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

Skip to comments.

27% of Republicans Would Vote for Pro-Life Third Party Instead of Giuliani (Proof Rudy CAN'T Win)
Rasmussen Reports ^ | 10-4-07 | Rasmussen Reports

Posted on 10/04/2007 9:38:23 AM PDT by TitansAFC

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 301-350351-400401-450 ... 551-586 next last
To: Paul Ross

>>Actually his version of free trade differs from the current Administration and the Xlinton’s rather dramatically. The Bush’s while trying to claim they are merely following in his footsteps, would, if he was still available to commment, condemn hims as merely a fair trader, because he explicitly declared that our being open, while the other side wasn’t, or cheated...was not free trade. He also never believed in an international organization to decide our trade disputes...abdicating our rights to the WTO. This also has become a lynchpin of the last two administrations. Note, we have never formally executed a Treaty to become a part of this. This was merely done by legislation enacting the “Agreement” of NAFTA, appended as an 8-page addendum thereto. Congress cannot by simple legislation elevate something to Treaty status, and usurp our own Constitutionally-structured system so cavalierly. And it cannot also enact excess delegations of authority to the executive branch of functions fundamentally reserved to it alone.<<

I’m old enough to remember the speech that Reagan gave that kicked off his 1980 campaign - he devoted a great deal of time to something he called “a North American accord”, which became the precursor to NAFTA. Whether this means that he would have endorsed NAFTA, etc. in its current form obviously we don’t know, but I suspect that he would have concluded that the benefits of low tariffs are worth the price of having these cumbersome agreements. I agree with Milton Friedman - we don’t need any agreement to lower tariffs, we can do so unilaterally.


351 posted on 10/04/2007 3:11:37 PM PDT by NKStarr (GAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
"The Republicans haven't wanted anything to do with Conservatives, who you term as petulant children, for many years. "

Amen. Voting for Giuliani will only encourage the propagation of more RINOs. Don't waste your principles with a vote for Giuliiani. Vote Third. It's the only way to be stand up and be counted.

352 posted on 10/04/2007 3:12:26 PM PDT by ex-snook ("But above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight
“Here we go again. Conservative third party puts another Clinton in the White House.Smart move”

It was the last time. It ushered in the first truly conservative congress we have had during our lifetimes and created the first budget surplus ever. Republican control since has ruined all that.

353 posted on 10/04/2007 3:14:32 PM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: penowa
Try reading Tony Blankley’s column in yesterday’s Washington TImes. He expresses my sentiments quickly and cogently.
354 posted on 10/04/2007 3:51:52 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
No, He is probably my last choice in the current field.However, I am not a fool.
You will be responsible for the wicked woman from aArkansas as she nominates abortionist hompohile Supreme court judges. You will hand her the pen to sign all of the executive orders that circumvent the American people’s wishes. She will pack every single post here in D.C. You are a fool.
355 posted on 10/04/2007 3:54:56 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
oh, I get it.
Let us have a new, Morally superior party that promotes all of the things I believe in. And then when Hilary takes over talk radio and makes your taxes subsidize the late term abortions that her Supreme court nominees uphold and the “partnership “ benefits for the sodomites you can take full credit for not having voted for Giuliani but for actually effectively voting for HIllary.
No thanks.
356 posted on 10/04/2007 3:58:01 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
Because one is more strident and had absolutely no limit. The other is less so. That simple.
357 posted on 10/04/2007 3:59:19 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: spyone
I thank you. I apparently struck a nerve. The Righteous 29% are treating me like I am Hillary. It is ironic. I am as hard core as they are - just not so out of touch with reality.
358 posted on 10/04/2007 4:01:08 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Because one is more strident and had absolutely no limit. The other is less so. That simple.

Your "less strident one" will appoint people to the RNC and it's powerful committees -- liberal country club Republicans. Your "less strident one" will result in the prolife plank being stripped from the party platform -- effectively killing the GOP in future national elections.

359 posted on 10/04/2007 4:03:17 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Take the wheel, Fred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

“It’s proof that a Pro-Life third party would be idiotic, not proof that Rudy can’t win.”

it’s ‘proof’ that some ‘pro-lifers’ are not pro-life. Else they wouldn’t put Hillary Clinton in charge of the future of the Supreme Court.


360 posted on 10/04/2007 4:03:21 PM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: monday

Bush is not running and inadequate candidates are still inadequate


361 posted on 10/04/2007 4:04:06 PM PDT by italianquaker (Is there anything Ron Paul doesn't blame the USA for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Thorne
Grovel? where do you get that impression. You all are acting like liberals. Slandering anyone who has a different tactic in what is plainly shaping up to be a serious loss.
I have been a serious pro lifer for 35 years. Go ahead and look at My tons of posts. I am a staunch philosophical Christian. I do not change my beliefs. But what is it you plan on doing? If it is Hillary, I believe she will do so much damage that we as a people will never recover. Now with Giuliani, there is a chance we may. It is that simple.
362 posted on 10/04/2007 4:06:08 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr
...but I suspect that he would have concluded that the benefits of low tariffs are worth the price of having these cumbersome agreements.

NO. We have his actual example. Insisting on fair agreements with Japan as one example. Putting tariffs up to protect Harley Davidson, requiring domestic content requirements of the automakers, etc.

I agree with Milton Friedman - we don’t need any agreement to lower tariffs, we can do so unilaterally.

To which Reagan, who had appointed him as chair of his Council of Economic Advisers, respectfully declined to implement, because he recognized more astutely than Uncle Miltie, that we needed to engage the foreign "trading partners" to not only eliminate the overt barriers to our productive exports, but the non-tariff barriers as well.

To that end, we needed leverage. Those without reciprocal barriers have no leverage. As Bush has proved over, and over, and over and over and over and over again with the Chicoms. They laugh themselves silly when he puffs up his chest and says they are doing wrong.

They call his bluff every single time. He will not betray his import lobby backers, and defend the country. They know it. He knows it. And I am willing to bet YOU KNOW IT TOO.

And there is nothing "conservative" about him or what is being passed off as Free trade...when it isn't. It is phoney. Just like the Democrat's phoney soldiers.

363 posted on 10/04/2007 4:14:21 PM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: penowa
You may very well believe that there is nothing worse than President Rodham in your future, but I would suggest that having no party and no choice, just one big Commie party filled with the Socialists, Democrats, once-were-RINOs, is a lot more frightening to many of us.

Can you overstate in any more? Your hysteria is frightening to me. And Sir/Ms I am not joking.

364 posted on 10/04/2007 4:23:57 PM PDT by Stars&StripesNE (Liberals are the enemy within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: Salvey
Sorta reminds one of the democRATS who are so blinded by their hatred of Pres. Bush that they'd rather see us defeated by our enemies.

Methinks you just described yourself to a TTTTTTTT. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the enemy. Until people attempt to unite in any way to defeat her, we are talking 8 years of the war lost in Iraq and the war against liberals lost at home.

365 posted on 10/04/2007 4:29:33 PM PDT by Stars&StripesNE (Liberals are the enemy within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Well, if people want a candidate that has a great chance of being elected, SUPPORT DUNCAN HUNTER. Get his message out.


366 posted on 10/04/2007 4:30:24 PM PDT by wastedyears (George Orwell was a clairvoyant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
You will be responsible for the wicked woman from Arkansas ....You are a fool.

Then recall you start out by saying THIS in practically the same breath:

No, He is probably my last choice in the current field.

So, in view of that "last choice" you should be conducting yourself rather differently in this discussion. Recognize that NOW is the time to evict him from the nomination process, clearing the decks for a better choice.

You should instead be advocating your first choice. And then if you do defend Giuliani as a "last choice" it should be a hell of a lot more respectful of the principled rejections of him. That is, if you were serious about trying to persuade anyone.

At the current rate, to the extent you are persuading anybody, it is more likely you are persuading us against your views. You either aren't legitimate now (assuming you once were) or are now simply irrational in terror. Manuevered easily in a liberal shell game.

As a Christian, you should understand this from Matthew 11:

Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind?

Who are you wishing to emulate? Where is your faith?

367 posted on 10/04/2007 4:32:19 PM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: chuckles; Grunthor; penowa; babygene; Man50D; calcowgirl; Ol' Sparky; BallparkBoys
God Grant me the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change; The courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.

By the grace of God go all of us if Hillary Clinton is elected because the Republicans didn't know the difference.

368 posted on 10/04/2007 4:40:25 PM PDT by Stars&StripesNE (Liberals are the enemy within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: joonbug
I can wish for what won’t happen or make the best choice of available options.

Your defeatest attitude is based on the false assumption the answer is to give up by voting for someone who will only perpetuate the very socialist government you supposedly oppose. That will only beget more socialism. No wonder the GOP has become the Defacto socialist party.
369 posted on 10/04/2007 4:40:34 PM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
Vote Third. It's the only way to be stand up and be counted.

Voting for someone other than R or D will be voting for a second party candidate because the increasingly socialist GOP and socialist Democrats are essentially one party ideologically.
370 posted on 10/04/2007 4:43:38 PM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom; B4Ranch; Tailgunner Joe
Your hysteria is frightening to me.

Overstatements by him? Haw. How about getting frightened about the reality, instead of your derogatory attacks on FREEPERS. Who evidence the majority anti-communist views of long-standing Republican Conservatives. Do you have even a clue how large the Communist internal menace has become right under your nose? The fall of the Soviet Union (temporarily) has not dissuaded their internal subversion efforts one wit.

Did you ever read this? Note how much of it still is under constant agitation and advance.

Communist Goals (1963)

Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35
January 10, 1963
Current Communist Goals

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, January 10, 1963

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament of the United States 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. Extension of 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. 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 German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States 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. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

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

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

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 which are under Communist attack.

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

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

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

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 ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and 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.

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.

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.

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 use 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 United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.


371 posted on 10/04/2007 4:47:33 PM PDT by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
"..everything north of the Mason-Dixon will go to Rudy in the primaries...along with most of the mid-west."

How much does Rudy pay you?

Do you sincerely beleive that?

Here's my prediction:

If Rudy is the Republican nominee, it will be a dummycrat landslide in '08.

372 posted on 10/04/2007 5:00:46 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom

You can’t help but throw in another slam, can ya?

Look within and ask yourself why you are defending a liberal when other candidates would clearly be superior.


373 posted on 10/04/2007 5:06:40 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: bassmaner

All the more reason to get behind a candidate OTHER than Rudy.
Nominate Rudy, Hillary would win.


374 posted on 10/04/2007 5:10:47 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Pollsters trying to stir up and create news so they can get their name in the papers, on the media. The MSM does not really like Rasmussen. How else can he make news?


375 posted on 10/04/2007 5:12:16 PM PDT by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Never fear, calcowgirl, Sounds like she is an AA kind of person.

I think I heard that on Young and the Restless 20 years ago. Your typical Rooty supporter. Its like this “ Save me Rooty, my principles have long disappeared. Only YOU Rooty, can keep me from the burkha by sending out those social conservatives that you so despise to fight the WOT, so that people like me, living in my gated community, can continue to shop at the finest stores!

gag me kind of thing.

LOL!


376 posted on 10/04/2007 5:17:23 PM PDT by dforest (Duncan Hunter is the best hope we have on both fronts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

I am not defending Rudy.... Duncan Hunter is my choice. I am trying to be realistic — and realistic tells me, that if Rudy gets the nomination and runs against Hillary Clinton, I will hold my nose and vote for him.


377 posted on 10/04/2007 5:19:16 PM PDT by Stars&StripesNE (Liberals are the enemy within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Rudy will have this nomination locked up by Feb...Thompson might win a few southern states, but everything west of the rockies...and everything north of the Mason-Dixon will go to Rudy in the primaries...along with most of the mid-west.

You may be correct about the rust belt and the left coast, but Giuliani doesn't stand a chance in the South, the Midwest, The Rocky Mountain West, or the Desert Southwest. That is he total composition of the Republican stronghold.

If Giuliani is the nominee we will lose, and lose big time!

378 posted on 10/04/2007 5:19:46 PM PDT by roamer_1 (Vote for FrudyMcRomson -Turn red states purple in 08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

Well on the issue of trade,we just disagree.
But on the issue of Reagan, there is no disagreement - he was a great man and I miss his leadership.


379 posted on 10/04/2007 5:27:13 PM PDT by NKStarr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: NKStarr; roses of sharon
As with most Rudophiles, you are incapable of admitting you’re wrong, and unable to answer a direct question.

Admit it, I busted you with the question. You would not support that candidate, even if they supported Free Trade, tax cuts, and the War in Iraq. Why? Because there are certain lines you will not cross, certain principles you will not sacrifice for the GOP - even if the Democrat is worse on 90% of the other issues.

So stop telling us to sacrifice what we believe in for the greater good of the party. We won’t. If the GOP nominates a Liberal, then DAMN the GOP! I DO NOT WANT THEM TO WIN WITH RUDY911 AS THE NOMINEE!!!!!!!

And for the last time - it’s not JUST about his rabid Pro-Abortion activism. The list is nearly endless on why Rudy911 is a nightmare and unacceptable in any contest.

If you wouldn't vote for the Pro-Free-Trade, Pro-Tax-Cuts, Pro-Iraq-War, Pro-Traditional-Marriage, Pro-Life, Pro-Gun, Pro-Constructionist-Judges Anti-Semite who sides with the Palestinians over Israel and supports the idea of it being a Muslim state, then you know how we feel. Whether the candidate feels Jews are lesser beings, or the unborn are lesser beings, they would be UNACCEPTABLE to me in either case. In BOTH cases I would revolt from this party. Both issues are TANTAMOUNT to me, I will not sacrifice either.

380 posted on 10/04/2007 5:35:35 PM PDT by TitansAFC ("My 80% enemy is not my 20% friend" -- Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Clinton II. You get what you vote for.


381 posted on 10/04/2007 5:41:01 PM PDT by gathersnomoss (General George Patton had it right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
They've almost completed that objective, as evidenced on this thread.
382 posted on 10/04/2007 5:43:08 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
“ Save me Rooty, my principles have long disappeared. Only YOU Rooty, can keep me from the burkha by sending out those social conservatives that you so despise to fight the WOT, so that people like me, living in my gated community, can continue to shop at the finest stores!"

gag me kind of thing.

I'm definitely suffering from that gag thing. ;-)

383 posted on 10/04/2007 5:45:59 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

You know it is starting to make me dislike the pro lifers. Really. They would put a woman in the WH that would change the course of this country in ways they cannot even imagine.

They have controlled this board, demeaned anyone who disagreed with them, have done nothing but threaten to take their ball to a new field if they don’t get their way.

These third party people won’t nominate someone who would do anything other than deliver the WH to an evil evil woman.


384 posted on 10/04/2007 5:48:28 PM PDT by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: gathersnomoss

-—”Clinton II. You get what you vote for.”-—

You just don’t get it. WHO CARES if Clinton wins in a Hitlery vs. Rudy911 race? The threat is empty to me.

You just don’t get the fact that a GOP run by Rudy911 is not a GOP worth supporting anymore. It is a radically different party working against my values and issues.

Clinton II would be BETTER to me than Rudy911. At least THEN the Liberal GOPers will get the DAMNED idea through their head that you can’t win with a Liberal running the party. At least THEN we’d have a party left to fight for, something we would NOT have with Rudy911 at the helm. At least THEN we won’t have to witness a permanent splitting of the party, and a GOP seeking NARAL endorsements every election.


385 posted on 10/04/2007 5:48:38 PM PDT by TitansAFC ("My 80% enemy is not my 20% friend" -- Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom

Liberals within are more destructive than those who you can face and oppose openly and vehemently.

If you believed your tagline, you would not be calling conservatives “arrogant,” “stupid,” and “useful idiots”... IMO.


386 posted on 10/04/2007 5:49:45 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
Pro-Life advocates are not idiots, there will be no third party created by them.

I'm afraid you're wrong. Ever heard of the Constitution Party? The problem is they're just as flawed as Republicans but the "purists" have been hoodwinked into believing they're more pure.

This is downright scarry. We must remain united to defeat Hillary.

387 posted on 10/04/2007 5:53:36 PM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Democrats--Al Qaeda's best friends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
Your "less strident one" will appoint people to the RNC and it's powerful committees -- liberal country club Republicans. Your "less strident one" will result in the prolife plank being stripped from the party platform -- effectively killing the GOP in future national elections.

Rudy = Schwarzenegger--on a national scale.

388 posted on 10/04/2007 5:57:43 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]

To: Designer

I would prefer FDT, but I don’t think he’ll win.


389 posted on 10/04/2007 6:05:47 PM PDT by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 372 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
. And then when Hilary takes over talk radio and makes your taxes subsidize the late term abortions that her Supreme court nominees uphold and the “partnership “ benefits for the sodomites you can take full credit for not having voted for Giuliani but for actually effectively voting for HIllary.

None of those things would happen if Hillary took over. Republicans would filibuster all legislation involving the issues you mentioned.

And, you don't SEEM TO REALIZE Giuliani is for domestic partnership benefits and civil unions for sodomites, has opposed a ban on PBA and has supported taxpayer funding of abortion. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF BEHIND AND LEARN HOW LIBERAL GIULIANI IS.

There is a FAR better chance of civil unions and taxpayer funded abortions becoming reality if Giuliani works with Democrats and RINOs to get all that passed.

It's just amazing you can't comprehend that.

390 posted on 10/04/2007 6:19:36 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist


Ross Perot made the Clinton presidency of either 8 or 16 years possible, got Ginsburg and Breyer appointed to the Supreme Court, encouraged al Qaeda by its weakness in foreign affairs, sent sensitive missile technology to the Chinese in return for campaign cash, and ran what was (not arguably) the most corrupt administration in the history of this Republic. Did you enable Perot for the sake of "principle"? If so, you also bear responsibility for the impending disaster that confronts the United States. Sometimes street smarts are required to avoid shooting yourself and your principles in the foot.

.

391 posted on 10/04/2007 6:21:22 PM PDT by OESY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom
But it is fact that Hillary Clinton would not appoint any judge willing to overturn Roe V. Wade.

Guiliani has spoken before NARAL, opposed a ban on PBA and has and still does support taxpayer funding of abortion.

Given that, why on earth would you think he'd appoint a justice willing to overturn Roe?

392 posted on 10/04/2007 6:22:41 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

read later


393 posted on 10/04/2007 6:23:38 PM PDT by afnamvet (Duncan Hunter : THE consummate conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davidlachnicht
So, in order “show the GOP who’s boss”, you’ll allow a more-liberal-than-Guliani to be elected?

You got the wrong poster here. I rather see Hillary in office than Giuliani. She would do less damage to conservatism.

394 posted on 10/04/2007 6:24:44 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Social conservative are not and have never been reliable GOP voters.

Then you have nothing to worry about.

395 posted on 10/04/2007 6:26:20 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (We didn't "win" the Cold War. We had a half-time lead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

Oops, I think you posted to the wrong person, I have no idea which candidate you are talking about?

I scrolled back and don’t see which one?

Come again please, thanks!


396 posted on 10/04/2007 6:28:35 PM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom
Once she’s in she is there for 8 years. Who knows how long this Republic would last..

The Republic survived just fine when Bill Clinton was in office. Republicans gained 500 seats nationwide, took over Congress and we got a balanced budget and welfare reform.

What the Republic might not survive is Giuliani Presidency that would cripple the conservative movement and shrink the Republican minority in Congress. It would at least a decade before Republicans would even have a chance of controlling congress again and eight years before a conservative President could assume office.

397 posted on 10/04/2007 6:29:35 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
"They would put a woman in the WH that would change the course of this country.."

I'm sure they don't intend to do that at all, and I can see if we put two and two together, we could project that as one possible scenario.

However, if you look at it from a different angle, namely; put pressure on the Republican leadership to dump Rudy and any other pro-death candidate, then everybody wins!

A pro-life POTUS in the WH, a re-energized GOP, and the dummycrats in fast retreat.

I see that as a win-win-win.

Just dump Rudy. It's a start.

398 posted on 10/04/2007 6:50:33 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: Jen's Mom
"..if Rudy gets the nomination.."

Please see my post #398.

399 posted on 10/04/2007 6:53:10 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
"Anti-Semite"

Huh? Whodat? I didn't know there was an anti-Semite candidate in the race.

400 posted on 10/04/2007 6:56:42 PM PDT by Designer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 301-350351-400401-450 ... 551-586 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