It's Wrong for the Right to be Rudyphobic

National Review Online ^ | October 12, 2007 | Deroy Murdock

[StatenIsland]

If I step outside my conservatism, and to a certain extent, my faith, I am confronted with issues with which I have difficulty grappling. And at the bottom of it all is my belief that Giuliani is the only one that can defeat Hillary.

And for my conscience's sake, I could even decide that a Democrat presidency is a small price to pay to preserve my steadfast loyalty to my principles and beliefs.

But a HILLARY presidency? No. The damage to my country would be too great. In eight years, a Hillary presidency with a Democrat congress could insure that there will never be a Republican government for as long as this nation can endure.

[Guenevere]

And what kind of Republican governnment do we have now??????

[dforest]

Rooty toots will keep on trying. I guess it is all parts of NO, that they don’t understand.

I believe those who will not vote Rooty have gotten tired of arguing about it and are going to hang on to their principles.

No is No.

[Flintlock]

No, it’s not.
Rudy is right on attitude, but wrong on NEARLY EVERYTHING else.
He will do for the National GOP what ‘ol Pataki did for the GOP of New York—totally destroy the organization and leave NOTHING behind.
There are better candidates—let’s pick one.

[StatenIsland]

“And what kind of Republican governnment do we have now??????”

Think I don’t see that? But where do these rhetorical questions lead us...to a Hillary debacle? Think I don’t wrestle with this?

I dunno. Maybe it’s weakness on my part, but a Hillary presidency, and it’s long-term implications on the type of country the United States could become under her thumb, scares me too much to stay home or vote third party.

[G Larry]

THE PRIMARIES HAVE A PURPOSE!!!

Vote your priciples in the primaries!!!!!

IF you have to make tough choices in the General election, worry about that latter!!!!

[TLI]

No is No.

Giuliani? Why, you would not vote for good `ol Rudy?

Do you mean the strong talking / good delivery / charismatic / strong in the "polls" Rudy?


Perhaps this Rudith?


Maybe this one?


How about `ol Stonwall Rudi?

New York City 2001 Gay Pride Parade It was less than three months before the unknowing and horrific September 11th, 2001, attacks (that's two) on New York City, that N.Y.C. Mayor Rudy Giuliani hosted his "8th Annual Gay Pride Celebration" at Gracie Mansion in Manhattan, New York. It was held on Thursday, June 21, 2001, and for the first time, at the perennial urging of S.V.A. President Williamson Henderson, and a few others, it was held not as an early morning breakfast but as an evening cocktail party.







Actually, I think it is a load of hot air that rudy tootsie is even close to being "the only one that can beat the hildabeast." Consider that a bit of education to the public regarding her now full blown communism would make her a liability to the libs and a target for a campaign that reveals her true nature. Step one would be to quit referring to her as a "Democrat" and only refer to her as a communist. And get that message out in the form of her quotes on forums other than this one.

But back to the subject. We must run Rudy tootsie to beat hildabeast? Na, we can do better than that.

[Edit35]

Although I cannot envision myself supporting Guliani, I can see one possible silver lining if he’s elected US Pres.

Perhaps, just perhaps, he will be sooo aware of the right’s distrust and resentment of him that he will go overboard and support (even more than a REAL conservative) all conservative initiatives.

Perhaps, just perhaps, he WOULD nominate pro-Life judges, and perhaps he would steer clear of all legislation that would boost nationalized health care, forced PC homosexual education, etc.

Sometimes, as has occurred with Pres GWB, so-called conservatives feel they need to ‘reach out’ to the leftist loonies just to make friends.

But Rudy perhaps already has the lib GOP and some wackadoodle Dems in his pocket.

Thus he just might push the REAL conservative agenda even harder just to prove he’s not a smooshy liberal. (Hey, I can dream, can’t I?)

[GBA]

Months ago, I thought that regardless who the Republicans nominated, the Republican nominee would beat Hillary. With the election still over a year away, I'm not so sure. Each candidate is a compromise of strong points, negatives and weaknesses, but the most compelling thing about voting for any one of them is Hillary as President. I hope that's enough.

If elected, Hillary will probably have at least two years with a compliant Congress to advance her Soros socialist agenda. I would vote for almost anyone, even Ron Paul, to keep Hillary, Soros and all the rest of the Clinton crime family from sticking it to us.

[piytar]

I’m not got to bash Rudy beyond saying “2nd Amendment, abortion, NY sanctuary city,” and would vote for him over sHrillary, but I’d prefer ANY of the other GOP candidates besides ron paul...

[Man50D]

I dunno. Maybe it’s weakness on my part, but a Hillary presidency, and it’s long-term implications on the type of country the United States could become under her thumb, scares me too much to stay home or vote third party.

If it comes to Hitlery or Rudy then there will be a socialist in the White House regardless of whether there is a an R or D after their names. The GOP has been so fixated on appeasing the socialist Democrats over the years for the sake of compromise that it has abandon it's core conservative principles for socialism and thereby aligned itself with the socialists. They are essentially one party. An alternative party would be the second party.

[dforest]

Thanks for posting some of Rooty’s “qualifications”.

I am sure the Clinton camp has a nice national ad in the works to inform the uninformed.

argh

[BunnySlippers]

bump

[dforest]

It would be better to not dream. Think about reality.

[Calpernia]

>>>Giuliani’s pro-family/anti-abortion ideas, his socially conservative mayoral record, and his popularity among churchgoing Republicans.<<<<

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha ::gasps::, hee, hee, hee, hee, hee, ::snorts::, hee, hee, ha, ha, hee, ::falls on floor::

[Calpernia]

bttt

[angcat]

Can you imagine that barf bag wife of his as first lady. That is an embarrassment in itself.

[Dr. Sivana]

And at the bottom of it all is my belief that Giuliani is the only one that can defeat Hillary.

Speaking as a former, but nearly lifelong, Connecticutian who spent a lot of time in Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx, I can say with moral certainty that New Yorkers have a poor conception of what the rest of the country thinks.

This inability to understand what the other 90% of the country thinks and feels extends to Giuliani himself. Giuliani is in a poor position to exploit Hillary's weaknesses, and for every state he puts into play, he puts to other ones in danger. He would also hurt turnout in those states where we could win congressional seats back. This country does not need a tougher, more efficient, less discreet, ethnic Nelson Rockefeller.

[ctdonath2]

This “Rudyphobia” ignores three key factors: Giuliani’s pro-family/anti-abortion ideas, his socially conservative mayoral record, and his popularity among churchgoing Republicans.

This "Rudiphilia" ignores three key factors: Giuliani's abortion agnosticism, his totalitarian mayoral record, and his opposition among the Republican base.

Rudy's supporters need to stop flinging "but he's good on _this_" at the opposition, and start addressing the critical issues which are consistently driving away enough of the base that he won't get elected.

Giuliani is the only one that can defeat Hillary.

Nominate Rudy, get Hillary.

Ya gotta find someone else that doesn't look like a flaming leftist to a very large part of the right wing.
Seriously, if a candidate would do well on the Democratic ticket (which Rudy would), we don't want him.

[Calpernia]

>>>>I can see one possible silver lining if he’s elected US Pres

Silver lining? Like what? The Stonewallers get age of consent laws banished to victimize our children?