T Nation

Yay Rudy!

It’s now official. Rudy is Pro-Choice, Pro-Civil Unions and Pro-Gun Control.

What say ye, conservative friends? Is he still your best candidate? Will you still support him? Do these issues really matter at all?

In my book, this is certainly a plus. If it comes down to him or Hilary, I may just have to suck in my gut and vote GOP in 2008. I’ll keep following him, as he sees to be the only candidate with traits I like that has any sort of shot (Ron Paul and Mike Gravel don’t seem to be getting off the ground).

[quote]Beowolf wrote:

What say ye, conservative friends?
[/quote]

He isn’t Hillary.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:

It’s now official. Rudy is Pro-Choice, Pro-Civil Unions and Pro-Gun Control.

What say ye, conservative friends? Is he still your best candidate? Will you still support him? Do these issues really matter at all?

In my book, this is certainly a plus. If it comes down to him or Hilary, I may just have to suck in my gut and vote GOP in 2008. I’ll keep following him, as he sees to be the only candidate with traits I like that has any sort of shot (Ron Paul and Mike Gravel don’t seem to be getting off the ground).

[/quote]

Bewolf,

This is why we on the Right take you seriously. We believe you would look seriously at Rudy.

However, there are a slew of blowhards who would vote for a corpse as long as it was wearing a d on it’s tie.

Even though this guy is clearly more of a moderate. I remember dems crying bloody murder about the lack of moderates in the Republican party.

Here he is.

This guy is going to have cross over appeal.

It’s something that’s been lacking in large numbers since Reagan.

JeffR

[quote]doogie wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

What say ye, conservative friends?

He isn’t Hillary.[/quote]

No. He just looks like her.

Giuliani as our next president? Are you out of your fucking minds!

For all the criticism I’ve heard about liberals on here, I’ve yet to see one dressed in drag – and on a regular basis I might add. Come to think of it, I think I’ve seen Giuliani in a dress more times than Hillary.

“Liberal bashing conservatives” agree on a thrice divorced, corrupt, adulterous drag queen as their best likely candidate for president.

Correction, he’s been selected for you…
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerPage.jhtml


Ron Paul 2008
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Media Elites Struggle to Keep Ron Paul Under Wraps
http://www.jbs.org/node/3836

Congressman Ron Paul now has the most YouTube subscribers among the Republican candidates for president. During the last 24 hours, Congressman Paul passed Mitt Romney to take the #1 spot.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
http://www.americablog.com/2007/05/rudy-comes-out-says-that-yes-he-is-pro.html

It’s now official. Rudy is Pro-Choice, Pro-Civil Unions and Pro-Gun Control.
[/quote]
For the past couple of decades, the National GOP’s position on social issues has been “make the Handbasket move more slowly”. I wonder if that is about to change.

[quote]doogie wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

What say ye, conservative friends?

He isn’t Hillary.[/quote]

This might be a dilemma if I lived in a battleground state.

But since I live in Massachusetts where the Democratic candidate will get all the electoral votes anyway, I would most probably cast a write-in vote for a social conservative.

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
doogie wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

What say ye, conservative friends?

He isn’t Hillary.

No. He just looks like her.

Giuliani as our next president? Are you out of your fucking minds!

For all the criticism I’ve heard about liberals on here, I’ve yet to see one dressed in drag – and on a regular basis I might add. Come to think of it, I think I’ve seen Giuliani in a dress more times than Hillary.

“Liberal bashing conservatives” agree on a thrice divorced, corrupt, adulterous drag queen as their best likely candidate for president.

Correction, he’s been selected for you…
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerPage.jhtml


Ron Paul 2008
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Media Elites Struggle to Keep Ron Paul Under Wraps
http://www.jbs.org/node/3836

Congressman Ron Paul now has the most YouTube subscribers among the Republican candidates for president. During the last 24 hours, Congressman Paul passed Mitt Romney to take the #1 spot.


[/quote]

He has great legs for a man his age :wink:

It’s the gun control issue that is the major problem for me.

At the same time, presidents don’t write legislation.

[quote]JeffR wrote:

However, there are a slew of blowhards who would vote for a corpse as long as it was wearing a d on it’s tie.

[/quote]
What about you blowhards who only support someone wearing an “R” on their tie? I see no difference.

This election cycle is already going in the trash.

Didn’t the last seven years teach you guys anything about politicians who talk tough with nothing to back it up?

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
JeffR wrote:

However, there are a slew of blowhards who would vote for a corpse as long as it was wearing a d on it’s tie.

What about you blowhards who only support someone wearing an “R” on their tie? I see no difference.

This election cycle is already going in the trash.
[/quote]

Good old liftus.

I support Joe Lieberman and Richardson.

You think bradley or petey support an equal number of Republicans?

JeffR

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Didn’t the last seven years teach you guys anything about politicians who talk tough with nothing to back it up?[/quote]

Yep. They get elected.

[quote]doogie wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

What say ye, conservative friends?

He isn’t Hillary.[/quote]

Yup, he’s not Hillary and he won’t get my vote anyway. Of all the liberal things I am for I am vehemently against two out of the three he’s for. The other I just don’t give a fuck about.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
JeffR wrote:

However, there are a slew of blowhards who would vote for a corpse as long as it was wearing a d on it’s tie.

What about you blowhards who only support someone wearing an “R” on their tie? I see no difference.

This election cycle is already going in the trash.

Good old liftus.

I support Joe Lieberman and Richardson.

You think bradley or petey support an equal number of Republicans?

JeffR

[/quote]

The point is, JeffR, that a MAJORITY of Americans, on either side, will just vote down the line of their party, which is whatever party they’re parents were.

Most people are so uninformed they really don’t make a choice, so much as they succumb to parental teachings. If you really think that most of the South votes GOP because they believe it to be in their better interest, your kidding yourself.

They do it because their parents and their grandparents are bitter over the Civil Rights movement. Just like in Massachusetts, where liberalism is pretty much crammed down your throat by the hippy college atmosphere.

Most people don’t discuss issues, or even seriously consider candidates, they just vote down party lines.

I consider myself quite independent from my parents, thankfully, who are both much more liberal than I. My mother votes Democratic out of conscience (help the poor, ect…) and my dad is much more concerned with environmental issues than I am, and votes Dem because of it.

While I was certainly influenced by them, I’d like to think I’m different in my thinking (ala my support of Ron Paul and Mike Gravel, and my considering of Rudy).

[quote]gdol wrote:
Didn’t the last seven years teach you guys anything about politicians who talk tough with nothing to back it up?[/quote]

gdol,

Please explain yourself.

I think cleaning up New York and what he did after 9/11 is pretty damn “tough” work.

Further, being at odds with all the other candidates and many primary voters is “tough.”

Rudy is plenty “tough” enough, especially, in comparison to the democratic candidates.

JeffR

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
JeffR wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
JeffR wrote:

However, there are a slew of blowhards who would vote for a corpse as long as it was wearing a d on it’s tie.

What about you blowhards who only support someone wearing an “R” on their tie? I see no difference.

This election cycle is already going in the trash.

Good old liftus.

I support Joe Lieberman and Richardson.

You think bradley or petey support an equal number of Republicans?

JeffR

The point is, JeffR, that a MAJORITY of Americans, on either side, will just vote down the line of their party, which is whatever party they’re parents were.

Most people are so uninformed they really don’t make a choice, so much as they succumb to parental teachings. If you really think that most of the South votes GOP because they believe it to be in their better interest, your kidding yourself.

They do it because their parents and their grandparents are bitter over the Civil Rights movement. Just like in Massachusetts, where liberalism is pretty much crammed down your throat by the hippy college atmosphere.

Most people don’t discuss issues, or even seriously consider candidates, they just vote down party lines.

I consider myself quite independent from my parents, thankfully, who are both much more liberal than I. My mother votes Democratic out of conscience (help the poor, ect…) and my dad is much more concerned with environmental issues than I am, and votes Dem because of it.

While I was certainly influenced by them, I’d like to think I’m different in my thinking (ala my support of Ron Paul and Mike Gravel, and my considering of Rudy).
[/quote]

Great post.

I’m not arguing with any of it.

You aren’t the problem. Unfortunately, you also don’t make many headlines.

If more people were like you, there would be less rancor and more results.

This is one of things that is so appealing about Rudy. He has cross-over appeal.

He’s certainly different than the other candidates.

I’m pretty excited.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
gdol wrote:
Didn’t the last seven years teach you guys anything about politicians who talk tough with nothing to back it up?

gdol,

Please explain yourself.

I think cleaning up New York and what he did after 9/11 is pretty damn “tough” work.

Further, being at odds with all the other candidates and many primary voters is “tough.”

Rudy is plenty “tough” enough, especially, in comparison to the democratic candidates.

JeffR
[/quote]

I think the allusion to Bush was clear enough, a guy who used his father’s connections to get into the Air National Guard during Vietnam because, as he told a crowd in 1994, “I didn’t want to go to Canada,” then portrays himself as a warrior, with publicity stunts like the “Mission Accomplished” landing and “bring 'em on.”

As for Rudy, another guy who avoided Vietnam with student deferments and then an employer’s letter, while McCain was enduring the Hanoi Hilton and Chuck Hagel was a decorated sergeant BEFORE going off to college.

Then he somehow becomes “America’s Mayor,” which is basically just saying he looked good on TV and talked a good game in the dark months after September 11. Meanwhile, he set up his command post for terrorism in the World Trade Center, which had previously been a terrorist target. You can find basic details of this on his Wikipedia page.

Some firefighters also blame his decisions on communications equpiment for causing needless deaths on 9/11, which may have been tied to patronage issues.

As for cleaning up New York, I’d certainly give him credit for changing the tone and rescuing the city from the permissive atmosphere that many of its elites had given birth to. But community policing and the “broken windows theory” that accompished so much in New York pre-date Rudy by a long time. Rudy also pushed Bratton, his successful Police Commissioner, out of office because he was getting too much of the limelight.

As for tough talk, great, he can’t run away from his record on abortion, gays and gun control. But when tough talk and accountability was really needed, when it became apparent in 2004 that the war in Iraq, the “central front in the war on terror,” was being egregiously mismanaged, Rudy offered only the most tepid protests against how badly the Bush administration was bungling its central challenge. Some tough guy.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
But when tough talk and accountability was really needed, when it became apparent in 2004 that the war in Iraq, the “central front in the war on terror,” was being egregiously mismanaged, Rudy offered only the most tepid protests against how badly the Bush administration was bungling its central challenge. Some tough guy.[/quote]

I agree completely with this statement. If I were to vote in any primary I would rule any candidate who supported the war.

Rudy, if he had cared at all about catching those responsible for attacking “his city” would have at least “asked” the administration not to lose focus. He was the one man who could have used his influence but didn’t.

He FAILED this country as far as I’m concerned.

[quote]gdol wrote:
JeffR wrote:
gdol wrote:
Didn’t the last seven years teach you guys anything about politicians who talk tough with nothing to back it up?

gdol,

Please explain yourself.

I think cleaning up New York and what he did after 9/11 is pretty damn “tough” work.

Further, being at odds with all the other candidates and many primary voters is “tough.”

Rudy is plenty “tough” enough, especially, in comparison to the democratic candidates.

JeffR

I think the allusion to Bush was clear enough, a guy who used his father’s connections to get into the Air National Guard during Vietnam because, as he told a crowd in 1994, “I didn’t want to go to Canada,” then portrays himself as a warrior, with publicity stunts like the “Mission Accomplished” landing and “bring 'em on.”

As for Rudy, another guy who avoided Vietnam with student deferments and then an employer’s letter, while McCain was enduring the Hanoi Hilton and Chuck Hagel was a decorated sergeant BEFORE going off to college.

Then he somehow becomes “America’s Mayor,” which is basically just saying he looked good on TV and talked a good game in the dark months after September 11. Meanwhile, he set up his command post for terrorism in the World Trade Center, which had previously been a terrorist target. You can find basic details of this on his Wikipedia page.

Some firefighters also blame his decisions on communications equpiment for causing needless deaths on 9/11, which may have been tied to patronage issues.

As for cleaning up New York, I’d certainly give him credit for changing the tone and rescuing the city from the permissive atmosphere that many of its elites had given birth to. But community policing and the “broken windows theory” that accompished so much in New York pre-date Rudy by a long time. Rudy also pushed Bratton, his successful Police Commissioner, out of office because he was getting too much of the limelight.

As for tough talk, great, he can’t run away from his record on abortion, gays and gun control. But when tough talk and accountability was really needed, when it became apparent in 2004 that the war in Iraq, the “central front in the war on terror,” was being egregiously mismanaged, Rudy offered only the most tepid protests against how badly the Bush administration was bungling its central challenge. Some tough guy.[/quote]

Hey, gdol.

Well, as usual, I couldn’t disagree with you more.

You usually are pretty good about reading linked material. Don’t fail me.

Here are some hard numbers:

www.nyc.gov/html/records/rwg/html/bio.html

These are huge improvements in New York’s overall health.

Further, you are certainly in the minority about post-911.

He was an inspiration and did exactly what George should have done after Katrina.

Now, if you want to minimize those accomplishments, go right ahead.

I know you’ll vote for some reject under the guise of “I’m a discontented Conservative.”

However, there are plenty of open minded individuals who are going to give a serious look at a guy who is tough minded and gets results.

If he can clean up New York and keep it afloat during one of it’s greatest crises, then he should be taken seriously.

He is eloquent and knowledgeable. Where George is weak on specifics, this guy is in command. Where George allows the dem press to dictate the agenda, this guy will use them as a mouthpiece for his initiatives.

If he can move the Republicans to broaden their base of support with his moderate stances, then he should be looked at.

I think the base will come along.

Besides, what alternative do they have?

hillary?

No chance.

I, for one, am weary of having to explain the President’s thinking.

I’m ready for President Giulani to do his own speaking.

JeffR

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
But when tough talk and accountability was really needed, when it became apparent in 2004 that the war in Iraq, the “central front in the war on terror,” was being egregiously mismanaged, Rudy offered only the most tepid protests against how badly the Bush administration was bungling its central challenge. Some tough guy.

I agree completely with this statement. If I were to vote in any primary I would rule any candidate who supported the war.

Rudy, if he had cared at all about catching those responsible for attacking “his city” would have at least “asked” the administration not to lose focus. He was the one man who could have used his influence but didn’t.

He FAILED this country as far as I’m concerned.[/quote]

Oh, rubbish. You have no idea what went on behind the scenes.

Further, you usually have no concept what goes on in the scene.

Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.

I certainly do.

Besides, if he stood up and screamed bloody murder publically, would Bush have been more likely to listen than having a private conversation?

One thing about George, he doesn’t bend to public pressure very easily.

As for you, let’s get serious. You and I both know you are going to write in some communist who thinks cuba is cool.

However, I’m pretty excited about Rudy. I’m not going to have to do any of his speaking. I’m not going to have to shepherd his message so that it isn’t trampled by the vultures (you).

I’m looking forward to it.

JeffR