The Real Rudy

Newsweek ^ | 3/4/07 | Susannah Meadows, Mark Hosenball, Michael Isikoff, Eve Conant, Sarah Childress, Andrew Romano and Jo

[Kaslin]

Duncan Hunter CPAC Video

[Luke21]

You have caught on to the game. All I see are Rudy puff pieces and Rudy love polls from the same media that is our sworn and absolute enemy.

These people want a no-choice foisted on the public. They want us to choose between two liberals in the general, after choosing between three of them in the primary.

No way. No how. The Rudy folks can have their tea party. He might even get nominated. I speak for no one but myself. And I will not support this wretchedness. If my party wants to truly become the yogurt version of the Democrats and the voters choose to do it, fine. But I will not be part of it. I voted for Bob Dole. I've voted for some dreadful Republicans, but not this time.

The Republicans nominated Wendell Willkie in 1940. He then ran around the country telling everyone how great FDR and the New Deal was. He had to change voter registration to run, but at least he was honest. And it was quite a slaughter. Two liberal parties results in victory for the most liberal.

[nctexan]

"No, it doesn't, that's why the colors are different and the disclaimer is there."

How about pointing out the disclaimer that says Hillary's position on Iraq has changed from what is being advertised? I don't see it...

Anyway her position on Iraq has been soft for months before her big flip last month.

If your proof point graphic is so important to your case, why don't you make it correct instead of hiding behind an 'imaginary disclaimer' or 'color coding'?

[PhiKapMom]

Noticed the anti-Rudy crowd and the Hunter crowd are already here. Are the Hunter threads so void of posts that have to have Rudy threads to post on. Guess that is what happens when a candidate is an * in polling numbers.

[nctexan]

I should have pinged you on my post #63.

This chart ought to be fixed or put in the can.

[ApplegateRanch]

Any time the press is trying to push a candidate upon us, it is because he fits their agenda, not ours.

[flashbunny]

"If your proof point graphic is so important to your case, why don't you make it correct instead of hiding behind an 'imaginary disclaimer' or 'color coding'?"

Because I guess the people who made it assume, perhaps falsely, that people would be intelligent enough to decode that the difference in colors plus the disclaimer means there isn't an exact match. And maybe, just maybe, they gave people to much credit by thinking they weren't in a cave and know that hillary is now trying to play the other side of the issue.

So to boil it down, your complaint is that the chart isn't sufficiently "dumbed down" and therefore requires numerous disclaimers for the lowest common denominator audience.

[ApplegateRanch]

You and your inconvenient facts again!

Would you just shut up, and climb peacefully aboard the Rudy Suicide Firetruck?

[AuntB]

Noticed the anti-Rudy crowd and the Hunter crowd are already here. Are the Hunter threads so void of posts that have to have Rudy threads to post on. Guess that is what happens when a candidate is an * in polling numbers.

That could be because the Rudy crowd was slinging mud and LIES at Hunter every time they tried to post anything about Hunter way back to November and December. The usual suspects, I might add.

I'm curious how someone that supports Inhofe and Coburn can be a Rudy fan.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1741802/posts

He's a running dog protectionist swine, who should be kept on his leash, or in his kennel, apparently42 posted on 11/20/2006 4:50:28 PM PST by Torie

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1755850/posts

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Rudy makes the cover of Newsweek in a 9 page spread.

Newsweek does centerfold spreads now?

Now we get to see him on the newstands all week!

Great! Now I know which issue to avoid in the waiting room of my dentist appointment this week.

[PhiKapMom]

I wasn't even hardly posting here back then and I think this mud slinging is actually kind of funny on the Rudy threads because it is bringing in more and more support.

There was not a huge Rudy contingent on here back then either. Guess I will have to go find the Hunter threads for November and December because he wasn't even in the race back then.

Then I will see for myself how many Rudy supporters were trashing Hunter -- most never heard of him until recently.

[Bahbah]

Noticed the anti-Rudy crowd and the Hunter crowd are already here.

Perhaps they will tire of this eventually. (I know, being a pollyana.)

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Too bad Hunten Dunker can't get on some magazines he might even break 3%.

Yeah it's a shame, isn't it, not appearing on a left-wing rag. I don't think Newsweak had the room to do an article about Hunter anyway. It's 20 pages of "news" are comprised of advertising and healthcare sob stories anyway.

[AuntB]

Funny how the Duncan Hunter cult won't tell us why their leader has NEVER sponsored a single bill that was eventually passed and signed into law. All those years in Congress and NOTHING legislatively to show for it. Duncan Hunter is all talk. No leadership.

I'm going to post the proof here that you are lying, because you can't be that misinformed. Are you going to retract the above statements?

Here for legislation presented by Hunter and passed. I will only post the last session of congress, there is MUCH more, as you well know.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/R?d109:FLD003:@1(Rep+Hunter) :

109th congress:

H.RES.1070 : Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Members of the House should actively engage with employers and the American public at large to encourage the hiring of members and former members of the Armed Forces who were wounded in service and are facing a transition to civilian life. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (introduced 9/29/2006) Cosponsors (2) Committees: House Armed Services; House Veterans' Affairs Latest Major Action: 12/5/2006 Passed/agreed to in House.

H.R.1101 : To revoke a Public Land Order with respect to certain lands erroneously included in the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge, California. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (introduced 3/3/2005) Latest Major Action: Became Public Law No: 109-127

H.R.1815 : To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2006 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (by request) (introduced 4/26/2005) Latest Major Action: Became Public Law No: 109-163

H.R.5122 : To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (by request) (introduced 4/6/2006) Latest Major Action: Became Public Law No: 109-364

H.R.5683 : To preserve the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in San Diego, California, by providing for the immediate acquisition of the memorial by the United States. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (introduced 6/26/2006) Latest Major Action: Became Public Law No: 109-272

H.R.6054 : To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (introduced 9/12/2006) Cosponsors (19) Committees: House Armed Services; House Judiciary; House International Relations Note: For further action, see S.3930, which became Public Law 109-366 on 10/17/2006.

H.R.6166 : To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (introduced 9/25/2006) Note: For further action, see S.3930, w hich became Public Law 109-366 on 10/17/2006.

H.AMDT.648 to H.R.4437 Amendment mandates the construction of specific security fencing, including lights and cameras, along the Southwest border for the purposes of gaining operational control of the border; designates fencing in specific sectors; and includes a requirement for the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on the use of physical barriers along the northern international land and maritime border of the United States. Sponsor: Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] (introduced 12/15/2005) Agreed to by recorded vote: 260 - 159 (Roll no. 640).

NOW, that's just last years, only part of it, I'm tired! Hunter gets legislation passed! Unlike some other candidates.

[My GOP]

Well this Rudy supporter NEVER goes on Hunter threads. I don't think I should go on Duncan threads since he's not my candidate. I guess for me its a matter of respect. I stay only on the Rudy threads.

[narses]

I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights, Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. “No, I have not supported that, and I don’t see my position on that changing,” he responded. Source: CNN.com, “Inside Politics” Dec 2, 1999 http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Rudy_Giuliani_Abortion.htm

ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES (November 14, 2006)

RUDY GIULIANI (R), FORMER MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY: I'm pro- choice. I'm pro-gay rights.

KING: Giuliani supports a woman's right to an abortion, and back in 1999, he opposed a federal ban on late-term abortions.

GIULIANI: No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing.

KING: Immigration could be another presidential landmine. Back in 1996, Mayor Giuliani went to federal court to challenge new federal laws requiring the city to inform the federal government about illegal immigrants.

JEFFREY: He took the side of illegal immigrants in New York City against the Republican Congress.

KING: Giuliani opposes same-sex marriage but as mayor, he supported civil unions and extending health and other benefits to gay couples. He also supported the assault weapons ban and other gun control measures opposed by the National Rifle Association.

GIULIANI: I'm in favor of gun control. I'm pro-choice.

Republican Big-Wigs Support Pro-Abortion Event in NY

Pro-abortion Governor George Pataki and New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who also supports unrestricted abortion, are co-chairs of the 2000 Choice Award Presentation to be held on May 30 at the St. Regis Hotel in New York City. The event is sponsored by the Republican Pro-Choice Coalition, a group that is campaigning for the removal of the pro-life plank from the Republican National Platform.


http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200503010743.asp

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Is this the same Duncan Hunter who bounced $129,000 worth of checks to the House bank?

More scandalous than hiring a criminal to be appointed to DHS?

[My GOP]

I just can’t understand why so many are making Rudy look more liberal than he really is on social issues and why they refuse to acknowledge he is a conservative on just about every non-social issue and I certainly can’t understand how social issues are more important than all the other issues when choosing a President since the President has very little influence on social issues. And I certainly can’t understand how being “perfect” on social issues is more important than electability.


To begin with, Rudy is AGAINST gay marriage. On Hannity and Colmes on February 5th he said, “Marriage should be between a man and a woman. [It's] exactly the position I've always had.” Now as far as homos go, personally, I disagree with their life style but as long as they do what they do in the privacy of their own home I really don't care and nobody else should either, especially not the federal government. The POTUS doesn't have the power to stop people from being gay. And he surely shouldn't be interferring in people's private lives. And to top things off, marriage is a state issue. So therefore voting on the basis of this issue doesn't make much sense.


Rudy is not the abortion on demand liberal people make him out to be. He is against partial birth abortions, contrary to the misinformation some on here are posting. On Hannity Rudy said “Partial-birth abortion, I think that's going to be upheld(by the USSC). I think that ban is going to be upheld. I think it should be.” And as soon as Rudy got finished saying this, Hannity acknowledged, “There's a misconception that you supported partial-birth abortion”. So there we have, Rudy is against partial birth abortions. Rudy is also for parental notification. He also acknowledged this on Hannity. So Rudy certainly isn’t for abortion on demand.

In general on abortion, we have a pro-life President now but we are still having abortions. No president has the power to stop abortion. Rudy has already said he supports strict constructionist judges like John Roberts. He constantly praised the President for appointing Roberts and Alito. On Hannity Rudy said “I think the appointment of judges that I would make would be very similar to, if not exactly the same as, the last two judges that were appointed. Chief Justice Roberts is somebody I work with, somebody I admire, Justice Alito someone I knew when he was U.S. attorney, also admire. If I had been president over the last four years, I can't think of any, you know, that I'd do anything different with that.” Assuming Rudy gets elected President and appoints Roberts-like justices then maybe Roe v. Wade will get overturned. But even if it does get overturned we know that this won’t stop all abortions. The abortion issue would then revert back to the states and does anyone really think California would outlaw abortions? Being pragmatic in our thinking we all know we can't completely stop abortions. Therefore voting solely on this issue very unpragmatic. I hate abortions like everyone else on here but I realize that regardless of how many pro-life presidents we elect, its just not going to stop.


I'll admit his past gun stances are bothersome but he has say that what's good for NYC isn't good for all of America. However, he isn’t the anti-Second Amendment Nazi he is made out to be. On Hannity Rudy said, “I understand the Second Amendment. I support it. People have the right to bear arms.” Rudy isn’t going to try to ban guns or come take anyones guns. Are Democrats pushing for gun control now that they have control of Congress? No. And nobody has pushed for gun control since Gore lost the election in 2000. Everyone knows its a losing issue and I don't see any push for gun control by anybody in the near future.

Rudy is great on all the other issues, the ones where the President actually has the power to make a real difference, like the WOT. He's fiscally responible(he turned a NYC's deficit into a surplus), a tax cutter(he cut over 20 taxes as Mayor), conservative on domestic policies(he dropped 600,000 people off welfare, cleaned up the rampant crime as Mayor and supports school choice, ect), for smaller government and government deregulation, for social security reform, supports strict constructionist judges, and is 100% perfect when it comes to his stance on the WOT and all other foreign policy which by the way is 100 times more important than worrying about what some gays people are doing, gay people that doesn't affect our lives at all!!!


Finally, Rudy is, IMO, the only Republicans that can win in 2008. So take your pick, Hillary or Rudy. Sure, we can "choose" another Republican but he will lose to Hillary. Back to Rudy, if he's elected President and fights terrorist like he fought crime as Mayor can you imagine the results we will in the defining struggle of our generation, the fight against Islamic fascism. Everyone know for a fact Hillary will surrender the terrorist and hand our foreign policy over to the UN and EU and poor Israel would be left out to dry. Rudy is extremely competetent and a great leader and there is nobody I want more as Commander in Chief. So I think we need to stop worrying about gays, people that don't affect our lives life at all. We need to worry about Islamic fascism, the people that want to kill us all, and vote for someone that will go after them.

Many in the conservative community are open to Rudy. Sean Hannity is certainly open to Rudy and likes Rudy. George Will wrote this about Rudy, ““His eight years as mayor of New York were the most successful episode of conservative governance in this country in the last 50 years, on welfare and crime particularly." Giuliani, more than any other candidate (Romney comes the closest) has the record of taking on major institutions and reforming them. Think about tourist magnet that is New York now. When Rudy Giuliani took office, 59% of New Yorkers said they would leave the city the next day if they could. Under Rudy Giuliani’s leadership as Mayor of the nation’s largest city, murders were cut from 1,946 in 1993 to 649 in 2001, while overall crime – including rapes, assaults, burglary and auto-thefts – fell by an average of 57%. Not only did he fight crime in Gotham like Batman, despite being constantly vilified by the New York Times, he took head on the multiculturalism and victimization perpetuated by Al Sharpton and his cohort of race baiters. He ended New York’s set-aside program for minority contractors and rejected the idea of lowering standards for minorities. As far as the economy goes, Rudy reduced or eliminated 23 city taxes. He faced a $2.3 billion budget deficit but cut spending instead hiking taxes." Heck, even Rush is open to Rudy. Rush said, “"He's a smart cookie ... Here's the thing about Giuliani," he said on his radio show the other day. "Everybody's got problems with him ... But when you start polling him on judges, he's a strict constructionist ... That will count for quite a bit. He can fix the abortion thing ... So I think he's got potential--particularly, folks, since we're still going to be at war somewhere in 2008." If Rush is at least open to Rudy then he realizes Rudy isn’t that bad.


And apparently even Reagan liked Rudy. Rudy was Reagan's Associate Attorney General and was awarded the Ronald Reagan Freedom Award, putting him along side Margaret Thachter, Billy Graham, and Bob Hope as receiptants of the award. Speaking of Ronald Reagan, Reagan said this about compromise in his autobiography An American Life: "When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn't like it. "Compromise" was a dirty word to them and they wouldn't face the fact that we couldn't get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don't get it all, some said, don't take anything. I'd learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: 'I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.' If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it."


Yes, Rudy may be alittle bit of a compromise but in reality, everytime you vote it’s a compromise. Nobody is ever going to find a candidate or a President they agree with 100% of the time, even Ronald Reagan. Reagan gave amnesty to illegal immigrants in 1986 and I’m sure the vast majority of Freepers disagree with that. Reagan even appointed O’Connor to the Supreme Court. Nobody is perfect. The only thing we can do is find the Presidential candidate we agree with the most on the most important issues and issues the President has the most influence over, the one that is the most electable, and the one that would make the best and strongest leader. That’s Rudy.


Back to Ronald Reagan for a second. In the above excerpt he used the term “radical conservatives”. So apparently Reagan thought that conservatives that were all or nothing, unappeasable, unpragmatic, and unrealistic are “radical”. I do too. Lets review history. World War II ended in 1945. SEVEN years later in 1952 the most popular general of the war, Dwight Eisenhower, won in a landslide despite far right extremist unpragmatic Republicans not supporting him in the primaries. History always repeats itself. I must now end the overly long post by quoting Dennis Miller, who also supports Rudy, “Rudy would have the best bumpersticker, ‘I’m the man the men in caves don’t want to win’”. Enough said.

[Fierce Allegiance]

Rudy blew off his sons high school graduation. He learned of his daughters acceptance to harvard from a newpaper. What a pice of crap.

[AuntB]

Is this the same Duncan Hunter who bounced $129,000 worth of checks to the House bank?

Well, you're just on a roll today, aren't you?

Los Angeles Times[snips]

September 11, 1992, Friday, San Diego County Edition

REP. HUNTER IS CLEARED IN HOUSE BANK SCANDAL

BYLINE: By JAMES BORNEMEIER, TIMES STAFF WRITER SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Column 2; Metro Desk

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Coronado) learned Thursday that he was cleared of any criminal wrongdoing involving his hundreds of overdrafts at the House Bank. For Hunter, the news came an agonizing day and a half after dozens of other congressmen received identical letters from Malcolm R. Wilkey, a special counsel appointed to investigate the bank scandal. The letter exonerates Hunter with the phrase, "I have concluded that there is no basis for pursuing a further inquiry regarding possible criminal violations concerning your account."

Receipt of the three-paragraph missive, on stationery of the Office of the Attorney General, brings an official close to a painful episode for the six-term congressman. An outspoken conservative who ranks fifth in the House Republican leadership, Hunter has generally avoided major public blunders during his 12 years in office.

When the House Bank scandal broke last fall, Hunter said, "Nobody has ever had a Duncan Hunter check returned for insufficient funds." The statement was interpreted as a curt denial, but turned out to be an accurate -- and carefully worded -- description of how the loosely run bank worked. It routinely covered overdrawn accounts with other members' funds. Hunter was right: Nobody had lost any money -- and the bank had operated that way for decades.

To justify his overdrafts at the House Bank, Hunter pointed to a scholarship fund he had set up in 1985 to aid needy district students. Hunter said the fund, to which he has donated more than $12,000, was his way of paying for congressional "perks," including the House Bank's de facto overdraft protection. The scholarship fund payments brought him into "moral balance" on the issue, Hunter said at the time. Back in California to face voters, Hunter toured his district and set up a card table with his checks spread out for constituents to examine. Angry voters laid into him about the checks, but also complained bitterly about the state of the region's economy. Hunter surprised his aides during a tour stop in El Centro by promising to turn back half his congressional pay until the unemployment rate in his district declines two points. Using a formula that blended San Diego and Imperial County unemployment figures for April, the base rate was pegged at 9.8%. It now stands at 11.2%. He also announced that he will pay for his congressional perks, including medical care, a health club and discount meals, at commercial rates.

30 posted on 01/31/2007 12:35:25 PM PST by linda_22003 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1776934/posts?page=30#30