Giuliani campaigns in Newport Beach (and outlines his positions)

Daily PIlot ^ | March 24, 2007 | Amanda Pennington and Alicia Robinson

[FairOpinion]

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani led off with his strongest card, his terrorism-fighting credentials, before touching on healthcare, immigration and energy policy in a speech to a welcoming crowd Saturday.

"Sept. 11, 2001, taught me — and I believe it taught a lot of people, including President Bush — that we have to remain on offense," Giuliani said. "That means that we have to use our military. We can't show weakness."

Giuliani seemed to hit all the right notes Saturday, getting applause when he criticized Democrats' stance on healthcare and advocated vouchers for schools.

On immigration, he told reporters he doesn't support amnesty for illegal immigrants, but he could support a guest worker program if there were adequate border security and tamper-proof ID cards. He said that even if illegal immigrants "can demonstrate that they are lawful, that they are paying taxes [and] that they'll pay penalties," they still shouldn't be put ahead of people who go through legal channels.

"And citizenship here, if it's earned, should be premised on being able to read and write English and understand American history, so we restore assimilation to the process of immigration," he said.

"Nothing will unite the Republicans more than a candidate who can beat Hillary Clinton," Curry said.

[KATIE-O]

How about us Southern Baptists? All 16,000,000 of us.



lmao! Are you presuming to speak for 16 million people?? You're delusional, AuntBee. There are many, many Southern Evangelicals who say they are very open to a Rudy presidency even though they don't agree with some of his social politics. They do agree on Rudy's strong points and that includes leadership in the WOT.

[Peach]

Be that as it may, there's no denying (honstly) that my post is true.

Well that would be a nifty trick since you're claiming I have a mantra about something I don't think I've even said once, let alone repeatedly.

[KATIE-O]

I think a big part of Rudy's appeal is that he can make a clear, persuasive, and cogent case for himself. Dubya just can't do it - he comes across as befuddled and out of touch, as well as downright incoherent. Rudy's style is about as different from Dubya's style as you can get. For most GOPers (and most Americans), that's a good thing.

For those preferring to live in the FR Vacuum, denial ain't a river in Egypt, and DST mandates that you change your calendars from 1956 to 2007.







Ah, another voice of reason...... an island of sunshine in the Twilight Zone. :) Excellent post.

[dforest]

You certainly are on here attempting to tell everyone that YOU know how others are thinking and speaking.

Why cant MamaB?

The hardsell tactics and bully tactics are very tiresome.
Kind of like kicking a dead horse.

[wagglebee]

You seem to think just being a conservative makes him qualified or even electable.

That's not at all what I think.

I do think that Rudy's liberalism makes him unqualified.

If as you Rudyites like to say, "Rudy is the only one who can beat Hillary," then why didn't he run against her for the Senate? Could it be that he didn't actually believe he could win?

[airborne]

My post was aimed at all Rudy supporters, not you specifically.


I pinged you because you were one of those currently on the thread.


If you believe Rudy isn't the only one who can beat Hillary, why not say so now?

[wagglebee]

If you believe Rudy isn't the only one who can beat Hillary, why not say so now?

Uh, perhaps because they know that this is the ONLY reason any real conservative would support a bleeding-heart liberal as the GOP nominee.

[HitmanLV]

I call 'em like they are! Thanks! ;-)

[KATIE-O]

Questions about positions are "stupid"? Wow, how liberal of you.





Can't we stop throwing around the label of "Liberal?" No one here who is a member of the Republican Party is a "liberal" so this is just pure name calling childishness.

[KATIE-O]

I just love your tagline !

"Rudy Giuliani - Restoring Optimism in '08"

The liberals are optimistic, NARAL is optimistic, the homosexuals are optimistic, and the media is optimistic.


Yippee!



Too bad the wild eyed Freepers who constantly bash Rudy are not optimistic about anything. I'll bet your glass is always half empty.

[dforest]

No, but the Rudy cheerleaders are definitely "full of it"

[airborne]

Too bad the wild eyed Freepers who constantly bash Rudy are not optimistic about anything.

I see you've moved to name calling to divert attention from the issue.

I'll bet your glass is always half empty.

You'd lose that bet.

[wagglebee]

No one here who is a member of the Republican Party is a "liberal" so this is just pure name calling childishness.

So, pro-abortion (including partial birth abortion), pro-homosexual "civil unions" (i.e. marriage), pro-illegal immigration and pro-gun control are no longer liberal positions?!

[rintense]

He quit for a VERY GOOD REASON- his daughter was dying and he needed to be with family. Get your facts straight.

[KATIE-O]

Rudy is no Reagan. Reagan was a conservative and his core beliefs were the thing that drew in the voters that contributed to landslides.

His personal life was not perfect, but he did not champion liberal causes, embrace homosexuality, abortion and fight to take away arms.

All of these things Rudy has done. He cannot get away from it because it is on the record.

His views on social issues are a danger to our future. His views advance liberal causes.

He is not a conservative and has never claimed to be in the past. His candidacy will lose more voters than he could ever pick up.

Take your blinders off and look at the whole package.




I could advise you to do the same. Reagan started out as a liberal Democrat. He believed in a womans right to choose, just like Rudy. He changed along the way but you seem to think he was born with the Republican logo stamped across his forehead.

[supercat]

"Nothing will unite the Republicans more than a candidate who can beat Hillary Clinton," Curry said.

I thoroughly grant that, at a time when Hillary Clinton is not campaigning, Rudy Giuliani can probably outpoll her. I fail to see how that justifies claims that he can beat her.

At this stage of the game, winning 2 percentage points worth of moderates for every percentage point of the base that is lost might seem like a good deal, but what's going to happen once the Democrats go into campaign mode? They're going to win back many of the moderates who were momentarily captured by the leftward run. Even if the Democrats only recapture half of the moderates, that would still leave the GOP with nothing to show for its leftward run. So why bother?

[dmw]

" No one here who is a member of the Republican Party is a "liberal" so this is just pure name calling childishness."

Not according to this guy...

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.

~Jim Robinson~

Notice he says," moderate/liberal Republican..." It's not name calling. It's just the facts ma'am.

[wagglebee]

Reagan started out as a liberal Democrat.

No, you're mistaken, he started out as a moderate to conservative Democrat.

He believed in a womans right to choose, just like Rudy.

Yes, and then within months of Roe v. Wad he saw the carnage of the abortuaries and changed his mind. Rudy on the other hand started out pro-life and then after seeing the carnage of the abortuaries decided to be pro-abortion.

[rintense]

I don't support Rudy and I'm optimistic that someone who hasn't even declared yet, has numbers rivaling Hillary. I'm optimistic that Republicans and conservatives could potentially have a candidate to vote FOR, not someone to elect as a vote AGAINST Hillary.

What amazes me is that many of the Rudy supports have become one issue voters (he'll be good on the WoT), yet have decried others for making abortion, or the 2nd Amendment, or gay marriage their 'one' issue.

As a Republican, I can not in good conscience vote for someone who has only one quality that Republicans and conservatives identify with- especially when I know someone like Fred Thompson, who is completely electable and can win- is an option. It is Thompson and his consistent support of traditional conservative issues that will unite the party.

Not someone who will polarize it. Like Rudy.

[daviddennis]

For whatever reason, I had forgotten that and I suppose it makes me seem like an insensitive guy, for which I apologise.

That being said, he was frustrated by life in the Senate. See:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009798

Alas, my central point that he seems to have little executive experience still stands.

D