Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rudy a Lefty? Yeah, Right.
The Washington Post ^ | October 28, 2007 | David Greenberg

Posted on 10/28/2007 4:43:03 AM PDT by libstripper

You wouldn't know it from reading the papers, but the favorite to win the Republican presidential nomination is a confirmed right-winger. On issues such as free speech and religion, secrecy and due process, civil rights and civil liberties, pornography and democracy, this moralist and self-styled lawman has exhibited all the key hallmarks of Bush-era conservatism.

That candidate is Rudolph W. Giuliani.

As any New Yorker can tell you, the last word anyone in the 1990s would have attached to the brash, furniture- breaking mayor was "liberal" -- and the second-to-last was "moderate." With his take-many-prisoners approach to crime and his unerring pro-police instincts, the prosecutor-turned-proconsul made his mark on the city not by embracing its social liberalism but by trying to crush it.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: antigun; autocrat; crossdresser; giuliani; gungrabber; julieannie; liberalstatist; proabortion; rinorudy; rudy; rudygiuliani; rudyisaliberal; sickofrudy; zotbait
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-198 next last
To: saganite

Your posting #41 is well said.

If anything can be said in Rudy’s defense, however, Rudy seems to be more forceful and communicative, less Politically correct and with more backbone than the current Whitehouse occupant.


101 posted on 10/28/2007 8:39:43 AM PDT by So Circumstanced
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: jonathanmo

I do not care, no matter what I will never vote for the liberal statist elitist SOB.


102 posted on 10/28/2007 8:56:09 AM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Politicalmom
Have you ever personally MET Robinson? I’m tellin’ ya, ever since I got my new triple thick tinfoil hat with the pneumatic seals around the edge, I have been seeing things with crystal clarity.

I can now hear the black Helicopters way before they even come into sight.

103 posted on 10/28/2007 9:33:36 AM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock

“Rino rudy a liberal statist. I will never vote for the pro abortiion, anti gun, pro gay worthless SOB.”

I heard last night somewhere he somehow pioneered the sanctuary cities (illegal immigration) idea a few years ago. Would be interesting today to ask him what he thinks about the anchor baby concept now on national TV.


104 posted on 10/28/2007 9:45:17 AM PDT by Hillbillary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Hillbillary

Who knows? He two faced.


105 posted on 10/28/2007 9:48:37 AM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Hillbillary

Pioneered sanctuary cities? Nope. He just continued city policy started before he was elected. Sanctuary cities developed in the 1980s in response to the lack of Federal enforcement of illegal immigration laws. The Feds expected the locals to carry the load, and eventually the locals refused because of the lack of support.


106 posted on 10/28/2007 9:54:23 AM PDT by jonathanmo (So many phobes, so little time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: kjo

I’m not saying I wont vote for him if hes the nominee,...obviously I will. I’m just saying he’s not my first choice,


107 posted on 10/28/2007 9:57:20 AM PDT by Armedanddangerous (Chuin, Master of Sinanju (emeritus))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jonathanmo

So you admit he help violate US law in supporting the policy of sanctuary cities. And he is a pro illegal invader.


108 posted on 10/28/2007 10:11:37 AM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV
Sure. Jim Robinson, who refuses to vote for Giuliani, is a plant from DU.

I told you to keep your head down.

109 posted on 10/28/2007 10:17:29 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Trails of trouble, roads of battle, paths of victory we shall walk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock
Sure, the Feds put together a law, basically saying the Federal goverment was lousy at their job, and expected the locals to take care of it. Giuliani told them to stuff it, and if they were serious about immigration law, the Feds had to prove it first before NYC would cooperate again.

You seem to forget WHY the sanctuary laws developed in the 80's.

I know "Rudy is pro-illegal invader" is a nice bumper sticker, but illegal immigration is much more complicated than that and needs a myriad of solutions that involves all levels of government, STARTING with the Federal government securing the borders.Sanctuary cities will fade away after that.
110 posted on 10/28/2007 10:20:37 AM PDT by jonathanmo (So many phobes, so little time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: All

Rudy has not gained the nomination yet and likely will not do so. Isn’t it a bit early to be condemning those who have retained their honor, integrity and principle and refuse to vote for an immoral, pro-abortion, flip-flopping media creation?

If one does not vote for Rudy, one does not vote for Rudy. For it to be truly said that one elected Hillary, one would have to cast a vote for Hillary. These separation by degree arguments and least smelly turd comparatives are contemptible and dishonest. I for one, am sick of them.

To all those capitulating camp followers who dare suggest principled conservatives somehow want Hillary because they refuse to vote contrary to their beliefs; I invite you to participate in the osculation of my posterior and those of whom you have insulted.

I know there are some who don’t care that the last vestiges of conservatism seem to be circling the drain, but I do. So, take your “Hillary as bogeyman” fear-mongering and best ordure comparatives to someone who gives a damn.

I am not impractical, but firm in my beliefs and my resolve as are many others on this forum. I realize, and it looks likely, the GOP will again be represented by a posturing and pandering creation of the media. As long as candidates “promise” some seem content to believe them. That is always worked so well before, why not, right? Everyone knows a candidate has never lied or broken a promise. They do it every time and do you know why they do it? They do it because we vote for them and are complicit in their dishonesty, because we were ignorant enough to trust them. Did you ever wonder why the candidates with impeccable credentials and a history of doing things to move conservatism forward and that have consistently been socially conservative never seem to be “electable”? I am far more interested in the answer to that question because I already know why a conservative wouldn’t cast a vote for Rudy.


111 posted on 10/28/2007 10:41:45 AM PDT by WildcatClan (DUNCAN HUNTER- The only choice for true conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: jonathanmo
He supported a sanctuary city policy that is all I need to know about him being against me on immigration.
112 posted on 10/28/2007 11:01:51 AM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: kjo
Look...would you rather have the Clintons back for eight years?

If Rudy's nominated that's exactly what's going to happen.

113 posted on 10/28/2007 11:04:06 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jalisco555
Then be prepared to hear the words "President Hillary Clinton" every day for eight long, long years.

Presidents are elected to single 8 year terms now? When did this happen?

114 posted on 10/28/2007 11:06:09 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jalisco555
But the Fairness Doctrine will shut down conservative talk radio. Campaign finance laws and hate speech laws will shut down web sites like Free Republic. Health care will be nationalized and we'll all be paying for abortions with our tax dollars. And our foreign policy will be set in Beijing.

Ain't gonna happen. Hillary would have to deal with a revitalized GOP in Congress and public. All of this has to go through Congress anyway, unless Hillary will receive magical dictatorship powers upon taking the oath of office. And ask King George back in 1776 what happened when he tried to pull that.

Rudy's nominated = 3rd party

115 posted on 10/28/2007 11:09:47 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV
Actually their behavior is best explained by the theory of Natural Selection.

No, it's called sticking by our long-held principles and refusing to compromise on them by voting for POS pro-abortionists.

116 posted on 10/28/2007 11:13:46 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"No, it's called sticking by our long-held principles and refusing to compromise on them by voting for POS pro-abortionists."

No, it's called going down with the ship after blowing a whole in the hull AND tying everyone on board up to ensure they all die along with you.

117 posted on 10/28/2007 11:21:46 AM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: dangus
For someone who was so hated by liberals, perhaps you can explain why he received the endorsement of the Liberal Party?

For access to Rudy's administration. It was a political move on their part. Rudy treated Liberals like crap in his first 4 years and the Liberal party had been shut out -- so they had to do something to try to kiss his ass. So they gave him the endorsement. And given that Rudy was a republican running in one of the reddest cities in the nation -- it didn't hurt to have his name not only on the Republican line of the ballot, but on the Liberal line as well.
118 posted on 10/28/2007 11:31:38 AM PDT by Sadecki ("Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock
That's what I did in 1992 and look what it got me...8 years of Clinton. I learned my lesson.
119 posted on 10/28/2007 11:41:14 AM PDT by nycgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock

Understood where you are coming from...when I was young, I used to believe everything was just black and white as well...


120 posted on 10/28/2007 11:50:54 AM PDT by jonathanmo (So many phobes, so little time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: nycgal

I do not see any real difference between the two so if Rino Rudy is nominated I will go third party.


121 posted on 10/28/2007 11:52:10 AM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: jonathanmo

I am 37adn know there is grey, but Rino Rudy has as black of a heart as Hitlary. I will never vote for teh lying pro illegal invader liberal.


122 posted on 10/28/2007 11:53:44 AM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: All

Leave it to a liberal to describe Guilani as a “self-styled lawman,” and describe total charlatans as “heroes,” or “decorated veterans.” Like him or not, Giulani was a committed career Federal prosecutor who had more success than any other at exterminating much of organized crime in his District, and that in spite of contracts out for his assassination. In the same breath, a liberal will hail as a “hero” some ninety-day Vietnam fraud with self-nominated decorations, no witnesses other than himself to the “exploits,” or some REMF faux Marine clown who is only the most corrupt of all the members of Congress. It’s classic newspeak from the party of no standards.


123 posted on 10/28/2007 11:58:01 AM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV
No, it's called going down with the ship after blowing a whole in the hull AND tying everyone on board up to ensure they all die along with you.

I'd rather die a clean, quick death (Hillary) than a slow-agonizing one (Rudy)

124 posted on 10/28/2007 11:59:55 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock
I do not see any real difference between the two so if Rino Rudy is nominated I will go third party.

I guess it's time to put your glasses on:)

125 posted on 10/28/2007 12:00:54 PM PDT by nycgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: nycgal

Or take your rose colored ones off. He is as liberal as Hitlary.


126 posted on 10/28/2007 12:02:22 PM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: kjo
We have to get real.

OK.

I'm real.

You don't want Hillary in. Who would you NOT vote for against Hillary?

There are quite a few people who will not vote for Rudy, either, as a matter of concience.

For me there is no difference, either would openly use my tax money to finance abortions making me have to choose between prison for not paying taxes or being an accessory to murder.

I won't vote for either one of them in the general.

Now, maybe some folks should get real enough to consider this and seriously consider a candidate we can all vote for.

127 posted on 10/28/2007 12:09:09 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
That image and others like it are one of the reasons Rudy won't win.

That just won't fly in flyover country.

Though it will get lots of airtime next October, and maybe even be explained, the bulk of the tube watching population won't care why.

The image will haunt them all the way to the voting booth.

I can't see how voting for a former mayor who put the city's emergency response center in one of the buildings in a complex which had already been targeted by terrorists is a good idea for America, and that dies not even touch on the issues.

128 posted on 10/28/2007 12:21:49 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"I'd rather die a clean, quick death (Hillary) than a slow-agonizing one (Rudy)"

So put a gun to your head or take poison, just don't take me and the rest of the country along with you.

129 posted on 10/28/2007 12:21:58 PM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock

I hope you’ll be happy with President Hillary. When you have to fork over more than half your pay for her Socialist programs, please do not complain.


130 posted on 10/28/2007 12:25:21 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert (imwithfred.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV; Extremely Extreme Extremist

I liken voting between Rion Rudy and Hitlary as choice between a kick in the crotch and a punch in the teeth. I will vote for neither.


131 posted on 10/28/2007 12:26:19 PM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
Bush-era conservatism.

There's the problem--the adjective, "Bush-era" is the same as "compassionate", i.e., NOT.

132 posted on 10/28/2007 12:26:54 PM PDT by jammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert

No I will not be, but I would equally not be happy with what would happen under Rino Rudy. So I see no difference.


133 posted on 10/28/2007 12:27:29 PM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

“the favorite to win the Republican presidential nomination is a confirmed right-winger.”

OH BULL-SHIITE!


134 posted on 10/28/2007 12:28:28 PM PDT by Grunthor (Christmas is a time when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kjo

“Look...would you rather have the Clintons back for eight years?”

Careful with that argument, it’s an antique. Rudy is NOT the only one running with and R after his name you know.

Just the most liberal one.


135 posted on 10/28/2007 12:30:35 PM PDT by Grunthor (Christmas is a time when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock
As a Republican a no vote is a vote for Hitlary. The sharpest knife in the draw you ain’t.
136 posted on 10/28/2007 12:33:39 PM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: sport

The RNC and NRSC were too busy spending millions in Rhode Island smearing Steve Laffey to ensure the re-election of Linc Chafee...Hmmmm


137 posted on 10/28/2007 12:34:40 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert (imwithfred.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV
As things stand with the party never insult me and call me a republican. I am a conservative independent. And give a choice between a liberal republican, a liberal democrat, and a libertarian who is fairly socially conservative. I will for the libertarian.
138 posted on 10/28/2007 12:36:50 PM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Eagles Talon IV

“I refuse to believe anyone would endanger their lives and the lives of their own families just to make a political point”

You are concerned over the things of this world. We who refuse to vote pro-abortion based on our relligious beliefs are concerned with the Word of God and the afterlife.

That is FAR more important than ANYTHING that could possibly happen in this world.


139 posted on 10/28/2007 12:38:53 PM PDT by Grunthor (Christmas is a time when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jalisco555
Then be prepared to hear the words "President Hillary Clinton" every day for eight long, long years.,/i>

Well, the good thing about having Hitlery as president is that we'll reach CW-2 much sooner. This country's on it's way down the tubes. The sooner it happens, the better chance an armed populace will still exist.

140 posted on 10/28/2007 12:40:11 PM PDT by meyer (Illegal Immigration - The profits are privatized, the costs are socialized.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

Are you honestly going to make a case that Bush or Rudy are better conservatives than Reagan?


141 posted on 10/28/2007 12:41:29 PM PDT by Grunthor (Christmas is a time when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: The Old Hoosier

“Bush-era conservatism” — kind of an oxymoron, isn’t it?”

Some kind of moron, anyway.


142 posted on 10/28/2007 12:41:59 PM PDT by Grunthor (Christmas is a time when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor; The Old Hoosier

Jorge is not a conserative, he is a rockefeller republican.


143 posted on 10/28/2007 12:48:56 PM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell

Great post, if this was stated by Fred, Duncan or Tancredo at the next debate, I’d be standing and applauding!


144 posted on 10/28/2007 12:51:35 PM PDT by Grunthor (Christmas is a time when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock

“Jorge is not a conserative, he is a rockefeller republican.”

RNC = Republican, Not Conservative.


145 posted on 10/28/2007 1:04:20 PM PDT by Grunthor (Christmas is a time when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor

Sums it up nicely.


146 posted on 10/28/2007 1:05:22 PM PDT by Hydroshock ("The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." - Sam Ervin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Flintlock
Joe will stay home, or go fishing. He just WILL NOT hold his nose to vote for somebody. Trust me.

You got real. Give Rudy the nomination, and after one flash of Rudy in a dress (likely to be the most used MSM image after September 1, '08), and the average guy in flyover country will be somewhere besides the polls on election day.

It is a pity so many Republicans feel the need to compete with the Democrats for the Democrat base, but that seems to be what is happening.

In the meantime, conservatives are expected to wish in one hand and watch the other fill up.

147 posted on 10/28/2007 1:05:23 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Hydroshock

They’re just labels and you’re suicidal.


148 posted on 10/28/2007 1:06:29 PM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: jonathanmo; Sadecki

Just as I suspected. You all have no clue what you are talking about, relying on text-proofed media accounts for your opinions.

The Liberal Party sided with Giuliani in 1989. Sadecki, that they sided with a vast underdog in 1989 devestates your theory that they did so to gain access to the winner, doesn’t it?

When else did they go against Democrats? True, they opposed Koch in 1977. BECAUSE HE WAS TOO CONSERVATIVE. They sided with Mario Cuomo, instead. Sound like a conservative choice to you? Then there was 1969, when they backed John Lindsay, whom I’m sure jonathanmo’s source counts as supporting the Republican. Lindsay was booted out of the Republican Party, which prefered the DEMOCRAT to him, because he was FURTHER TO THE LEFT THAN THE DEMOCRATS.

In fact, the Liberal Party was so angry at Koch for being too moderate, they consistently endorsed his opponents.

Against Koch (who supported Bush), for Lindsay (who criticized even Johnson for being too conservative), for Giuliani... Not exactly a pattern of moderation.


149 posted on 10/28/2007 1:08:27 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor
"We who refuse to vote pro-abortion based on our relligious beliefs are concerned with the Word of God and the afterlife.

That is FAR more important than ANYTHING that could possibly happen in this world."

So in the name of your God you are willing to get all of us killed? You are no different then the crazed savage ragheads.

150 posted on 10/28/2007 1:11:15 PM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-198 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson