1
   

Religious Right gives Rudy the nod

 
 
Reply Wed 7 Nov, 2007 03:59 pm
have you been on the fence about Rudy for his morals? Rest easy

FOXNews.com - Pat Robertson Endorses Rudy Giuliani For President - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,057 • Replies: 19
No top replies

 
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Nov, 2007 06:24 pm
@Silverchild79,
ooohhhh..... I feel so much better knowing that pat robertson supports another old white guy! (sarcasm)
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Nov, 2007 06:32 pm
@Silverchild79,
haha

it's newsworthy because Rudy's main criticism within the GOP is that he isn't palatable to the religious right
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Nov, 2007 06:48 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;44627 wrote:
haha

it's newsworthy because Rudy's main criticism within the GOP is that he isn't palatable to the religious right


yet another reason we can't trust Rudy....
0 Replies
 
lancesorbenson
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 03:20 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;44627 wrote:
haha

it's newsworthy because Rudy's main criticism within the GOP is that he isn't palatable to the religious right


He's not palatable. Robertson has been off his rocker for years and any credibility he had went down the tubes when he endorsed a cross-dressing, anti-gun, pro-abortion adulterer for president.

http://blogs.nypost.com/movies/rudy.jpg

Oh yeah. Rest easy you social conservatives. Pat Robertson says Rudy is OK. Go back to sleep.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 03:25 pm
@Silverchild79,
I love how you guys try and take Rudy's SNL appearance and use it as a smear campaign. Give it up, nobody cares he was on SNL. It has nothing to do with his legitimacy as a candidate.

What's next? Are you gonna oppose tech developments in Califonia because Arnold played a Terminator?
0 Replies
 
klyph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 04:39 pm
@Silverchild79,
Doesn't matter if Santa Claus and the pope endorse him, his stance on conservative issues will be his undoing, and if he gets the republican nomination, he will fail to recieve enough votes to beat the democratic candidate. The republican base is still mostly entrenched in true conservatives and the religious sect, whom, contrary to popular belief, don't ask Pat Robertson who to vote for. The title of your thread is false because While pat may endorse him, the religious right does not.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 04:46 pm
@Silverchild79,
and whatabout the ever growing young republicans movement of hawkish pro choicers who don't like takes of socialism?
klyph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 04:48 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;44951 wrote:
and whatabout the ever growing young republicans movement of hawkish pro choicers who don't like takes of socialism?


takes of socialism? If you're implying that they don't like socialism, why in the hell would they vote for the most liberal "republican" walking the earth. And while they may be "ever growing" they are neither the majority nor the base. Who shows the strongest at the polls? Old people.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 04:54 pm
@Silverchild79,
because he's tough on crime, cuts taxes & is financialy responsible and that's proven from his days running the 17th largest economy in the world. He was able to cut crime and debt. And he does it without lambasting America with morality which should be more a personal issue then a matter of polictial policy. Maybe if our Republican candidates weren't so interested in who we want to marry or abortion we wouldn't have a failing ecnonomy. Bush is more interested in keeping the social stigma up on abortion and homosexuality then he is the value of the dollar.

Rudy isn't socialist, that's ignorantly false

0 Replies
 
klyph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 05:05 pm
@Silverchild79,
Quote:
Update: Embarrassing. You’re going to put out an ad on one of the two or three hottest domestic issues of the campaign and have your numbers be off by 30%? I fact-checked this stuff in five minutes of googling. The Democrats will have a field day with it.
[T]he data Giuliani cites comes from a single study published eight years ago by a not-for-profit group, and is contradicted by official data from the British government.
According to the United Kingdom’s Office for National Statistics, for men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1999 and 2003, the “five-year survival rate” — a common measurement in cancer statistics — was 74.4 percent.


Did you read the whole article including the update? It's more proof that Rudy will lie cheat and steal to achieve his own agenda. More deception and bullshit. We need someone with integrity, not a master of propaganda and smear-campaigning.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 05:13 pm
@Silverchild79,
blah, all politicans spin numbers and misrepresent things

Ron Paul says we can dismantle the CIA and FBI and be perfectly safe from terror, that's a FAR worse lie

but you're still wrong, Rudy isn't a socalist and that quote proves it
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 05:17 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;44957 wrote:
blah, all politicans spin numbers and misrepresent things

Ron Paul says we can dismantle the CIA and FBI and be perfectly safe from terror, that's a FAR worse lie

but you're still wrong, Rudy isn't a socalist and that quote proves it


Ron Paul does not believe in dismantling the FBI, he believes in returning it to its originally intended purpose of federal law enforcement, not domestic spying. FBI is not the FSB.

He DOES want the CIA gone because of all of the trouble they've gotten us into over the years they've existed. Iran, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, they meddled in all of these countries and all three have come back to bite us in the ass. We have the NSA, which is responsible for well over 70% of the country's intel gathering, and has yet to **** us over anywhere CLOSE to the level of the CIA. Why two agencies? I thought conservatives were AGAINST government waste?
0 Replies
 
klyph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 05:23 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;44957 wrote:
blah, all politicans spin numbers and misrepresent things

Ron Paul says we can dismantle the CIA and FBI and be perfectly safe from terror, that's a FAR worse lie

I'm curious to know which brand of crystal ball you purchased, mine lacks the clairvoyance yours seems to possess.
Quote:

but you're still wrong, Rudy isn't a socalist and that quote proves it


BottleOfBlog: Comrade Rudy Thanks God For Socialized Medicine...And Socialized Housing...And Socialized--Well, Rudy Loves Socialism!
Quote:
…Giuliani was serving as mayor and participating in a city of New York health plan when his doctor informed him that his prostate biopsy had come up positive. The coverage he enjoyed -- which resembles the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan -- permits all city employees, from trash haulers and subway clerks up to the mayor himself, to select from a variety of insurance providers, and it is not much different from the reform proposals adopted by his nemesis Hillary Clinton…

In the spring of 2000, when Giuliani learned that he had cancer and abruptly dropped out of the Senate race against Sen. Clinton, he was enrolled as a member of GHI, one of the two gigantic HMO groups that provide care for most city workers (the other is known as HIP). He underwent surgery and radiation at Mount Sinai Hospital, a prestigious institution that participates in the GHI plan, which means that his costs were largely underwritten by city taxpayers.

So does that qualify as "socialized medicine"?

At GHI and HIP, the city government pays the premiums for its hundreds of thousands of enrolled members, of course…


Rudy won't support a socialist structure that doesn't benefit him directly. However, he more than happily used tax dollars to pay HIS medical bills.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 05:28 pm
@Silverchild79,
so Rudy was in an HMO and therefore he advocates a NHC? apperently your crystal ball sees far better then mine

speaking of my crystal ball, I don't need it to know that striking down the FBI and CIA will levae us vunerable to attack. You're doing it wrong. Try using your common sense!
klyph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 05:32 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;44961 wrote:
so Rudy was in an HMO and therefore he advocates a NHC? apperently your crystal ball sees far better then mine

speaking of my crystal ball, I don't need it to know that striking down the FBI and CIA will levae us vunerable to attack. You're doing it wrong. Try using your common sense!


When has Ron Paul ever advocated the "striking down" of the FBI and CIA? You're almost as good at political spin as Rudy!

My point about him being enrolled in a publicly funded HMO, then criticising public health care was that he was being hypocritical. Nothing more.
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 05:46 pm
@klyph,
klyph;44963 wrote:
When has Ron Paul ever advocated the "striking down" of the FBI and CIA? You're almost as good at political spin as Rudy!


it's common knowlege he's said this and when asked about it he doesn't even deny it. Observe

YouTube - Congressman Ron Paul at the Fourth GOP Presidential Debate

he hasn't said anything about it recently because it would be campaign suicide
0 Replies
 
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 06:05 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;44961 wrote:
so Rudy was in an HMO and therefore he advocates a NHC? apperently your crystal ball sees far better then mine

speaking of my crystal ball, I don't need it to know that striking down the FBI and CIA will levae us vunerable to attack. You're doing it wrong. Try using your common sense!


Funny, we had the CIA and FBI when terrorists attacked us in Lebanon, Kenya, Tanzania, New York City #1, Yemen, Oklahoma City, New York #2, and those neat anthrax letters a few years back. They don't seem to do their jobs very well.

However, if you look at the pre-WW2 years, back before we started pissing off Muslims, we didn't have this hysteria about terrorism......why? Could it be that OUR POLICIES are creating the terrorist problem, and that no amount of percieved security can possibly protect us from this type of tactic? The 9/11 Commission Report seemed to agree with the former portion, and I submit that the FBI can't do a goddamned thing to stop terrorism in this country. For an example, Google "Timothy McVeigh".
0 Replies
 
klyph
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 06:16 pm
@Silverchild79,
All I see is him making a good point about how incapable these agencies have been. If it's broke it needs fixing, but when it becomes so self engorged and useless that it costs billions to achieve nothing, it needs to be replaced.

Personally, I don't have any interest in the government protecting me. I would rather die from a terrorist attack with my civil liberties intact then to live my whole life in fear of a terrorist attack that may or may not take place. Freedom is earned through years of death, struggle and turmoil, it is easily lost and very hard to get back. I'll keep what I have left and kindly ask you to not take any more.
0 Replies
 
xj0hnx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Nov, 2007 07:53 pm
@Silverchild79,
Pat Robertson backing Julianna in about as useful to him as Alex Jones supporting Ron Paul. Robertson is a fringe christian extremist that even other evangelist shy away from because he is, in a word, insane.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Religious Right gives Rudy the nod
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 04:15:28