanted to buy an ownership stake in U.S. ports operations that are the enemy. Probably some of the most tolerant business people in the world where Christians, Muslims, and Jews routinely engage in commerce with one another without violent incident and where they all benefit from the exchange of goods and saervices. Yep, that free trade sure is some scary stuff


71 posted on 03/18/2007 7:31:00 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
The problem isn't the illegals, who are good for the North American economy.

Bankrupting public and private health institutions is good for the economy?

Filling our prisons is good for the economy?

Affirmative action in citizenship for illegals from Mexico is good for the economy?

Selling our country out to illegals who have no allegiance to the United States to start with is good for the economy?

Are you a joke or just a traitor?

72 posted on 03/18/2007 7:36:02 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
The problem isn't the illegals, who are good for the North American economy.

Bankrupting public and private health institutions is good for the economy?

Filling our prisons is good for the economy?

Affirmative action in citizenship for illegals from Mexico is good for the economy?

Selling our country out to illegals who have no allegiance to the United States to start with is good for the economy?

Are you a joke or just a traitor?

73 posted on 03/18/2007 7:36:12 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

It's funny that you had to dance all around Communist China. Obviously, mainland China is our enemy. You could at this point in time add Russia N.korea, Syria and Iran. I'm not saying that trade should be banned with these countries, but it should be a negotiating tool not a given.


74 posted on 03/18/2007 7:37:33 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Duncan Hunter: pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-border control, pro-family)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

Francis--

There are solid, economic reasons why things are screwed up. You, like many paleocons, try to make things into a personal culture war.

Am I in favor of getting government out of the health care business, and allowing medicine to choose who they provide coverage for? You bet.

Am I in favor of putting criminals in prison? Absolutely. Blacks are far more likely to commit crime than Latinos in the United States, but I am certainly not in favor of deporting them wholesale.

As far as the allegiance nonsense, Nativists were saying the same thing about Germans and the Irish back in the 1830s and 1840s-- they were more loyal to the Pope than they were to the Republic, blah blah blah.

Given Carlos Mencia is not a menace to the United States, I think the border bots suffer from something very similar to Bush Derangement Syndrome. Revolutionary Muslims killed 3,000 people during an astonishing attack on our own soil, and radical revolutionaries like Ahmadinejad are planning to follow up the attacks with nukes. Rather than face this existential danger, many have displaced the emotion on things more innocuous-- Bush is destroying us, immigrants are destroying us, global warming is destroying us, the beliefs of Christians are destroying us according to atheists.

All of this is nonsense, and is really amazing considering the real people who plan to do some real harm to the Republic with the weapons of Armageddon.


75 posted on 03/18/2007 7:52:17 AM PDT by JHBowden (President Giuliani in 2008! Law and Order. Solid Judges. Free Markets. Killing Terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: ken5050
"Chris Matthew's Sunday show just showed a 2 minute video of Rudy in drag, in a falsetto, kissing, then slapping, Donald Trump.."

We all know by now, how Trump feels about the WOT and Bush. Anyone think he won't influence Rudy? LOL.

BTW, the Rats are saving the best of the worst about Rudy till AFTER he gets the GOP nomination..IMHO.

sw

76 posted on 03/18/2007 7:52:58 AM PDT by spectre ((Spectre's wife))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
Are you a joke or just a traitor?

I think you should apologize. There used to be a time at this forum where every post didn't have to end with a blistering insult.

We were free to engage in discussion, even disagreement, without insults.

People were free to be corrected and enlightened without being called idiots.

Take it out of the gutter. We can do better.

77 posted on 03/18/2007 7:59:52 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
Blacks are far more likely to commit crime than Latinos in the United States...

Our prisons in the West and the gangs on the streets have more Mexican nationals in them than American citizens.

More Americans are killed by illegals than have been in the war on terror and the Iraq war.

Give it a rest... stop selling us out and betraying this country...


Revolutionary Muslims killed 3,000 people during an astonishing attack on our own soil, and radical revolutionaries like Ahmadinejad are planning to follow up the attacks with nukes.

LAX IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT YOU IDIOT!!!

78 posted on 03/18/2007 8:04:11 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

Hey, if you want to excuse the lax immigration enforcement that gave us 9-11, go ahead...

I will not...


79 posted on 03/18/2007 8:06:02 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone



Oh, and by the way....

If you did not see the huge illegal immigrant protests in the streets when immigration policy was debated in D.C.; where signs that glorified Bin Laden were all over the place, I'll call you plain stupid as well...


80 posted on 03/18/2007 8:10:02 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Polybius
In addition, for those who use abortion as a litmus test, a Hillary White House would pack every vacancy in the Supreme Court with Ruth Ginsburg clones and keep late term abortion as the U.S. law of the land for decades to come.

And a Giuliani White House wouldn't?

http://www.blogicus.com/archives/rudy_giuliani_is_not_our_man.php

No thanks. You present some good points about the election being affected by events of the recent past, but I don't see that as being so inevitable that I'm going to just lay down my sword without a fight.

If he would run, I think that Fred Thompson could have the charisma to pull a lot of those sheeple votes without demoralizing the base the way Giuliani at the head of the ticket would.

81 posted on 03/18/2007 8:10:58 AM PDT by Wissa (I despise the liberal media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: JohnSheppard

If Bill Clinton had been a Republican, I still would have known he was a liberal, pro homosexual, Constitution twisting liar. I would never have voted for him.


82 posted on 03/18/2007 8:11:48 AM PDT by Old Landmarks (No fear of man, none!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

Francis--

How many Mexicans were involved in 911?

Secondly, you're not looking at the numbers correctly. Crime has been consistently falling in all categories in the United States since the early 1990s. In any sample involving millions of people, you're going to find a lot of crimes, including homicides.

But unlike you and John Kerry, I do not see terrorism as a law enforcement issue. Revolutionary Islamists are working literally to end the United States of America, and 911 is simply an opening salvo. They want us all dead. Do you understand the difference?

If you insist on name calling, perhaps I should start calling you Francois Dashwood. It has a nice ring to it.


83 posted on 03/18/2007 8:12:10 AM PDT by JHBowden (President Giuliani in 2008! Law and Order. Solid Judges. Free Markets. Killing Terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

I'm not excusing anything, and certainly not your boorish behavior.

Throwing out the "traitor" word when discussing a policy matter on a thread is no minor insult. And it's completely unnecessary.


84 posted on 03/18/2007 8:14:09 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

If the illegals protesting in the streets carrying signs glorifying Osama Bin Laden wasn't enough of a clue for you, you are a stupid as he is...


85 posted on 03/18/2007 8:18:41 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
But unlike you and John Kerry, I do not see terrorism as a law enforcement issue. Revolutionary Islamists are working literally to end the United States of America, and 911 is simply an opening salvo. They want us all dead. Do you understand the difference? If the illegals protesting in the streets carrying signs glorifying Osama Bin Laden wasn't enough of a clue, you are as stupid as Kerry is...
86 posted on 03/18/2007 8:21:30 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
But unlike you and John Kerry, I do not see terrorism as a law enforcement issue. Revolutionary Islamists are working literally to end the United States of America, and 911 is simply an opening salvo. They want us all dead. Do you understand the difference?

If the illegals protesting in the streets carrying signs glorifying Osama Bin Laden wasn't enough of a clue, you are as stupid as Kerry is...

87 posted on 03/18/2007 8:21:48 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

You would be smart if you read post #75 of this thread and reflected on its significance before writing out one more knee-jerk reaction. The truth is, is that immigrants have always benefitted this country (on net) even though the benefits may not be seen until the third generation has lived out their lives. That is the flat out truth. But deeply rooted fear and hatred prevent people such as yourself from seeing this. Negative attitudes about immigrants have always existed and yet the United States of America has been able to absorb them and even prosper because of them. Check your history, paleocon, you may just learn something if you're willing to open your closed mind for a change.


88 posted on 03/18/2007 8:21:56 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Halgr

FYI..Those of us who support Rudy aren't asking you to hold your nose and pull the lever, merely, be willing to listen to him as he asks for, and tries to earn, your vote. Don't forget that we share the concerns and issues that now make you doubt him. Just keep an open mind.


89 posted on 03/18/2007 8:23:39 AM PDT by ken5050 (The 2008 winning ticket: Rudy/Newtie, with Hunter for SecDef, Pete King at DHS, Bill Simon at Treas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

If the illegals protesting in the streets carrying signs glorifying Osama Bin Laden wasn't enough of a clue for you, you are a stupid as he is...


90 posted on 03/18/2007 8:24:06 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

How much have you had to drink this morning?


91 posted on 03/18/2007 8:25:25 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

Rudy will win my vote if it comes to that.

Reason ..... Past presidents actions & results vs Rudy

Jimmy Carter vs Rudy Rudy Wins
Bill Clinton vs Rudy Rudy Wins

Hillary vs Rudy Give me Rudy


92 posted on 03/18/2007 8:28:08 AM PDT by patriotspride
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

I hear you, honestly and I respect your comments.

But

Rudy's position regarding Abortion, the Second Amendment and other blatantly liberal views take me to a place where I don't see how I could ever support his positions....too much to compromise on my part.

I just hope and pray that Fred decides to run or that Duncan gains some traction.

I hear rudy being lifted up by too many republicans and its really very sad that so many would sell out just to defeat the dems.....sorry but I cannot be a part of that.


93 posted on 03/18/2007 8:28:25 AM PDT by Halgr (Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

If you could not see the television last summer because you were on something...

The illegals protesting in the streets carrying signs glorifying Osama Bin Laden wasn't enough of a clue for you...


94 posted on 03/18/2007 8:30:06 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

There you go again, repeating yourself over and over again. Do you have OCD or something or are you just such a blathering fool that you just can't remember that you post the same tripe from one minute to the next?


95 posted on 03/18/2007 8:31:09 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

You want to deny the truth...

If the illegals protesting in the streets carrying signs glorifying Osama Bin Laden wasn't enough of a clue for you...


96 posted on 03/18/2007 8:32:50 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

You want to deny the truth...

If the illegals protesting in the streets carrying signs glorifying Osama Bin Laden wasn't enough of a clue for you...


97 posted on 03/18/2007 8:32:56 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

Run Fred Run!!!!


98 posted on 03/18/2007 8:35:20 AM PDT by rintense (Just say no to McCain in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

Rudy in drag doesn't bother me one bit. His RINO beliefs DO.


99 posted on 03/18/2007 8:36:14 AM PDT by rintense (Just say no to McCain in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Halgr

I would happily, and enthusiatically support Duncan or Fred....but they first have to show me they can generate some support, both financially and in the polls. Our country is at war, facing the greatest danger ever, and I do not believe I can afford to sit out this crucial election. We share the same viewpoints on Life, RKBA, marriage, etc..but national security trumps everything this time out. A dirty bomb detonated in Grand Central station will kill a lot more babies, (and adults) and cause economic devastation to this nation. Rudy understands the national security concerns, even you give him credit for that, and he will appoint stricty constructionist to the court, who will NOT hamper his efforts to fight the terrorists. Those jurists just happen to have views on the social issues that agree with yours..


100 posted on 03/18/2007 8:36:27 AM PDT by ken5050 (The 2008 winning ticket: Rudy/Newtie, with Hunter for SecDef, Pete King at DHS, Bill Simon at Treas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-202 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