It's absolutely crucial to the conservative pro life movement to block Giuliani!

Vanity/The American Spectator ^ | 4/19/2007 | By W. James Antle III

[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 Deal

4/19/2007

~~snip~~

"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."

~~snip~~

Don'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?

Keep the faith!!

[don-o]

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.

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.

[doc30]

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?

[cloud8]

> 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.

[dirtboy]

Giuliani said w/r guns “What works in New York won’t work in Texas.”

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.

[vox_freedom]

I'm saying he's a fraud when it comes to conservatism. And listed several issues including his position on homosexuals in foxholes.
What's it to you anyway? Are you his keeper?

[GSlob]

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.

[vox_freedom]

Yeah, Giuliani is not for federal gun bans, no sireee...

[doc30]

What's it to you anyway?

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.

[vox_freedom]

I've never seen so much anger on FR like I have this week and it bothers me as a Christian.

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.

[WildcatClan]

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.

[WildcatClan]

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.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

The fact that -- by your own admission, mind -- you are incapable of discerning the baseline, fundamental difference between a pro-infanticide, pro-"gay rights" party platform and one adhering to traditional conservative principles serves as concrete evidence that you are, demonstrably, staggeringly ill-equipped to contribute meaningfully to any such discussion on this forum.

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.

[GSlob]

I do not share your concerns, and consider them as counterproductive.

[A Longer Name]

I’d give it up on the rudy thing. He doesn’t stand a chance and really isn’t qualified.

How is he not qualified?

[BillyBoy]

"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."

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)
Stay Home/Pass

================================================

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.

[Texas4ever]

Jim, there is no movement. I am disheartened by the lack of commitment or knowledge to what the CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT IS...

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.

[dirtboy]

"I would like to see a straight up poll with all Republican candidates, sans those who aren’t even running

I bet you would, since Fred is sucking more oxygen away from Rudy with each passing day.

[BillyBoy]

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?

[dirtboy]

Hey, blowhard, there already was a poll similar to what you are demanding

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=170;results=1

[dirtboy]

Oh, and blowhard, there was this poll as well - Fred and all the other candidates, declared and possible:

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=177;results=1

So before you whine about how unfair FR is, perhaps you could examine past polls, eh?