Skip to comments.Giuliani as the GOP presidential nominee would be a dagger in the heart of the conservative movement
Posted on 04/22/2007 10:45:43 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Giuliani as the GOP presidential nominee would be a dagger in the heart of the conservative movement (and a knife in the back).
||Giuliani||Clinton||Dem Platform||GOP Platform|
|Abortion on Demand||Supports||Supports||Supports||Opposes|
|Partial Birth Abortion||SupportsOpposed NY ban||Supports||Supports||Opposes|
|Roe v. Wade||Supports||Supports||Supports||Opposes|
|Taxpayer Funded Abortions||Supports||Supports||Supports||Opposes|
|Embryonic Stem Cell Research||Supports||Supports||Supports||Opposes|
|Federal Marriage Amendment||Opposes||Opposes||Opposes
Defined at state level
|Gay Domestic Partnership/
|Openly Gay Military||Supports||Supports||Supports||Opposes|
|Defense of Marriage Act||Opposes||Opposes||Opposes||Supports|
|Amnesty for Illegal Aliens||Supports||Supports||Supports||Opposes|
|Special Path to Citizenship
for Illegal Aliens
|Tough Penalties for
Employers of Illegal Aliens
Ignoring Immigration Law
|Protecting 2nd Amendment||Opposes
|'Assault' Weapons Ban||Supports||Supports||Supports|
Against Gun Makers
|War in Afghanistan||Supports||Supports
Voted for it
|War in Iraq||Supports||Supports
Voted for it
Voted for it
2001 & 2006
Who do you support Jim? Did I miss it in the last thread?
Awesome. I just hope those that make the selection do it with eyes wide open. Otherwise this country will be in a world of hurt.
NOOOO!! Not another one!! We’re still trying to finish off the last one!! :)
Good to see all of that in one place!
Let’s see what positions he takes for the executive office. If he is serious about strict constructionists on the supreme court then he is a very viable choice for any conservative. How many other candidates stand a chance to win PA, OH, NJ, etc?
His personal views should not be a barrier in allowing a liberal an easy walk into the WH.
No knife in the back. His history shows he’s a full fledged liberal, with the exception of tax cuts. If we allow him to win, we’ll deserve the gutting we get.
Fortunately, we have some pretty good options. Starting with Hunter, Thompson and Huckabee. If they all tank, we have Brownback and Romney and Tancredo. If they tank too, we get to choose from McCain and Rudy. Zoinks.
Good grief. Give us a break from idiocy.
Jim SHOULD be supporting Hunter.
Daggers in the heart are bad.
Folks better be watching out for the poison in the cup, too...
He just repeated that abortion “is a constitutional right” two weeks ago. His version of a strict constructionist ranges from Scalia to Ginsberg. Not too promising.
Until Thompson enters the race. : )
>Good grief. Give us a break from idiocy.
It’s not idiocy when considering the realities facing us in 08. I am all for dumping Rudy if I had any confidence a true conservative had a shot of wining the States that will need to be won.
This is the pledge we should make:
I will do whatever I can to campaign for a conservative in the primary season, with every fiber of my conservative being.
(I swiped that from ohioWfan, and it’s an excellent slogan).
Rudy, IMHO cannot pass the test. So, I am obligated to not campaign for him, but for one of the other much more conservatives out there.
Thank you for another good thread.
Seriously--if we're thinking people like Tancredo can win in November 08 against Hillary, the party as a whole would only be doing the smart thing looking elsewhere.
>He just repeated that abortion is a constitutional right two weeks ago.
I thought he said recently Roe was bad law?
I’ll support just about any of them that gets the nomination, including Thompson. Until then, conservatives should be pushing the best guy forward. That is Hunter, with or w/o Thompson in the race.
LOL...I’m seeing Animal House, the big goof Flounder, “This is Great”
Tank Rudy in the primary and forget him.
“I thought he said recently Roe was bad law?”
No, he hasn’t.
Hunter is doing pretty well a the grassroots. I think the debates will showcase him very well.
When was the last time someone won the Whitehouse while losing their own home state?
I love flashbunnys flash cards btw.
Ping to the start of more fun!
If all you're concerned about is winning, even if the candidate is liberal, I suggest you campaign for the Democrats, that's how they think.
You just can’t make it any clearer than that!
I’m not one of those who says I would not vote for Rudy under any circumstances, should he prevail. But there are NO circumstances possible that I will support him in the primary.
No, that would be Fred Thompson.
He may have. But that would be a 180, and must have been in the last 48 hours.
He’s a better speaker than many have led us to believe.
Honesty and integrity go a long way (to me and I hope to all conservatives.) Meaning what you say and saying what you mean.
I’m tired of panderers. I suppose it’s a good thing that Guliani isn’t pandering (at least to conservative.)
There is no way he matches my criteria of someone I could back in the primary at all.
True, we are going to take a beating.
I thought he said recently Roe was bad law?
You may be confusing what Rudy said with what Thompson said.
Rudy is pandering. He’s just not so good at it, when we have 8 years of his mayoral record to refute his whitewash.
I’ve yet to see HUnter tapdance or have to nuance an answer. He’s the same conservative man he was when he came to office in 1980.
Rudy`s got huge name recognition, but not a conservative bone in his entire body. Rudy`s a lifelong liberal. Period.
Conservatives DO NOT support big government. Rudy supports big government Republicanism. Conservatives DO NOT support gun control. Rudy supports gun control. Conservatives DO NOT support an assault weapons ban. Rudy supports an assault weapons ban. Conservatives DO NOT support abortion on demand. Rudy supports abortion on demand. Conservatives DO NOT oppose a ban on partial birth abortion. Rudy opposes a ban on partial birth abortion. Conservatives DO NOT support special rights for homos. Rudy supports special rights for homos. Conservatives DO NOT support amnesty for illegals. Rudy supports amnesty for illegals. Conservatives DO NOT support the notion that humans are a significant cause of global warming. Rudy supports the notion that humans are a significant cause of global warming. Conservatives DO NOT support Campaign Finance Reform, AKA. McCain-Feingold. Rudy supports Campaign Finance Reform, AKA. McCain-Feingold.
Conservatives with a conscience, don’t vote for liberals. Not unless they’ve sold out their principles and integrity for political expediency. Voting for the lesser of two evils only goes so far. Betraying ones conservative roots is not an option.
We can’t stop you from voting for Rudy. But please don’t think of him as a conservative. He is ABOUT as liberal as Hillary.. not AS liberal.. but ABOUT as liberal.
"Rudy Giuliani has repeatedly said that he will not seek to change current law as described in the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funding of abortions except in cases involving rape or incest, or where the life of the mother is at stake. And, given the opportunity, a President Giuliani would appoint strict-constructionist judges who will follow in the philosophical footsteps of Justices Thomas, Alito, and Scalia, and Chief Justice Roberts."
It’s up to us, and all the other people who ought to get their butts out and working at the grassroots.
You beat me to it. The number one difference between Rudy and Hillary is honesty. He’s got it and she doesn’t, plain and simple. Although I think Jim’s list of “positions” is oversimplified, and the two aren’t really anywhere near identical, even if they WERE identical on their stated positions on all issues, I’d take the honest one over the dishonest one in a second. Dispatching the unspeakably evil Clinton machine needs to be a high priority.
Might we add a series of collector cards about his record on terrorist attacks? Here is just the beginning of the research in that regard:
Daniel Pipes included Giuliani in his article about “ostriches” who denied domestic terrorism.
Key excerpt: Law enforcement seems more concerned to avoid an anti-Muslim backlash than to find the culprits. This attitude of denial fits an all-too-common pattern. I have previously documented a reluctance in nearby New York City to see as terrorism the 1994 Brooklyn Bridge (road rage was the FBIs preferred description) and the 1997 Empire State Building shootings (many, many enemies in his mind, said Rudolph Giuliani). Likewise, the July 2002 LAX murders were initially dismissed as a work dispute and the October 2002 rampage of the Beltway snipers went unexplained, leaving the media to ascribe it to such factors as a stormy [family] relationship.
Here’s more from Pipes on one of the pre-9/11 terrorist attacks on NY under Giuliani’s watch (which he used as a platform to call for stricter national gun control):
Ali Hasan Abu Kamal, a Palestinian gunman hailing from militant Islamic circles in Florida, took a gun to the top of the Empire State building in February 1997 and shot a tourist there. His suicide note accused the United States of using Israel as its “instrument” against the Palestinians but city officials ignored this evidence and instead dismissed Abu Kamal as either “one deranged individual working on his own” (Police Commissioner Howard Safir) or a “man who had many, many enemies in his mind” (Mayor Rudolph Giuliani).
Here’s information on an earlier terrorist attack on NYC while Giuliani was mayor:
Key excerpt: The Mayor’s urgency to quash the widespread reports of a link between the shooting suspect and the well-known terrorist organization fit a pattern he established immediately after the Tuesday shootings. From the beginning, he personally took control of all briefings on the matter, often appearing with the Police Commissioner at his side, and took pains to dampen the rumors that might pit one ethnic group against another or raise the city’s level of fear.
Even now, Mr. Giuliani and the Police Department have refused to discuss the question of a motive in the van shootings, which left one student brain-dead, another in poor condition and two others with less serious wounds. Though many Hasidim say they are certain the students were shot because they are Jews, the police say they have not determined the shooting was anti-Semitic.
Yesterday morning, Mr. Giuliani met for 40 minutes with a group of Arab restaurateurs, business owners and community leaders from Brooklyn. He told them that Arabs as a group should not be blamed for the shooting, and the Arab leaders put out a statement expressing condolences to the families of the victims and noting that Arabs were instrumental in contributing information that led to Mr. Baz’s arrest.
This particular attacker was linked to a hotbed of Brooklyn Islamofascism centered in Bay Ridge. But Giuliani didn’t follow up to see if there was a wider pattern of Islamofascist attacks being planned/supported/funded there — he treated the shooting as an isolated crime, tried to avoid admitting any links to terrorism, and met with leaders of Brooklyn’s Arab community. Giuliani’s record on Islamofascist attacks when he was in charge is not good.