Rudiani is a Republican now? What was he before? And, is this the same Rudiani that backed liberal democrats in positions of power in New York? And is this the same Rudiani that dressed in drag on national television?

Is this the conservative RINO’s want us to vote for? He sounds like a freak.

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12169

BKennedy on October 17, 2007 at 6:42 PM

As I said, I will vote for a conservative in the primary. Did I say which one?

ThackerAgency on October 17, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Have you ever thought that YOU might not be a Republican. If none of the Republican candidates represent you, maybe you are not a Republican. Maybe you are something else, maybe you’re a Republican in name only. Hey, that makes you a RINO!!!!

tommylotto on October 17, 2007 at 5:17 PM

Funny that you assume I am a ‘Republican’ anyway. How can I be a ‘Republican’ if I don’t have an R in front of my name? That’s the only designator, right?

I am a CONSERVATIVE. The Republicans USED TO BE conservative too so they WERE more attractive to me.

I’m not a RINO because I don’t pretend to be a REPUBLICAN, friend. That party left conservatives a long time ago. Larry Craig, Mike Foley are wonderful examples of ‘real Republicans’ these days.

Who needs conservatives anymore when you are ‘Republicans’?

Beyond that I don’t know what he is besides someone who thinks the problem with the Republican party is that they’re too far right.

Hollowpoint on October 17, 2007 at 7:32 PM

No, given the current frontrunner, I think the Rep. party has alot of sense. Its not the party that’s too far right, I’m not even sure which way is “right” on some issues. I know which way is wrong though, and many here who think they speak for the Republican orthodoxy are wrong and its thinking like that that will leave this party in the dog house come November 08. The Dems are traitors.

Yeah, like Bernstein is an expert on that topic.

Which topic? Christianity in general? or the centrality of Hillary’s personal faith in her life?

I’ll agree with you on the former but not on the latter. All it takes to make one qualified to comment on Hillary’s faith is keen and patient observation. As a seasoned reporter, I should think Bernstein is more than capable of that.

Of course there are far Left Christians. That’s what the National Council of Churches, Jesse Jackson and others are all about. Their idea is that Socialism is the perfect embodiment of Christianity. Share and share alike…by government fiat.

Buy Danish on October 17, 2007 at 8:03 PM

I don’t disagree. It would not surprise me to learn that Hillary’s socialism is motivated primarily by her Methodist upbringing and tenets. The social ethic was a significant part of the Wesley brothers’ movement. The difference between Wesley and Hillary, however, is that Hillary can read the Bible (and Wesley’s work) through the lens of Marx, a lens John Wesley never had.

But my point was that Hillary’s devout Christian faith (assuming Bernstein’s observations were accurate) would absolutely be used by her campaign against a Republican of nominal or questionable Christian conviction. And if you don’t think that it would have an effect, you’re not familiar enough with the “religious Right”. Abortion may be the 800-lb gorilla issue, but divorce/sanctity of marriage is certainly in the top 3, and running a candidate who has one (or more) divorces under his belt puts the GOP at a disadvantage.

I’m not saying she’d suddenly steal the Christian vote, but I think it would definitely make her more attractive to similarly-minded (theologically-liberal) Christians who see their Christianity as necessitating social(ist) policies. Yeah, her stance on abortion will probably stick in the craw of most of those voters, but I do believe she would be able to get a good percentage of those religious-Christian centrist voters who had voted Republican in recent years because the Democrats appeared so anti-Christian.

As I said, she could make (well, she plus a weak/questionably-Christian Repub candidate) the GOP vulnerable on a front they haven’t been for the last few cycles.

I heard on the radio today an interview (I think it was Medved’s program) with Carl Bernstein about his book on Hillary A Woman In Charge. Throughout the 10 minutes or so that I heard, Bernstein repeatedly mentioned the centrality of Hillary’s Christian faith and religiosity to every aspect of her life.

Harpazo on October 17, 2007 at 7:13 PM

Yeah, like Bernstein is an expert on that topic.

Of course there are far Left Christians. That’s what the National Council of Churches, Jesse Jackson and others are all about. Their idea is that Socialism is the perfect embodiment of Christianity. Share and share alike…by government fiat.

Are you implying that Tommylotto is a Leftist???

Buy Danish on October 17, 2007 at 7:19 PM

No, but he’s certainly not a Republican or a conservative. Beyond that I don’t know what he is besides someone who thinks the problem with the Republican party is that they’re too far right.

Very funny!!

Sorry for all the last minute posts – I’m just catching up.

But the current crop of candidates are nothing but Democrats who have an R in front of their name…Other than the tax issue, Hillary is identical to Rudy, Mitt, and McCain.

ThackerAgency on October 17, 2007 at 5:03 PM

That is utter baloney.

Let me guess. You’re a one issue (or maybe two issue) voter and your issue is abortion first, gun rights second, and if the candidates don’t walk in lockstep with your views they are RINOs.

I lived in Maine and I know what a RINO is – it’s defined by Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe. I also lived in NYC and it is most certainly not Rudy Guiliani. It is also not defined by Mitt Romney.

Speaking of Rudy the Republican, I meant to thank Allah for reminding us all of this earlier.

See the Chocolate Jesus thread for reference.

It’s a Republican nomination process. I don’t show up on leftist blogs and discuss their nominees.

Hollowpoint on October 17, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Are you implying that Tommylotto is a Leftist???

“…and assuming that Bernstein’s evaluation of the role Christianity plays in Hillary’s life is accurate, this presents…”

Edit function, please!

I heard on the radio today an interview (I think it was Medved’s program) with Carl Bernstein about his book on Hillary A Woman In Charge. Throughout the 10 minutes or so that I heard, Bernstein repeatedly mentioned the centrality of Hillary’s Christian faith and religiosity to every aspect of her life.

Given that some in the so-called “religious Right” establishment have expressed dissatisfaction with the four Republican frontrunners, and assuming that Bernstein’s evaluation of the role Christianity plays in Hillary’s life, this presents another front on which the Republicans are in danger of losing (previously-guaranteed) votes to Hillary.

If it’s Democrat vs. Democrat, at least I’m going to vote for the most experienced Democrat (Hillary). The only problem I have with her positions is her desire to tax everybody. The reason it is a political winner for her is because the way our democracy works today, there are a whole lot more votes out there who pay ZERO taxes than those that pay taxes. . . so tax and spend resonates.
Other than the tax issue, Hillary is identical to Rudy, Mitt, and McCain.

ThackerAgency on October 17, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Hillary wants to do more than tax everybody – she wants to tell you how to live your life. She’s not interested in your freedom; she’s interested in maintaining her political power – and the power of the Democratic Socialists of America.

By the way, our tax policy has zero to do with how our democracy Republic works. It’s easy for her and other Democratic Socialists to demonize those who actually create jobs in the United States, confiscate their gains, and spread it around to buy votes in the form of ‘entitlements’ and other such projects. That’s easy to do when there’s a ‘Progressive’ tax system in place to benefit those politicians that engage in class warfare politics.

But anyone who thinks that Hillary won’t wind up running to the RIGHT of a centrist Republican candidate in the general is short-sighted.

Hillary is positioning herself, with her abiguous votes on the war(s), to be a viable choice to voters for whom the War on Terror/Islamofascism/etc. is the single, overarching, most important vote.

If the Republicans think they’ll be able to win over centrist, RINO, or Blue Dog Democrat voters by moving leftward, they are setting themselves up for defeat, because Hillary is in no danger of losing her leftist base by moving rightward. She may anger them, and they may hiss and spit at her, but they will still faithfully cast their votes for her.

The Republicans, however, after eight years of “compassionate” faux-conservatism, do not have this luxury.

The ONLY way for the Republicans to win the general election is for a candidate to establish himself clearly and distinctly as different from Mrs. Clinton. At this point, unfortunately, none of the four Repub. frontrunners have done that.

There is still time, however, for one of the frontrunners or one of the second-tier candidates — or, heck, even a new entry — to emerge as a strong and credible voice for conservative principles.

A lot can happen between the primaries and the convention. Just ask Howard Dean.

tommylotto on October 17, 2007 at 5:17 PM

He.is.a.waste. Anyone ignorant enough to claim that there isn’t a whit of difference between Hillary and the top 4 reps, except on taxes, has a serious problem with reality.

Name-calling does nothing to help your point.

Sorry, but this ol’ Texan will vote (at least in the primary) for a conservative. I just hope a majority of us have a memory longer than six years.

Texas Nick 77 on October 17, 2007 at 10:17 AM

You know Texas Nick, that’s funny because I specifically recall Fraud! Thompson spearheaded McCain-Feingold(-Thompson) more than six years ago, he lobbied for dictators, terrorists, and abortionists more than six years ago, and today he won’t tell us about anything that didn’t happen less than six years ago.

Good eye, Texas Nick.

ThackerAgency on October 17, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Have you ever thought that YOU might not be a Republican. If none of the Republican candidates represent you, maybe you are not a Republican. Maybe you are something else, maybe you’re a Republican in name only. Hey, that makes you a RINO!!!!

Hillary is such a paragon of virtue and integrity, I’m sure she’s delighted to know that you are a fan.

Buy Danish on October 17, 2007 at 2:38 PM

I’m not a fan of Hillary. I just wish a CONSERVATIVE could oppose her on something other than ‘I’m not as bad as Hillary’. There are fundamental problems with her positions and any conservative can defeat her. But the current crop of candidates are nothing but Democrats who have an R in front of their name. This race is Democrat vs. Democrat. Yes, all 4 Republican front runners are Democrats.

If it’s Democrat vs. Democrat, at least I’m going to vote for the most experienced Democrat (Hillary). The only problem I have with her positions is her desire to tax everybody. The reason it is a political winner for her is because the way our democracy works today, there are a whole lot more votes out there who pay ZERO taxes than those that pay taxes. . . so tax and spend resonates.

Other than the tax issue, Hillary is identical to Rudy, Mitt, and McCain.

He switched to Republican right after Reagan won the election. Now that’s polical expediency!
omnipotent on October 17, 2007 at 2:52 PM

Either that or he bought into the big idea as did millions of other people. Which I think is why they call Reagan the great communicator.

If Rudy’s game is political expedience, why not be a Dem – that’s where the trend was in 06 and will be 08.

Spirit of 1776 on October 17, 2007 at 2:22 PM

He switched to Republican right after Reagan won the election. Now that’s polical expediency!

Perhaps you should stay out of conversations about Mitt or Rudy since you’re a FredHead.

Buy Danish on October 17, 2007 at 2:40 PM

My support for Fred is driven as much by my opposition to RINO Rudy and FlipFlop Mitt as anything else.

It’s a Republican nomination process. I don’t show up on leftist blogs and discuss their nominees.