Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Giuliani, the Pre-Ordained
A good friend of mine, knowing I had been out of the news cycle for a while, forwarded me a link to an article written by one of my favorite bloggers. I'm pretty sure his intent was to help convince me that voting for a liberal Republican is always better than voting for a liberal Democrat. What it has done, in turn, is given me a chance to think about my vote a little more intensely. The United States was at a crossroads in 2006, as it has been for many of the most recent elections. The Democrats clearly offered a retreatist strategy for the War on Terror, endless litigation for the Bush Administration, a very liberal agenda socially, and higher taxes economically. Sean Hannity frequently asserts they did not run on this agenda however anyone paying attention to politics understood what their intent was. America voted for defeat in Iraq, higher taxes, and liberalism in 2006. The choices were very clear, and several excellent lawmakers were voted out in favor of scrubs with obviously inferior qualifications, due to the frenzy and fake scandals built up by the media and the Democrats.

Despite the clear warnings to voters by reliable sources regarding the election of 2006, the Congress still swung to the other side. This would have been OK if the opposition party had qualified candidates willing to support our nation in a time of war, to defend us and our principles no matter the cost. The Republican party is heading in the same direction, with George W. Bush turning into an incredible disappointment in his second term. He's seeking a legacy no doubt, not unlike Bill Clinton in his second term, it's a lukewarm stream of policy nuance and a shun of the conservative base that elected him twice. I assure you if we vote for Rudy Giuliani to be the Republican nominee in 2008, he will be no better than a President Clinton regardless of what letter stands behind his name. Why must we choose between two liberals, or "be responsible" for a President Clinton? If anything, Giuliani and Clinton should split the vote, allowing a third party conservative candidate to win. I'm not naive enough to believe this would ever happen, but I'm also smart and principled enough to not vote for Giuliani because he danced in front of the cameras during some of America's darkest days.

I cannot vote for Giuliani, and I will not vote for John McCain. Good luck on nominating a qualified candidate this time Republicans. Before party line Republicans start declaring that I'm "throwing my vote away" or some other ridiculous drivel, understand that by voting for Rudy, you are in fact voting for an extreme leftist. Rudy Giuliani would be more qualified to run as a Democratic VP candidate than the Republican nominee.


Comments on "Giuliani, the Pre-Ordained"


Blogger Jim said ... (9:15 PM) : 

Mr. Giuliani is a liberal/moderate Republican, but to describe him as an extreme leftist is a bit over the top rhetorically. As I've stated before, he's not my first or even second choice for the nominiation. However, if he does manage to win the GOP nomination, then I will support him. The only role a president plays in regards to abortion is his ability to nominate Supreme Court justices and appointments to the Federal Judiciary. Both Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 were pro life, yet they each had judicial appointments who voted consistently to uphold existing abortion laws. Mr Giulaini has promised to nominate judges who are strict constructionsts, like Scalia, Alito and Roberts. I believe his positions on taxes, the war on terror, the war in Iraq, immigration, health care and a whole litany of other issues stand in sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton. In 1992 a signifigant percentage of conservatives voted for Perot because they were angry with President Bush for breaking his "no new taxes" pledge. The common refrain was "there's no real difference between the parties anyway, so I'm going to vote my conscience". Consequently, "the man from Hope" won the White House with a whopping 42% of the vote and gave all of those disaffected conservatives another and even larger tax increase. He also gave us "dont ask, don't tell". Attempted to nationalize health care. Nominated Ruth "by gawd" Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court. Refused to cut capital gains taxes. Vetoed a partial birth abortion ban. Responded ineffectually or not at all to terrorist attacks on citizens and property of the United States. Declined to take Osama Bin Laden into custody when he was offered to us by the Sudanese government, and last but not least, disgraced the office and presidency of the United States, leading to his impeachment. Keep these facts in mind if you decide to pull the lever for an unelectable 3rd party candidate. You can't always get everything you want in a candidate, but you can definitely get end up with everything you didn't want in a president.

Go Elder


Blogger Chucko said ... (2:28 PM) : 

You know Jimmy, I held my nose and voted for Ohio Republicans the last election and felt dirty for doing so. Still, the Democrats prevailed, but that's just the way it rolls sometimes.

Regarding Giuliani on judges.


Blogger Chucko said ... (2:31 PM) : 

Also, how do you justify "opposing abortion" but wanting it to remain legal? That position does not make any sense at all. Unless he has come up with a magical new reason for opposing it, other than for the murder that it is, the statement contradicts itself. Giuliani would get trounced in a race with Hilliary.


Blogger Jim said ... (9:11 PM) : 




post a comment

Go to the source!