National security and fiscal restraint?
A welfare plantation for illegal invaders?
War?
Borders?
Terrorism?
2nd Amendment?
I think he must share his screenname with someone else who posts under his name.
First we were treasonous liberals. Now I’m an idiot and a liar.
Social conservatism is all the rage and the heck with national security and fiscal restraint.
“First we were treasonous liberals. Now I’m an idiot and a liar.”
A cathartic memoir?
National security and fiscal restraint?
A welfare plantation for illegal invaders?
War?
Borders?
Terrorism?
2nd Amendment?
“Social conservatism is all the rage and the heck with national security and fiscal restraint.”
Fiscal restraint? Rudy?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1812568/posts
“But what Forbes failed to point out is that in Rudy’s second term, when the economy was booming, he abandoned fiscal restraint and became a big-spending liberal. City budget expenditures jumped 25 percent – twice the inflation rate – and Giuliani left his successor a projected operating deficit of $4.5 billion and New York’s citizens with the highest tax burden in any major municipality in America.”
So the fiscal conservatism spin is just myth - all you have left is “national security”. Well, rudy is soft on illegals, that’s the truth. So we have to narrow “national security” down to the WOT.
And rudy’s actual credentials on that are...?????
Talk about “single issue” voters. Ignore everything else, because rudy has talked tough on the WOT!!!! Oh boy!
IMO, we are losing the battle. In order to win any further National elections, we need everyone on board, and as you can see, that is not going to happen.
This leaves a presidential candidate with but one choice to make if he wants to win. That would be moving to the center during the primary, which is what is happening now. This runs contrary to the notion that you must capture and solidify the base first. It has always been so, but the base is now split with the socials occupying about a third of it. That third is being slowly written off by all the major candidates, even though they will deny it. They must move ahead and make up the difference with the electorate center, because to embrace that minority one third of the base will sink the candidacy of any running in 2008.
It's a damn shame, but it is a reality, and has happened before. The Republican Party will be forced to change as a result. The Dems are moving left, alienating their base, and we have to move to pick them up in order to win Nationally.
This is causing a great deal of anger and it will continue for some time to come. Nobody likes changes, but the changes will occur regardless.
I suspect that a Ross Perot will appear to scoop them up very soon. If not this cycle, then the next. It's just a matter of time.
We did not cause this to happen, and are not responsible for it. It is the nature of the swinging pendulum, and the leftward drift of America of the rest of the world. It is political realities of present and past, and if this generation does not address them, then the next generation will. If the choice of some is self imposed isolation, then that is their choice. If they kick and scream on the way down, the fall was their choice to make.
I would not let it bother you any more. It is not worth the anger and worry.
Everyone can see you and your buddies have just been pushing as hard as you can tonight. You are a disgusting idiot.
Total B/S and nothing but lies. Show me a single post where I approved of big spending or caving in to national security threats. I'm a small government, small spending, small tax, kind of guy. I'm also a nukem till they glow guy against our foreign enemies and a round them up and hang them guy when it comes to domestic enemies and traitors.
The fact that Rudy Giuliani is unqualified to be the nominee from the Republican party because of his liberal/socialist positions is not relevant to anyones positions on fiscal restraint or national security. It simply disqualifies him from the job.
Wow! You finally posted something accurate. Good job.
You three are nothing of the sort.
It's a shame you're being maligned on a site that tauts itself, among other things, as "pro God".
And it's equally shameful that our nation's founders are often brought into this discussion when the greatest of that group, Thomas Jefferson, wholly welcomed dissent in political debate.
I know you three, and most other Giuliani supporters are not "liberals", and I can understand, though not agree with, your reasoning in supporting the man's candidacy. It's just a shame you have to be the objects of insults and scurrilous attacks only for daring to speak your mind(s).