No more perverts in the White House!
Posted on 10/09/2007 8:32:07 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Front-runner Rudy Giuliani increasingly claims the mantle of invincibility -- issues, schmissues, he's the only guy who can beat Hillary.
Judging from my recent cocktail party conversations, it's having an impact. But these same conversations reveal how much wishful thinking goes into the myth of Rudy the Invincible.
"I can't believe the American people will vote for that woman and her husband, a philanderer," one wealthy businessman told me.
"Who are you supporting?" I innocently inquired.
"Rudy," he said.
Can you spell "cognitive dissonance"?
Sean Hannity spends hours every afternoon criticizing those in the GOP coalition (such as Dr. James Dobson) who won't vote for Rudy; sure Giuliani may be wrong on gay marriage and abortion, but he'll be much better than Hillary because he'll appoint "strict constructionist" Supreme Court justices, right?More self-delusion. Bucking the tide by appointing judges with sufficient intellectual integrity to overturn Roe v. Wade is very hard. Ronald Reagan wanted to do it, and he got it right only once. Even President Bush put appointing his good friend Harriet Miers ahead of appointing a Sam Alito. Only when the base went ballistic did Bush back down, and only because he really is a conservative who cares about what conservatives think.
Rudy? Here's a safe bet: He will appoint a loyalist crony to the bench. When the base erupts, he'll tell the base where it can stick its objections. That's Rudy.
When he's on your side, you admire how fearlessly he will defend your views. When he's not on your side, he ruthlessly steamrolls over you. And on abortion? Don't kid yourself: Rudy is not on our side.
And the Supreme Court is not the only issue of concern to social conservatives. What will Rudy do if and when a resurgent Democrat majority tries to repeal the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding for abortion? Or for that matter overturns the federal definition of marriage in the Defense of Marriage Act? Will Rudy spend his political capital on vetoing either of these? He's made us no promises. Instead, he's counting on widespread self-delusion and cognitive dissonance to carry enough social conservatives to win the nomination.
My question is: What is he counting on afterward? Because, frankly, Rudy's electoral prospects don't look that good.
The once-powerful Reagan coalition had three legs -- strong on defense, less government and social conservatism. But the war in Iraq is not the same as the war on communism. It's very unpopular, and Rudy has become as identified with this unpopular war as John McCain. Meanwhile, he has abandoned social conservatism. What's left of the Reagan coalition for Rudy to run on? Naked fiscal conservatism? Conservatives are deluding themselves if they think fiscal conservatism by itself is a winning political coalition. Do they not remember the party of Gerald Ford? It was very fiscally conservative, socially moderate, and a permanent minority party.
The halo of "America's Mayor" is already slipping. For months, polls showed Rudy Giuliani leading Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head matchup, but by June of this year that lead had begun to evaporate. The latest poll, conducted in late September by ABC News and The Washington Post, shows Hillary Clinton beating Rudy Giuliani by eight points. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney trails Clinton in a head-to-head matchup in the latest Rasmussen poll by only nine points. One point better than Romney does not a convincing argument make for abandoning all principles.
And that's before Christian conservative leaders bolt the party, which has abandoned them on abortion, to run a third-party candidate.
A little political realism, please. If you think a candidate who breaks up the Republican Party is the best man to lead the nation, vote for Rudy. But don't imagine, it's going to be easy to elect him.
Giuliani will inflict permanent damage WITH YOUR VOTE. And, there won't be anything you can do about it as Republicans won't stop a liberal Republican from advancing a liberal agenda where as they would filibuster such legislation pushed for by Hillary.
A vote for Giuliani guarantees a liberal in the White House for eight years and Republican minority in Congress for at least a decade.
And, you'd deserve what you're going to get if you allow Giuliani to turn the Republican party into a left-of-center party. Giuliani will set the conservative movement back pre-Reagan.
I think the majority of Conservatives are wise to the fallacy of “ teaching a lesson “ this time around and won’t fall for it . I think Dobson is going to find that his powers of whining will be quite trivial when compared to Hillary’s ability to scare the hell out of most rational Conservatives .
I also think that Thompson is the only one who can beat Hillary , and beat her with Conservative coat tails .
The party in the White House almost always loses seats in Congress. There is no reason to believe the Republicans won't have a chance to regain the majority as early as 2010 if Hillary assumes office.
And, it's hysterical ranting to think an unpopular leftist couldn't be beaten in four years by a real conservative leading real change.
“Hunter did do well.”
Yes he did, and I agree with him probably more than any other candidate. But has anyone from the House of Representatives won the presidency since WWII. How many ever have? I think Lincoln was in the House when he was elected, but not certain.
Senators have had little enough success winning the presidency (JFK the last in 1960), so the even lesser known members of the House probably have even less chance. Plus they might come across as even more political and parochial since they have to run for election every two years.
Preferences might shift some once more people are watching the debates and following the campaigns, but I wouldn’t bet it will change much.
So if Rudy is the nominee you’ll just go ahead and vote for Hillary? That would be the honest thing I guess.
Its big fun to imagine who we wish were on the ticket. But for those of us out here in flyoverland we don’t get to choose who gets on the ticket. That’ll be decided long before we actually get to cast a ballot.
And in case you haven’t been paying attention, the column on our side won’t read “Hunter” when it gets to that point. He’s a good guy, but he won’t be on any ballot that I will ever see.
The IRS used to put lots of resources into EITC fraud. The dims and rinos complained about the number of audits of low income taxpayers. Now it is open season on EITC fraud.
Yes, they do. I’ve been hearing a lot of grumblings from the liberals I know about their dislike for Hitlery. They all want Edwards or Obama. They don’t like her automatic annointing to the nomination thats occuring.
I think she’s extremely vunerable against a decent GOP president/vice president choice. There is no way in hell she captures the southern states or the so called southern swing voters unless the GOP ends up with a total loser of a ticket.
This election is still a year away. I’m just glad we finally got to see the GOP candidates so far in a debate and got to hear what they had to say. I think it went very well.
I disagree. Guiliani will not be much different than Bush. Bush has been terrible about illegal immigration and too willing to work with the dims in some areas. He has been strong on taxes, the war, and judges. Rudy may be more conservative dealing with Harry and Nancy than he would be in dealing with a Republican Congress.
“Although the EITC was signed into law by Ford in 1975, it was substantially increased by Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II. Many (Reagan and Milton Friedman among others) have claimed that the EITC lifts people out of poverty and increases work incentives because it is connected to earned income.”
To me, that program has always seemed like a subsidy for low wages, wages that would not be so low if we didn’t allow so many policies that lower them (won’t go into those now). We have many transfer payment subsidies for low wage earners, and if those workers earned more we’d save on all those programs and also allow the workers to make more choices about their purchases of goods and services in the consumer market.
And, there’s definitely MUCH fraud in the EITC program. I worked for a major tax preparation service one year, and declined to go back for more mainly because of not wanting to have any involvement in such obvious fraud.
One more time...the conservatives Rudy loses he makes up with Moderate Dems...if you don’t think there are more moderates than social conservatives, you’re wrong.
I agree with you . Fred has had an immense amount of pressure put upon him and I think he took it in stride .
I really enjoyed his subtle smackdown of Christopher Fatthews ...it’s about time
You should write a book about your experiences. The EITC has this halo of virtue. In reality, it is a cesspool of fraud, gaming, and entitlement.
Really wild rationalizations!
One more time ... Thompson can appeal to the middle/moderates just as well as Rudy can , and he can bring the Conservatives while he does it . Rudy can’t .
One more time ... I will also say that I think Thompson will have coat tails ... Rudy won’t .
Giuliani would do far more damage to the country than Hillary Clinton would ever be allowed to do. Only liberal Republicans can most liberal legislation passed. A Giuliani Presidency guarantees a shrinking Republican minority while a Hillary Presidency likely means a Republican majority again.”
I agree, just as two years of Slick Willie with a Democrat controlled Congress was the impetus to the Republicans winning control of both houses for the first time in forty years.
A Giuliani presidency would be four years like this past summer and the immigration internal fight, a RINO president trying to pass liberal policies in cahoots with the Democrats in Congress.
“You should write a book about your experiences. The EITC has this halo of virtue. In reality, it is a cesspool of fraud, gaming, and entitlement.”
I probably don’t have enough for a book, but at least where I worked (and it’s probably this way most everywhere) we prepared the returns based upon the information provided by the client. Use your imagination. But often they’d provide the wrong relatives (ineligible) and have to rethink who they were providing support for.
Of course, many knew the score and walked in with an acceptable list of people they provided qualifying support for. Some were probably legitimate.
Thanks for at least being honest about who you'll support. Got your Hillary bumper stickers on yet?
Wise words.
Prepare to duck.
Nor will I. That is a perversion of the function of one’s vote, which is, in fact, solely to be used to elect one of the viable (i.e., major party) candidates.
“I can’t believe the American people will vote for that woman and her husband, a philanderer,””
Right, instead they will choose Rootie the serial philanderer who put his office in the WTC against his security adviser’s advice so he could have a convenient love shack from which to cheat on his wife
I'd vote for neither because I am smarter to realize voting for a liberal is detrimental to conservatism.
I would certainly be pulling for Hillary Clinton to win, though. Her election would pave the way for another conservative revolution while Giuliani would turn both parties into liberal ones.
You mean except on social issues and gun control, issues he if far more liberal on than Bush. That means, he wwould be a big-government, pro-amnesty, gun-grabbing social liberal in office. How is that any different than electing Bill Clinton to office?
Literally, Giuliani's character and liberal record in office are almost identical to Bill Clinton.
I honestly believe in Bill Clinton were running for the first time for President as a Republican against Hillary Rodham (who had married someone else), we’d have the same people supporting Giuliani supporting him.
However her cackling could be the secret weapon to drive/prove UBL dead/outta his cave! Let the cackels over Tora Bora begin!
Now why in the world would we want the Republican party to move further to the left? The Republican party is a conservative pro-life, pro-family, pro-liberty party and should remain as such. No thanks to the abortionist liberals! The dems can keep their trash. We’ll run and win on our conservative principles.
Thakyouverymuch.
Same thing that Alan Keyes went through.
I like Hunter because he gets to the point.
I don’t have the ability to listen to someone talking trying to hit all the points and with alot of words in between.
To hard to discern.
Republicans have a big problem in the presidential race. Romney looks too contrived to be believed. Thompson looks like he’s going to fall over any minute. Rudy’s too liberal to get the nomination. Huckabee is just a too “aw, gee, schucks” kinda guy. Hunter scowls way too much even if he has reason to. Ron Paul’s a looney toon. Brownback looks polished but I don’t trust his past positions. Lastly Tancredo is a little too spastic.
No more perverts in the White House!
No more perverts in the White House!
Giuliani's got the goods on Hillary - he looks much better in pumps!
Just funnin' y'all...
Thankyouveryveryvery———much. I needed that. Me thinks the enemy has has used the old Trojan Horse trick to set up camp within our walls.
However, I also think the situation is much worse than that. Most rational Americans have probably (rightly) concluded that this administration officially exposed the so-called "war on terror" as a complete fraud when it p!ssed away thousands of lives and billions of dollars on a military campaign in a Third World sh!t-hole while at the same time it was pushing for the establishment of legal status for millions of foreign invaders right here in the U.S.
THAT is what is ultimately going to destroy the GOP's presidential prospects in 2008.
Yup... and I didn't think he'd win then either.
The democrat House with an 11% approval rating - which will rise only when the pollsters get their push poll questions straight.
The success of the surge.
I wish there was another candidate with Rudy’s crime fighting/terror fighting skills and abilities but there is not.
If the Evangelicals stab us in the back they will bring themselves and us everything they fear from Rudy PLUS TEN TIMES MORE.
It’s deja vu all over again!
We must help create a "self-deportation" away from radical Islam and its rhetoric.
In order to create that atmosphere we had to help in establishing beach-heads of freedoms. Which are taking shape, place, in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The values of self-worth and freedom were for far too long denied the citizens of the ME......These values are our biggest allies in this WOT (in the long run).....and both are typing root throughout the ME.
But of course this is going to take time. It is going to be a difficult and frustrating process at times. But with great rewards. We are changing the world. Is there any more noble and justifiable cause (especially when first and foremost it is directly related to our national security!).
Regarding immigration (I believe the WH was wrong to take the course they did in 06 - I also believe / know more is happening on our borders, regarding NS, then is openly discussed, and rightfully so).
Regarding 08 - Every GOP candidate is harder on immigration than the current WH.....
Best regards,
The fact that over the last 15-20 years the U.S. has invaded one of the most secularized countries in the Middle East while at the same time devoting substantial resources to restoring/protecting royal families in neighboring countries (Kuwait and Saudi Arabia) pretty much debunks your whole "beach-heads of freedoms" statement.
The fact that one of those royal families (the Saudi royalty) has long been one of the world's leading supporters and promoters of radical Islam makes your whole "begin a process of dragging the Middle East out of the dark ages" statement a joke.
Regarding 08 - Every GOP candidate is harder on immigration than the current WH.....
No, they aren't. One of them (Rudy Giuliani) has a well-documented track record as a radical supporter of illegal immigration. In fact, he's the one candidate from either party who has proudly and willfully violated Federal immigration law in the past. I never thought I'd see the day when so many so-called "conservatives" would go out on a limb to support a Republican candidate for the White House who belongs in a Federal prison instead.
Rudy will lose Ohio, and the only non-red states he will pick up are New Hampshire, and possibly Delaware, which will not be enough to offset losses elsewhere.
The soul-skinny party moderates would do well to remember that there are a lot of folks Christian conservatives will get behind; but Rudy is a complete deal and party breaker.
No, he is not. While he is fine, any real conservative with a good past can do it.
The GOP should also be prepared to lose New Mexico and/or Iowa — especially if Richardson or Vilsack is tapped as the Democrat running mate.
Dem light is just dem period. The rest of us can just look at the states that are already in that constantly shifting sand and see where it has gotten them......NO THANKS!
They might like their lower standard of living but I sure as hell do not want to go there. The cost of living in those moderate republican/democrat states where taxes and licensing have run ammuck just plain suck.
You are aware that the reason we keep the Saudi royal family in power is that the alternative is far worse, right?
Yes, and "lost" then and he'll lose this time for real. I'm starting to lean more towards a Romney/Huckabee ticket. Unless Fred gets rolling soon.
I believe that your guy is spectacularly weak up the middle, and is Hillary's dream opponent for exactly that reason.
But we'll see. We vote in three and a half months. Show us what you've got.
I admit that some of Rudy’s policies are not easy to predict. HER actions are guaranteed with permanent damage. I will not have any reservations about supporting the Republican nominee over HER.
I have to a agree with you. Guiliani is a sensible liberal on the war; but a liberal nonetheless.
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.