Yep. The Rudy Rooters are hard core leftists through and through.
I’m beginning to think so. Their rhetorical arguments are from the left. I don’t know why they aren’t at DU, and I’m not trying to be insulting.
Once, during the Bushbot wars, I was so mad at the prez, I got an account over there and started posting, figuring maybe I could be a right wing fly on the wall. I selected my posts very carefully, and stayed about a week. But the premises of their threads were so far left I got bored.
I can honestly say I wasn’t badly treated, but they did’nt know I was a Freeper either. I don’t even remember what screenname I used.
Hmm, I support a Giuliani-F.Thompson ticket, so that make me a "Rudy Rooter", yes? You use that term as if it is an evil thing.
Why don't you go to my homepage and peruse the links section, where I've collected more than 1000 articles in the last 6 years. Articles critical of human-caused global warming theory, race victimization mindsets, racial tribalism, abortion, helicopter parents undermining what's left of discipline in schools, antiwar groups' treason, gay groups' historical revisionism, the politicization of science and medical research, the lies of the 'green' crowd, antisemitism, the double standard against Christians, hate crimes legislation, CFR, China, Putin, CIA treason, the Plame Nonsense, Wesley Clarke, and the scams that funnel public dollars to the networks of liberal groups. Articles defending capitalism, gun rights, President Bush, the WOT, tax cuts, entitlement reform, welfare reform, cultural conservatism, conceal carry and refuting lie by lie the claims of the gun control crowd. And that's just through "C", plus links to articles by Coulter, Steyn, and hundreds of articles chronicling liberal media bias, Democrat corruption, and cases of Democrat vote fraud.
Collecting those links are only useful for two things: Using them later as facts and sources to refute specific lies and to provide historical documentation/accumulated evidence. If I am a leftist, why on earth would I accumulate so many sources and examples that refute leftist claims, lies, and ideology? Why would I preserve so many examples of media bias or Democrat corruption or voter fraud? If I were a liberal, wouldn't I be trying to let it fade away or at least be indifferent, instead of proactively chronicling all the flaws, lies, crimes, and treason of the left?
Given my 6 years of efforts to defend conservatism, as witnessed in one form by that collecting of documentation for use against liberal arguments, how on earth can anyone logically call me anything but a conservative, unless they are on a witch hunt?
Pragmatism in the face of imperfect choices is not a sellout that defines and overrides all other factors. All the car companies donate to gay and other leftist groups, does that mean that I and others can only remain a social conservative if we no longer buys cars? I can find a bicycle or tricycle maker that doesn't subsidize leftists, but those just aren't going to get the job done for what I must accomplish. Do I stick with principle, go without a car, and lose my job? Every conservative makes pragmatic compromises every day, whether they admit it or not.
The New Testament tells us the life of Jesus, in part to give us examples of how to live and make choices. Jesus went among sinners, saying that they are who he came to help. He didn't shun and withdraw from them, but rather conversed and reached out to them, while refraining from engaging or endorsing the sinful behavior. That doesn't mean that "Jesus endorses Rudy" (I won't speak for Jesus in this election) or that political decisions are always clear-cut either way for a Christian, but it does suggest that an "Isolation from the Unclean" mindset may not always be wise. Jesus took a lot of criticism from the Pharisees for dining with the unclean, because some thought such compromising and pragmatic action amounted to condoning the behavior of the immoral. But it was necessary for him to gather with the sinners to accomplish his goals. YMMV.
Politics is the art of compromise, and the conservative that gets some or most of what he is trying to accomplish is more effective than the purist who accomplishes nothing. That doesn't mean that supporting someone other than Rudy is taking a defeatist purist position, in fact it may turn out that supporting someone other than Rudy will be the best choice a conservative can make. Or not. That is what healthy debate is for, but it is both ridiculous and dishonest to have some of the long-time conservatives here with a proven track record suddenly historically revised into liberals simply because of a single pragmatic judgment they have made, especially since no votes have been cast yet.