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

Skip to comments.

Will FR embrace socialism to make way for Rudy Giuliani as a Republican presidential candidate?
vanity | April 21, 2007 | Jim Robinson

Posted on 04/21/2007 6:42:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson

We've got some real challenges facing us. FR was established to fight against government corruption, overstepping, and abuse and to fight for a return to the limited constitutional government as envisioned and set forth by our founding fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and other founding documents.

One of the biggest cases of government corruption, overstepping and abuse that I know of is its disgraceful headlong slide into a socialist hell. Our founders never intended for abortion to be the law of the land. And they never intended the Supreme Court to be a legislative body. They never intended God or religion to be written out of public life. They never intended government to be used to deny God's existence or for government to be used to force sexual perversions onto our society or into our children's education curriculum. They never intend for government to disarm the people. They never intended for government to set up sanctuary cities for illegals. They never intended government to “rule” over the people and or to take their earnings or private property or to deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech, free religion, private property, due process, etc. They never intended government to seize the private property of private citizens through draconian asset forfeiture laws or laws allowing government to take private property from lawful owners to give to developers. Or to seize wealth and redistribute it to others. Or to provide government forced health insurance or government forced retirement systems.

All of the above are examples of ever expanding socialism and tyranny brought to us by liberals/liberalism.

FR fights against the liberals/Democrats in all of these areas and always will. Now if liberalism infiltrates into the Republican party and Republicans start promoting all this socialist garbage, do you think that I or FR will suddenly stop fighting against it? Do you think I'm going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?

Do you really expect me to do that?


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: abortion; aliens; banglist; bernardkerik; bugzapper; bugzapperinventor; bugzapperthread; byebyerinos; bzzzt; classicthread; damties; dragqueens4rudy; elections; fr; freedom; freepercide; freepersturnedtroll; freepicide; giuliani; globalwarming; gojimgo; greatzot; gungrabber; herekitty; hizzoner; homosexualagenda; howlermonkeys; howlermonkeyzot; howlinzot; hsw; immaturity; jrrocks; julieannie; julieanniebotsmad; lemmings; liberty; lookatmenow; massresignation; newt; no; nonopus; nopiapspleez; onepercentersgone; onepercentersrule; opus; opuscentral; peachcompost; piapers; pridegoethb4; prolife; propertyrights; propiaps; rabidfringeshame; realmenofgenius; rino; rinorudy; rinos; rossperot; rudy; rudyhasalisp; rudyinadress; rudymcromney; rudytherino; ruhroh; runfredrun; savagegotitrite; selfimmolation; socialism; socialist; springcleaning; springhousecleaning; stoprudy; stoprudy2008; suicidebymod; supo; sweepuptime; takingoutthetrash; thanksjim; themanwhosavednyc; thtoprudy; travesty; undeadthread; vikingkitties; weneedfred; wideawake; wideawakes; zap; zapper; zot; zotbelt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 18,451-18,459 next last
To: devolve; ntnychik; PhilDragoo; gonewt
[But I would vote for a trained chimpanzee if it meant keeping Hillary out of the White House.]

Me too.

51 posted on 04/21/2007 6:56:31 PM PDT by potlatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: merry10

PING


52 posted on 04/21/2007 6:56:33 PM PDT by Paperdoll ( Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
“Do you think I’m going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?”

I’m with ya!

I also see your concern of Demoncrats in drag pretending to be Republicans ... using the scare tactic of “want Hillary in there”? LOL! NOW is the time to weed out the Demoncrats in drag posing as Republicans and clean up the cultural and moral debauchery that the Rudy’s and McPain's of the world promote.

Hopefully Fred will run!

53 posted on 04/21/2007 6:56:37 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Watch out Jim the rudy bots will get you banned.


54 posted on 04/21/2007 6:56:41 PM PDT by VaRepublican (I would propagate tag lines but I don't know how...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

No way would I vote for him even if he was the nominee.
I’m with Thompson.


55 posted on 04/21/2007 6:56:56 PM PDT by netmilsmom (To attack one section of Christianity in this day and age, is to waste time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Up yours asswipe.


56 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Do you really expect me to do that?

Me? No.

However I'm not one of those trying to redefine conservatism into some bastard hybrid of libertarianism and old school marxism.

They, well yeah, they expect you to STFU and get your head right or suffer the consequences.
57 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:14 PM PDT by Dr.Zoidberg (Mohammedanism - Bringing you only the best of the 6th century for fourteen hundred years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
If we must set up a third party and run a Ronald Reagan type candidate, so be it. Voting for Rudy would probably be worse than pulling the lever for Hillary/Obama/Silky Pony, since his win would have the imprimatur of the so-called “conservative” GOP and he would face less opposition in leading the country further towards socialism.
58 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:36 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Iran delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godebert

That wasn’t a presidential race.


59 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:38 PM PDT by streetpreacher (What if you're wrong?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Do you think I'm going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?

Rock on you crazy diamond!


60 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:43 PM PDT by Vision ("Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord, whose confidence is in him." Jeremiah 17:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
And should he get the nomination anyways do you forfeit your duty and honor and stay home instead of voting, thus clearing the path for a marxist to do all those things to the country with the backing of the congress and the courts?

I still can't fathom the idea of not supporting a candidate who goes the right way half the time over a candidate who does none of the time.

I don't support Rudy, but I'll vote for him if I have to just to keep a true 100% socialist out of the White House. Call me a political prostitute, but I still believe in the America I remember and the democrats will take that away from me.

61 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:53 PM PDT by infidel29 (...but sir, if my child had a fever I wouldn't go to a bureaucrat for the diagnosis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Unless we subscribe to radically different definitions of “socialism” [on the basis of my experiences in USSR of accursed memory I would associate it with the leftist collectivism; although the not-so-leftist Nazis also used “socialist” in their name - so it probably needs to be associated with collectivism pure and simple]- so, unless you happen to use some different definition of what ‘socialism”/”socialist” means, I find it implausible to associate Rudy with the meaning of ‘socialism” I learned by my own skin while living under it. His known position on taxation, for example, is diametrically opposite to collectivist levelling/redistribution mantra. Socialism is hillary’s “we are going to take your things away for the common good”. Rudy’s [past] experience with NYC taxes would mark him as anti-socialist, IMHO.
62 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:57 PM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I am a conservative, proud and loud.

I will be voting for a conservative come Nov, 2008.

Hopefully, that conservative will be from the Republican party and will win the White House.

If the Republicans don’t put up a conservative I can, with clear conscience, vote for, I will still vote for a conservative.

If that means I don't vote for a Republican Party candidate, then so be it. Principles over party, always.

63 posted on 04/21/2007 6:57:59 PM PDT by upchuck (A living, breathing example of the Peter Principle. Oh, forgetful, too :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZRepublican

The same folks who thought it would be a good idea to punish the President and the republicans in the mid term elections will be bragging about their power when the democrats take over the white house.

After all, it was said that it didn’t matter if the dems took over the senate because both parties were the same anyway.

That logic sure showed our troops and our allies, didn’t it?

That pretense of supporting the troops is no different than the dems insisting ‘they’ support the troops.


64 posted on 04/21/2007 6:58:12 PM PDT by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
In regards to Guliani I'm reminded of one time Ann Coulter was on Hannity & Colmes and Colmes was running down the list of liberal POV's of Guliani. Coulter responded by essentially saying that "sure but Guliani was the mayor of the soviet union". Perhaps implying Guliani gets some type of pass since he had to be somewhat moderate or liberal to get elected mayor of NYC. (I know in more recent interviews Coulter has said she could not support Guliani since he's in favor of abortion).

I don't know if Guliani is an economic socialist. He might have vetoed some of the spending bills the Bush signed.

The challenge for Guliani is that he is so far left of many of the cultural issues (not just abortion and gay marriage). When things like the murders at Virginia Tech happen (just like Columbine) many more people are concerned with these culture issues. Voters in Republican primaries are especially concerned about these issues and that is Guliani's challenge duiring the primary season.

65 posted on 04/21/2007 6:58:28 PM PDT by fkabuckeyesrule (Good News everyone!!!! It's baseball season!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I intend to vote for the Republican nominee, no matter who. I’m hoping it will be a conservative, but I’ll never vote RAT.


66 posted on 04/21/2007 6:58:45 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Wasn't even a FReeper in 2000, but supported Alan Keyes & then voted for W.


67 posted on 04/21/2007 6:59:57 PM PDT by pookie18 ([Hillary Rotten] Clinton Happens...as does Dr. Demento Dean, Bela Pelosi & Benedick Durbin!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

“So you prefer Hillary, then?”

LOL! Rudy and McPain are as bad as Hillary.
No backbone will get you MORE socialism, NO gun rights and more moral decline with either Hillary, Rudy or McPain.

“Because that’s the choice you know; a not-so-socially-conserevative Republican or another eight years of the Clintons.”

Some of us won’t settle for another four years of Clintons under another name - Rudy or McPain. Hillary, Rudy, McPain - they’re all the same. They should ALL be running as Democrats. You’re silly threats are boring. You ought to just vote for Hillary and be done with it.


68 posted on 04/21/2007 7:00:02 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

I truly hope hillary is the dem candidate.

She will lose. Big.


69 posted on 04/21/2007 7:00:04 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar (Just say no to Brady Bunch Republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I have no intention of “embracing” socialism, but I do embrace reality, and will vote for whatever candidates (for all offices) show the least commitment to socialism. I have no idea if that will be Rudy Giuliani, but if I’m facing a ballot that’s offering me a choice between Rudy, Hillary or Obama, and a couple of fringe party candidates who don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning, I won’t hesitate to vote for Rudy. Unfortunately, there are no viable candidates who have a real aversion to socialism, because there is only a small minority of US voters who have a real aversion to socialism. That state of affairs will not be fixed at the voting booths — it needs to be fixed through political education of our fellow citizens, one by one. Only after a great deal more of that is accomplished, will candidates who are committed to rolling back the tide of socialism become potential winners of elections.

I lived in NYC through Rudy’s entire time as Mayor, and believe me, the city was much better off with him as Mayor, than it would have been with any of the other candidates who had any chance of actually getting elected. I don’t like his views on the Second Amendment, illegal aliens, or massive social “welfare” programs, but I won’t express my dislike for those views by voting for somebody who holds even more socialist views on these and other topics, or by handing my vote to a more-socialist-than-Rudy candidate by voting for somebody who has no chance whatsoever of winning.


70 posted on 04/21/2007 7:00:18 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

Call if collectism if you want. Same thing to me.


71 posted on 04/21/2007 7:00:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

When he posted that, I considered if the thought crossed your mind of choking him through the computer monitor.

Looks like you just did.


72 posted on 04/21/2007 7:01:04 PM PDT by streetpreacher (What if you're wrong?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: streetpreacher
"That wasn’t a presidential race."

Thanks for clearing that up. So voting for liberals is ok, unless they run for president. Got it.

73 posted on 04/21/2007 7:01:15 PM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: All
Let me just throw this question out there.

If you disagreed with a canidate on many issues but you were totlly convinced that that person was the best person to confront the Islamofacist. Would you support that person for President?

74 posted on 04/21/2007 7:01:17 PM PDT by fkabuckeyesrule (Good News everyone!!!! It's baseball season!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

...gun grabbing, pro-abortion AND pro sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants...


75 posted on 04/21/2007 7:01:33 PM PDT by Molly K.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GSlob

I was about to ask if there was a single person on this thread that had even the vaguest idea of what the actual definition of “socialism” was.


76 posted on 04/21/2007 7:01:34 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: infidel29

You’re delusional. Rudy doesn’t go to the right even 10% of the time.


77 posted on 04/21/2007 7:03:18 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Well, Jim, since most of your polls show that the majority of us DON’T want Rudy the Rino for president I don’t think you have to worry about us embracing socialism. I sure as he** won’t.


78 posted on 04/21/2007 7:03:24 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
...a not-so-socially-conserevative Republican or another eight years of the Clintons.

Doesn't sound so bad to me. I lived through eight years of that hell before. If that is my choice, then I go third party. I will have plenty of time to decide which one.

Personally, I think this country just may have to burn before it gets better: the last American citizens who truly understood the meaning of sacrifice are rapidly departing from this world.

79 posted on 04/21/2007 7:03:25 PM PDT by beancounter13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Rudy is running for President. He is a Republican. He has supported Bush unequivocally in the WOT and regards to Iraq. He has been endorsed by some bedrock conservatives, like Ted Olson. Also - Rudy is consistently number one in the polls. He has a record as a fiscal conservative and crime fighter. I certainly respect the fact that you do not personally support Rudy for POTUS. So I guess the question is, do you allow FR, as a forum, to be a platform for those Republicans and Conservatives who do support Rudy, or do you banish them and all discussion of Rudy, excepting anti-Rudy posts? What do you do if he gets the nomination? Does FR become an anti-Rudy site? If it's Hillary vs. Rudy - what happens then at FR??

If FR continues to allow the full slate of candidates to be discussed, and that includes Rudy, then I don't see the point of this thread, and I say that with total respect of the fact that this is your site, and you get to run it as you see fit.

80 posted on 04/21/2007 7:04:01 PM PDT by veronica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarmlessLovableFuzzball
I miss George Allen.

Yep, and Gracie too.......

81 posted on 04/21/2007 7:04:11 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco ( No one should have to suffer the indignity of gawks, stares or peeks.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I hope not. It will suck if our two main choices are Hillary and Giuliary.


82 posted on 04/21/2007 7:04:11 PM PDT by aft_lizard (born conservative...I chose to be a republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Yet one of the people who have fought the hardest against Rudy is now banned from FR because the Rudybots started yelling that he was stalking. He was baited at every corner...when he asked them to stop posting to him, they said they would do as they damned well pleased...and they got him banned.

Please reinstate posting priviledges for Fierce Allegiance.


83 posted on 04/21/2007 7:04:43 PM PDT by trussell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus

I’ll never vote Rat either. Despite which ticket he’s running on.


84 posted on 04/21/2007 7:04:53 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

“Our founders never intended for abortion to be the law of the land. And they never intended the Supreme Court to be a legislative body. They never intended God or religion to be written out of public life. They never intended government to be used to deny God’s existence or for government to be used to force sexual perversions onto our society or into our children’s education curriculum”

Our founders could never envision the perverse behavior
of the ACLU, and teachers unions who wish to ram homosexuality down our children’s throats. Rudy has no problem with evil and perversity. We cannot allow him to prevail!!


85 posted on 04/21/2007 7:05:17 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! Or Rudy/Hillary if you want to murder conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
I remember those days too. :) I lurked here because I was afraid to join in. lol Yikes!
86 posted on 04/21/2007 7:05:29 PM PDT by KATIE-O (Rudy Giuliani - '08 (But Only If We Want To Win!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: streetpreacher; Jim Robinson
I know you to be a loyal Republican. The fact that Rudy is affecting you and other loyalists this way tells me that for the first time in modern politics, the GOP runs the risk of allowing a true third party threat to take shape in 2008.

What you may not realize is the Republican party is becoming increasingly socialistic as the Democrats. They are essentially one party based on their shared ideology regardless of the party labels. Creating a Conservative party will restore the two party system.
87 posted on 04/21/2007 7:06:46 PM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax , you earn it , you keep it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Do you really expect me to do that?

No and I stand with you. Liberalism and all the evil that goes with it must be defeated. That fight starts here.

88 posted on 04/21/2007 7:06:50 PM PDT by afnamvet (It is what it is)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

“Do you think I’m going to bow down and accept abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, global warming, illegal alien lawbreakers, gun control, asset forfeiture, socialism, tyranny, totalitarianism, etc, etc, etc, just so some fancy New York liberal lawyer can become president from the Republican party?

Do you really expect me to do that?”

No, sir. I don’t expect you to do so. And I hope that the conservative movement doesn’t become so unconfident in itself that it believes such expectations are reasonable. The Constitution established by our Founding Fathers - if it had any purpose - was to limit government (especially the federal government). No manner of sophistry on the part of modern liberals can change that.


89 posted on 04/21/2007 7:07:12 PM PDT by Bishop_Malachi (Liberal Socialism - A philosophy which advocates spreading a low standard of living equally.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
A canned post that I used to put up still applies.

I am a conservative not a Republican. I will vote for Republicans IF they are conservative. If Bush's opponent had not been Hanoi John Kerry, I would not have voted in the last election.

Islam's war against the west will inevitably bring the US a nuclear strike. The persistent open borders are a hot potato that will utterly destroy the party in power when it happens. I prefer that the borders be closed - but barring that, let it be the liberals who are destroyed if we're not going to move to prevent it.

This is as obvious and foreseeable as the earlier attacks on September eleventh. Aside from the loss we all will have of family and friends WHEN not if this happens, I recognize that the party who emerges in power will be able to radically reshape government the United States. Many on the left foresee this as well, and are actively working to keep our defenses weak.

I therefore am willing to sacrifice important pieces to win the game. Winning the white house or congress are less important than closing the borders. A candidate who could win an office, at the cost of placing someone in office that the left could justifiably claim failed to aggressively defend America costs conservatism control of the board.

By the same token I will not move to save a socially liberal republican candidate merely to defeat the democrat. Sometimes control of the board is more important than saving every pawn.

If I get a liberal in office who votes liberal while claiming (unchallenged) to represent the party with a conservative platform, then my voice is even more unheard than if a liberal democrat is in office. It means that conservatives will vote for anyone who claims conservatism, even if they are to the left of Hillary Clinton. It also means that the Republican party did this eyes wide open, believing that I (and other conservatives) would vote for a yellow dog if it was a republican. Sorry RNC that only works with democrats.

Semper Fidelis

90 posted on 04/21/2007 7:07:16 PM PDT by MrEdd (Dogs think they're human, Cats think they're Gods.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
We don’t need a liberal to beat a liberal.

It’s not just FR, it is the Republican Party.

If the GOP will not stand up for the unborn baby, who will?

If the GOP won’t stand up for the RTKBA, who will?

If the GOP will not stand up for God in Public view, who will?

Democrats?

The GOP needs to give us a real choice. Socially, there is no difference between Rudy and Hillary.

I need a Conservative Patriot to beat a Commie liberal. The GOP needs to motivate the base.

The media is trying to make us believe we need a liberal to beat a liberal.

The media has not picked a front runner in a long time. Coward Dean was supposed to be the next Demoratic Nominee in 04.

When that didn’t work, Kohn Kerry was going to be President.

That didn’t work, so now I need a liberal to beat a liberal.

I say horse hockey!

I am with you, Jim.

Give me a Conservative or give me death.

91 posted on 04/21/2007 7:07:24 PM PDT by do the dhue (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I wont - George S. Patton Jr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gonewt
And for what it’s worth, I do not believe Giuliani is a socialist. Say what you will about the guy’s position on social issues, but he has a record of success as NY Mayor that is pretty darned impressive.

I quite agree. I think Rudy was pressed up against the rightward wall as hard he could be in NYC. Any further and he wouldn't have gotten re-elected, and we'd have had somebody much, much further to the left instead. I expect he'll move somewhat further to the right as a national candidate because he'll have the space to do so -- the rightward wall of the national room is much further right than the rightward wall of the NYC room. Though I know it won't be as far right as my views are, I really don't want him to go any further, since as you note, the only viable alternative is likely to be Hillary.

92 posted on 04/21/2007 7:07:29 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: AZRepublican

that’s the point. There is precious little difference between Hilary and Guiliani. Would you vote for Hilary if there was an R behind her name?


93 posted on 04/21/2007 7:08:02 PM PDT by Mom MD (The scorn of fools is music to the ears of the wise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Peach

>This is the forum that largely chose Alan Keyes as the presidential candidate in 2000 so I’m not terribly worried that they don’t like Rudy. LOL<

Really? I didn’t know that. I’ve supported Alan Keyes for 30 years. Good man. Good mind. Too bad the country doesn’t realize how much it needed him. Look where we find ourselves now! Whatever happened to all those FReeper Conservatives?!


94 posted on 04/21/2007 7:08:05 PM PDT by Paperdoll ( Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: veronica

You might try paying a little attention to some of the conservatives here. I think the chances of Rudy ever getting the nomination or of becoming president are somewhere between slim to none and not a snowball’s chance in hell.


95 posted on 04/21/2007 7:08:48 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I don’t believe Rudy is a socialist, but I do believe he’s a chameleon who will blow whichever way the winds of Congress blow, and if that Congress happens to be a Democrat Congress intent on making the United States as great a socialist welfare state as France, then Rudy might just go along to get along.

He cannot be allowed to succeed, because his success would only embolden Republican liberals (”moderates”) and make other wishy-washy GOP jellyfish believe that going “moderate” is the way to win elections.

Run, Fred, run.
I beg of you.


96 posted on 04/21/2007 7:09:13 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; quidnunc

Uh..., Jim?

You just deleted someone who joined nine years ago.

Take it easy.


97 posted on 04/21/2007 7:10:01 PM PDT by Enosh ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Pre-emptive surrender by picking a RINO is a really friggin’ stupid way to go.


98 posted on 04/21/2007 7:10:05 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll

Well the long and short of it is FR is basically irrelevant to who the Republican nominee is and who wins the presidential election - unless there’s some incident similar to the Rather/Texas Guard thing - same of course is true of DU, and Daily Kos and whatever.

As active and large as the board is it’s still a micropscopic (and unrepresentative) portion of even just the Republican Party, much less the electorate as a whole.


99 posted on 04/21/2007 7:10:50 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim, your leadership is much appreciated. Many of us have had it, just as you have, with metrosexual, lukewarm, milquetoast, bootlickers like Rudy.
100 posted on 04/21/2007 7:11:01 PM PDT by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 18,451-18,459 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