Skip to comments.It's absolutely crucial to the conservative pro life movement to block Giuliani!
Posted on 04/26/2007 1:26:07 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
It's absolutely crucial to the conservative pro life movement to block the pro choice, pro gay agenda Rudy Giuliani from obtaining the GOP nomination. It would kill the movement and ultimately destroy the credibility of the GOP.
Excerpts from the American Spectator:
The Real DealDon't be fooled. Don't betray your principles or the cause due to fear of Hillary and the moonbats. Would Ronald Reagan cower in fear and betray his principles?
"Despite the calls to leave litmus tests behind, pro-life Rudy reluctance is justified. If nominated, Giuliani would be the most pro-choice Republican presidential candidate in history. Even Gerald Ford, an archetypal Republican for choice, backed a constitutional amendment overturning Roe v. Wade during the 1976 campaign. Barry Goldwater, who was nominated before abortion became a national issue and outspokenly pro-choice in retirement, backed the human life amendment in his final Senate race."
"Giuliani has feted NARAL and Planned Parenthood. He has praised Margaret Sanger and repeatedly accused mainstream pro-lifers of wanting to put pregnant women in jail. His concessions to date have been minor and offered without enthusiasm."
"Abortion opponents can ill afford to give up their leverage in the GOP. Their position has little support among the cultural elite; many in the Republican establishment would like nothing better than to get beyond issues like that. If pro-lifers support Giuliani because he hates abortion, it will be difficult for them to criticize personally opposed Democrats like John Kerry in the future. Their campaign to get bishops to withhold communion from pro-choice Catholic Democrats will seem partisan and hypocritical. And the whole movement may be seen as less serious and less influential."
Keep the faith!!
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Machiavelli is for the same kind of personality that reads the Art of War. Neither have any real application, but offer good justification for bad decisions.
Rudy is not going to beat Hillary. No way.
And Rudy is one of the least qualified to lead the GWOT.
So if those are your criteria, your backing the wrong man.
Yes, I read that one before. “Nihilists” at work.
I remember the discussions at the Collegiate level in my house of “existentialism”, “Nietzsche”, “Dostoyevsky”, etc. as a child in the very early 1960’s. So early in the ‘60’s I believe the dirt was still being tossed on the grave of 1959. Ad nauseum the discussions went on.
Although the link I provide below can, and probably will cause some to become brain numbed as well cause eyes to glaze over, and will possibly need to be approached more than five sittings to complete, it provides an interesting insight into those discussions I remember. As well provides us all some source of insight possibly as we reflect upon our society today.
I’m certain other sub memories also come into play here that I haven’t resurrected as yet thus my intent may be confusing to those whom might read up on “Nihilism” in the following link, but truly one cannot be hurt by simply reading the posting and understanding the content.
Both “Art of War” and Machiavelli are required reading for military staff officers and for politicians. So much for “neither have any real application”. Why, look at our own WJC of the stained blue dress to see the real life applications to making a political career and to the political survival. One needs not merely read the texts, of course, but to ponder and to understand them. But then again, that applies to many other texts.
Then be prepared for Klinton in the White House .
Better an enemy in front of me then behind me.
Both are still required reading for strategy by military, though there really is no “required reading list” for pols. Perhaps there should be.
The Prince, interestingly enough, was written to curry favor with the family after the Big M made some strategic errors. Basically it’s a butt kissing book.
Durasell’s Rules for Business #121: If the guy sitting across the table from you brings up either The Art of War or The Prince, understand you’re dealing with a second rate mind. The only rational response is a triangle paper football flicked at his left eye.
Boogeyman.Dont worry, the beast will defeat herself.
He certainly is not qualified to be the republican nominee.But as a rat bastard I would say YES!
It is his gun grabbing ways that does it for me.
And that! is the truth, plain and simple.
What was Hunter’s stand on the Schaivo case?
Seldom has so much nonsense been packed into three short sentences.
First of all, the Rockefeller Republican condescension drips from your post. Precious guns? I know you self-proclaimed Republican elites prefer to look down your nose at gun-totin' red-state rubes. However, red state rubes are the ones who put Bush in the White House. Twice. Since you live in gun-control nirvana, I can see why you can belittle gun-rights activists. You apparently don't care enough about gun rights to live in a state where you have any.
And second, President Rudy might not force daughters to have an abortion. But he'd pay for his grandaughter to have one. And use tax dollars to create a right for any woman to have an abortion, even if she can't pay for it. Such a man is completely unfit to lead the pro-life political party.
And third, I guess you've deliberately missed all the posts about Rudy's anti-gun and gun-grabbing past. But again, I guess us red-state rubes are just too unsophisticated to put Rudy's past actions aside and uncritically accept what he is telling us now that he needs our votes. Silly rubes...
Wait a minute. Rudy’s understanding of the nations predicament came too late. While I blame the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC, Rudy was not exactly pro-active regarding terrorism until after the fact. He put the emergency command center and fuel in the WTC after it had already been targeted. He made NYC a SANCTUARY CITY for illegals, therefore, LEO were prohibited from questioning anyones legality. Think about it, what a great city to live in if you aren’t supposed to be here. It has also been brought up that the radio systems the firemen were using were not up to par, imagine that in a city that size.
I am not ashamed to say that I am supporting Duncan Hunter, I can back up the fact that he is well aware of our countries predicament and has been fighting for years for the military. His voting record proves it, the fact that he served in the military and has a son that is currently serving in Iraq, he knows the cost of war. He certainly has the expertise to handle our predicament. The United States Military is not the same as the NYPD and FDNY.
Rudy is pro abortion and pro gun control. Those are the two major reasons why the media is pushing him.
Republicans can do much better. republican’s great weakness is that they cannot compete in the political arena.
Republicans are, I’m sorry to say, wimps. They can only win by default.
I’m not certain.
Perhaps his son, Sam, could find out for us.
Meanwhile, here are some of his positions that are fromhis website.
Sam, can you tell us what your dad’s position was with regards to the Terri Schiavo case?
“Abortion opponents can ill afford to give up their leverage in the GOP. Their position has little support among the cultural elite; many in the Republican establishment would like nothing better than to ‘get beyond issues like that.’
There’s the money quote.
The white shoes, country club Republicans just aren’t happy with us social conservatives. They’ll take our votes as long as we shut up and ride the back of the bus.
I’m not going to vote for their candidate for president.
" Right to Life -- Governor Thompson is strongly pro-life and signed one of the nations first partial-birth abortion bans. Under Thompson, the number of adoptions in Wisconsin increased by 22 percent, while the number of abortions decreased by 37 percent. Just as he did in Wisconsin, Thompson would appoint strict constructionist judges who do not legislate from the bench."
I concur. If Giuliani is elected, he'll face two ruthless and fanatic enemies--one in Islamofascism, and one in the Democrat congress. If we don't have a strong majority in congress, he won't be able to get funding for the war unless he "compromises" with the Dems--meaning he'll have to give them what they want on issues like gun control, abortion, non-conservative judges, etc. And since all indications are that he's in favor of those things anyway, I can see huge inroads on our deteriorating freedoms in return for too little money for the war, effectively rendering us incapable of fighting it.
The only favorable thing about Giuliani, IMO, is his determination to fight for victory against Islamofascism. But his liberalism on all other issues would, I believe, result in his inability to carry that fight forward.
Another question, which I believe correlates to your statement, is whether God can even be assumed to be on the side of a nation that permits the slaughter of its most innocent and defenseless citizens.
You are a pretender and we've seen your kind before. They casually mention they just happened to be at "some demonstration" (even though you obviously remember the exact date, time, place, etc.) and, oh, you weren't really interested, blah, blah, blah.
You're a big phony pretender, pure and simple, who doesn't support a conservative agenda -- much more, you do support a liberal agenda including the compromise of our troops with "out and proud" homosexuals. You also BTW don't support right to life, you don't support the 2nd amendment -- even though you purport to belong to the NRA as related on your FR homepage -- given you endorse the #1 gun grabber Rudy G.
Get lost jerk. We don't need you or your ilk on this forum. Go somewhere else to spread your lies and false representations.
A snowball has a better chance of getting tossed around by the Devil himself than Rudy has of EVER getting my vote. The hillery beast threat carry's no wieght with me. If the beast gets to the WH, look back on these days where you Rudybots were warned, and you'll soon realize the damage YOU inflicted on our Country. I'm not whistling Dixie here, and I will NOT join in electing a NE LIBERAL, so people like you can whistle past the graveyard of what used to be America. Some of you bots have the common sense and reason of a rock so I don't expect you to get it until it's too late, and even then, I'll have to rely on a coin toss, just to keep it real. Blackbird.
Oh, good. On what network will the debate be televised, do you know? Will it be Fox, I hope I hope?
" Looks like our true blue conservative did pretty well in our prior poll. Let's now see what happens if we nominate a social liberal who's okay with abortion, gay unions and gay rights is a gun grabber and is weak on illegal immigration. Who do you vote for in the general?
- The social liberal with the big "R"
- Third party
- Stay home
- Hillary, et al
Incidentally, the Fred Fan Club on FR is gloating about Fred is such a "winner" because he gets 70% in a FR poll where the ONLY choices are him or Rudy on the ballot. My guess is that any "true blue conservative" would get a similar level of "support" in a hypothetical two-way race with Rudy.
Shall we test this theory? Have some FR "polls" on the following:
Rudy vs. Tommy Thompson - Pick ONE
Rudy vs. Huckabee - Pick ONE
Rudy vs. Brownback - Pick ONE
Rudy vs. Gilmore - Pick ONE
"Libertarian" = conservative? BWAH-Ha-Ha-Haaaaaaa!!!
Oh well, at least I can get that channel. I’m sure it’s on my list somewhere. Thanks for the info!
Gulp. Now there is a big ol' elephant in the living room right there!
It is very difficult to even bring that up, due to the Phelps cultists.
But, the facts of the matter and history are inconvenient things. Lord have mercy.
Take it easy. The same thing could have happened to you or anyone else if you didn’t know such an obscene event were taking place. Do you keep track of all the gay activists in your area so you can avoid them? What would you have done in Gslob’s situation when someone like that approaches you?
> Precious guns? I know you self-proclaimed Republican elites prefer to look down your nose at gun-totin’ red-state rubes.
Giuliani said w/r guns “What works in New York won’t work in Texas.” So go down to the swamp and fire off a few rounds, redneck. I’m off for the country club.
Funny, I missed that part of the 2nd Amendment that has state-by-state exemptions.
And beyond that, Rudy called for FEDERAL gun control laws to override state laws.
So you're claim that gun owners have nothing to fear from Rudy has been discredited.
Another recycled Rudy zombie talking point done in again.
And why “bwa-ha-ha?” Contemporary collectivists of all stripes are characterized by their love of the big government [provided they are in command, of course], and classic liberal [in Friedrich von Hayek’s usage] tradition, with ist libertarian overtones - most surely looks and feels conservative in comparison.
Yeah, Giuliani is not for federal gun bans, no sireee...
You just seem very agitated and it's showing in your recent posts. I've never seen so much anger on FR like I have this week and it bothers me as a Christian. It's like no one wants to discuss things, but just get upset when there is disagreement.
What bothers me, as a Christian, is pretenders who support abortion, homosexual "rights" and removal 2nd Amendment freedoms. Further they defend and support a guy like Giuliani who is wrong on each of these critically important issues. Asking that there be compromise on these issues is just plain wrong. BTW, I wouldn't call it "anger" or being "upset" just serious disagreement on matters of moral values and freedoms.
In case you haven't noticed, that is what FR is about and those that want to subjugate these opinions to "discussion" or compromise should and will be held accountable.
For example is the matter of Giuliani and gun control. He has been on record regarding this issue (in his speeches and graphically in the above picture along with his friend Chuckie Schumer). Yet some here deny that he wants to do anything but allow states to regulate/restrict gun ownership and use. Well now, we have a disagreement on this issue don't we? So we stand up and state our opinion about it. Why? because it is important to us, our families, our sons and daughters and our future.
Exactly my point, it isn’t all about abortion and 2nd amendment. The Sanctuary City thing is more than enough for me. If Rudy doesn’t care about enforcing immigration laws in NYC, why would he care to do so in the rest of the USA? Rudy would be good in the GWOT? Tough talk to the enemy at the front door, while your enemy sneaks in the back door, somehow doesn’t seem so secure to me.
Great idea and that poll is bogus anyway as if those are our only choices. I would like to see a straight up poll with all Republican candidates, sans those who aren’t even running. It would really be interesting to see how Freepers would vote as things stand now.
You are, however, in the right place to actually learn quite a bit more on said topic than you (evidently) do at present, should you genuinely desire to avail yourself of the opportunity. Whether you actually elect to do so is, ultimately, no one's responsibility but your own.
I do not share your concerns, and consider them as counterproductive.
How is he not qualified?
I have been saying this for weeks. C'mon, JimRob, if you are REALLY serious about letting the "anti-Rudy" voters here have a voice, LET US tell you WHICH candidates we prefer. Don't try to engineer a hypothetical "Fred vs. Rudy" victory until such candidates are actually running against each other. Might as well ask whether freepers would vote for Ronald Reagan over Karl Marx.
You want what kind of competition Rudy has? ASK.
A simple FR poll is in order:
Here is a list of all the Republicans CURRENTLY running for President. If the election was held today, which of these would you vote for?
Former Governor Tommy Thompson (R-Wisconsin)
Former Governor Mitt Romney (R-Massachusetts)
Former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-Arkansas)
Former Governor Jim Gilmore (R-Virginia)
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (R-New York)
US Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas)
US Senator John McCain (R-Arizona)
Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-California)
Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas)
Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado)
THOSE are the cards we're currently being dealt. We can talk hypothetically all day if 92% of freepers would choose Condi Rice or Newt Gingrich or George Allen (anyone member last year when we were told HE was the savior of the GOP and anyone here who thought otherwise was ignorant??) or "Fred" over "Rudy" but it won't accomplish a damn thing unless those candidates actually RUN.
They just past what is practically SAME SEX MARRIAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE... Where is the movement? Where is the voice of the conservative? I say it is lame, speechless. Why? because the Media has successfully won the mind of many who dare to even think for themselves. Sit back, get fat and enjoy the ride.....EVERYTHING YOU HAVE STOOD FOR WILL BE TAKEN. I SAY EVEN YOUR BIBLE, YOUR RIGHTS TO YOUR CHILDREN,YOUR RIGHT TO SPEECH. Your grandchildren will not know your God and will curse you. This is the price of conforming to this world.
I bet you would, since Fred is sucking more oxygen away from Rudy with each passing day.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Fred and Rudy are our ONLY choices. Anyone here not for your hero Fred MUST be a “Rudy McRomney” supporter, right? We have a dozen people running on the GOP side but the only “real” candidate is a guy who sits on his ass for monthes and refuses to say if he’ll run. Get your head out of your @$$ and realize that you can’t dictate to us who the candidates are.
$100 bucks says most of you guys in the Cult of Fred are the ones who spent all of 2006 telling us George Allen WILL BE our candidate for President. Your last imaginary presidential candidate worked out sooooo well, didn’t he?
So before you whine about how unfair FR is, perhaps you could examine past polls, eh?