Rudy Giuliani is done

sam w wrote:

how did we get to the point in this country where everyone expects the govt to pay for everything for them?

What is your solution then? A poor 14 year old black girl was raped by her dad's friend and became pregnant. She wants an abortion (her legal right) but cannot afford it.

What would you propose?

right on the money wrote:

What would you propose?

I would propose a subjective process.

Pregnancy as a result of rape almost never happens, and that is a statistical, empirical datum. But I know, let's not look at facts, let's just deal with emotions, that way we can keep people screaming at each other.

........... wrote:

Not only are you ignorant, you are full of shit.

I am neither. I simply feel that I should only vote for a candidate who truly represents my viewpoint and who I feel is intelligent, honest, and well informed.

My time and effort is better spent volunteering in grassroots organizations that serve to better my community.

[quote]sam w wrote:

i have a constitutional right to travel. will the government be paying for my airline tics if i cant afford it? i also want to take a cruise.

[quote]

A *constitutional* right to travel? No.

Erhm wrote:

[quote]sam w wrote:

i have a constitutional right to travel. will the government be paying for my airline tics if i cant afford it? i also want to take a cruise.

[quote]

A *constitutional* right to travel? No.

actually you do have a constitutional right to travel.

the constitutional right to travel was the basis for striking down wisconsin's 2 tier welfare program. for a time wisconsin had better welfare benefits than illinois and so wisconsin saw an influx of illinois residents to get benefits. to stop this, wisconsin enacted a 2 tier system of benefits based on how long you have lived in the state.

a federal judge struck this down as an unconstitutional violation of a person's right to "travel."

Rudy will win wrote:

Folks, Rudy is the next President. He is ahead of Hillary by almost 20 points in some polls.

And which polls would these be?

Rudy will win wrote: I personally would like Liberman to run, but that is not going to happen since many consider him a man without a party. [...] Mormon are considered outside the mainstream of Christainity.

Um, you realize that Lieberman is also considered "outside the mainstream of Christianity" right?

But yeah, the reason I wouldn't be too eager to vote for him has nothing to do with that, but rather because of political ideals.

Erhm wrote:

[quote]sam w wrote:

i have a constitutional right to travel. will the government be paying for my airline tics if i cant afford it? i also want to take a cruise.

[quote]

A *constitutional* right to travel? No.

Yes there is.

In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It [travel] is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized."

In Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it [travel]is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."

Think about it, if there was no such right the government could issue an order stopping you from going on vacation, or prohibiting you from leaving your state.

I said this before and I'll say it again. Fred Thompson will be the Republican nominee. Rudy, McCain and the rest are just wasting time.

Rudy will win wrote:

Folks, Rudy is the next President. He is ahead of Hillary by almost 20 points in some polls. What Rudy is a Northeastern liberal Republican. On social issue he is liberal and on fiscal and foreign policy matters he is probably like Bush.

McCain is simply too old.

A peak at the 2008 Elections.

Rudy and McCain

VS

Hillary and Obama

First off, Rudy WON'T be the next president. He won't even get the Republican nomination. He is falling in the polls, and as his stances on the big Repub issues ( abortion, gay rights, and gun control), his personal life ( multiple divorces, marrying his 2nd cousin, etc) and his support of the criminal Bernie Kerick (basically showing everyone the type of people he would put in HIS cabinet) become better know to your average Republican voter, he will drop like a rock.

And you like a guy who is "on fiscal and foreign policy matters.. probably like Bush" ??? HA HA HA. The man whose presidency has seen a huge surplus turn into a huge deficit, the man who has led a nation where discretionary spending has risen way over "liberal" Bill Clinton's administration, is your fiscal role model?? And the man who has gotten us into the biggest foreign policy fiasco since 'Nam is your foreign policy role model? God save us if Rudy is like Bush fiscally and foreign policy-wise and becomes president.

McCain's problem is not really his age. He pissed off the Republican base too long to win many of them back, and his recent flip-flopping on several issues has pissed off moderate Dems. By trying to be in the middle, he has lost BOTH sides. The true centrists might go for him, but as you pointed out Rudy is actually more centrist if you look at his overall positions. McCain deserves more from the Repub base, but he ain't getting it so far.

The Repub nomination is wide open for any true conservative. As others said, Fred Thompson or someone like him has a big chance if he can drum up some noise/get in the limelight.

I think Obama will win the Dem side. He just raised 25 mil. That's big-time. Many dems don't think Hillary can win the general election, so they will not vote for her.

Obama vs...... (not Rudy in my opinion) ??

sam w wrote:

Erhm wrote:

[quote]sam w wrote:

i have a constitutional right to travel. will the government be paying for my airline tics if i cant afford it? i also want to take a cruise.

[quote]

A *constitutional* right to travel? No.

actually you do have a constitutional right to travel.

the constitutional right to travel was the basis for striking down wisconsin's 2 tier welfare program. for a time wisconsin had better welfare benefits than illinois and so wisconsin saw an influx of illinois residents to get benefits. to stop this, wisconsin enacted a 2 tier system of benefits based on how long you have lived in the state.

a federal judge struck this down as an unconstitutional violation of a person's right to "travel."

Point taken. But the government (FEMA) did pay to relocate Katrina victims. And there are (rare) cases when, say, Medicare will pay for transportation to facilities for certain medical procedures.

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

McCain's problem is not really his age. He pissed off the Republican base too long to win many of them back, and his recent flip-flopping on several issues has pissed off moderate Dems. By trying to be in the middle, he has lost BOTH sides. The true centrists might go for him, but as you pointed out Rudy is actually more centrist if you look at his overall positions. McCain deserves more from the Repub base, but he ain't getting it so far.

The Repub nomination is wide open for any true conservative. As others said, Fred Thompson or someone like him has a big chance if he can drum up some noise/get in the limelight.

the people who vote in primaries tend to more likely be the "true believers" which often puts them on the outer ends of their respective parties. i think it was an old nixon quote "run to the right in the primaries and to the center in the general election" or words to that effect.

mccain's problems are that he has repeatedly insulted and alienated the social conservatives. he made it a point to run AGAINST that wing of the party when he ran for president last time and many of us have not forgotten. in the michigan primary in particular, he pandered for votes by attacking the social conservatives. something which has never been forgotten by many of us. that might have been a good idea to get democrats to vote for him, but he seemed to forget he was running in a republican primary.

the votes he gets are from liberal republicans and those that see him as "electable" and so vote for him in spite of his flaws.

the true believer republicans, who get out and vote and do the leg work will never get excited about him. they will not see him as much different from the democrat, so why get excited for him?

in the end the same is true about rudy.

i dont buy the argument some have made that evangelicals will not vote for a mormon. i agree they will not see the moron as a christian, but given the choice b/t a pro-choice liberal democrat and a conservative mormon they will vote for the mormon.

none of the repub runners have excited the party. if no one else gets in a mccain or rudy could win by default.

i do think a fred thompson would shake things up a lot.

i hope he runs.

idiots... wrote:

whats that. wrote:

as for the abortion issue...... don't go stickin your dick in places if youre not prepared for the outcome. revearsely, don't go lettin people stick their dick in you if you're not prepared for the outcome. its as simple as that. RESPONSIBILITY.

Rape?

dumb f***. ofcourse a woman can get her box vacuumed if she got raped. as for someone who is irresponsible, i say face the consequences or do it like they did in the olden days- fill your dress up with rocks and walk into a pond.

I dream about a Obama vs Giuliani showdown. Giuliani's "northeasterness" will take him down if he goes up against Obama.

Alan

Rudy will win wrote:

Romney’s is a devout Mormon so that pretty much puts him out of the picture. Mormon are considered outside the mainstream of Christainity. Some even consider them a little nuts.

Please don't judge all Mormons by Harry Reid.

Or everyone would consider us a little nuts.

You could make a argument that every Republican candidate is "done"...the top three have all flip-flopped far worse than John Kerry ever did. And yet...there will be a Republican nominee in 2008. Yes, I predict SOMEONE will be nominated by the GOP. So while they all have various degrees of "doneness," one of them is obviously not totally done. And please don't counter with "Fred Thompson" as an argument. Nice imposing big gruff guy, but check his positions on issues.

personal responsibility? how responsible is it to make a girl have a child that she doesn't want? i'm sure that kid will be REALLY well adjusted, what with a mom that resents its existence and all...

put another way- no matter how stupid of a decision led to a girl breaking her arm, we don't leave her arm broken so it's disfigured/disabled for the rest of her life. we set it and put it in a cast. likewise, we shouldn't punish mother- and baby-to-be for a mistake like having sex.

"but oh oh human life is SACRED! a baby isn't the same as a broken arm!"

i don't know anyone who thinks late-term abortion is okay, but in the first trimester, IT'S NOT A BABY! a baby is a human, and a 12-week-embryo is not human.

if labor is induced and the baby isn't born alive, it was never alive to begin with; having never survived, or been able to survive, on its own, it is not "alive." otherwise, you could call tumors "alive." would you REALLY call a clump of 8 cells a human? how about a tadpole-looking thing with a nerve bundle but no brain? simply put: it's not human til it's a human.

no pre-viable embryo is "sacred" to anything but religion, and religion has no place in lawmaking. therefore, the LAW allows abortion. speaking of the law: more important to the law than your beloved "personal responsibility" is PERSONAL FREEDOM! if someone else wants to have an abortion of a pre-viable embryo, it is no business of yours. that you try to MAKE it your business is wrong. mind your own business. on that same topic, let the gays marry. if churches don't want to recognize their marriages, fine, but the state should.

Jed Babbin wrote:

Erhm wrote:

[quote]sam w wrote:

i have a constitutional right to travel. will the government be paying for my airline tics if i cant afford it? i also want to take a cruise.

[quote]

A *constitutional* right to travel? No.

Yes there is.

In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It [travel] is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized."

In Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it [travel]is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."

Think about it, if there was no such right the government could issue an order stopping you from going on vacation, or prohibiting you from leaving your state.

Actually, the government CAN issue an order stopping you from going on vacation or prohibiting you from leaving your state. In some cases so can private companies. it happened during 9/11, it also happens when there's disease outbreaks.