Don't Know If I Can Believe Him


rabywk

New member
Link Removed

NEW YORK - Rudy Giuliani, who called for tough gun control as New York's mayor, said Tuesday the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and a recent court ruling on personal liberties framed his current outlook defending a right to bear arms.

"You have to look at all of these issues in light of the different concerns that now exist, which is terrorism, the terrorists' war on us," the Republican presidential contender told The Associated Press in an interview.

He added that his thinking also was influenced by a federal appeals court's decision this year to overturn a 30-year-old ban on private ownership of handguns in Washington.

"It is a very, very strong description of how important personal liberties are in this country and how we have to respect them," he said of the ruling.

"I think, after September 11 — I mean I probably would have had the same impression before, I'm not sure — but after September 11, all that seemed much more powerful to me," Giuliani said.

He called the court ruling "a very, very persuasive argument for personal liberty" and said it "sort of maybe even did more to crystalize my thinking on the whole gun issue in light of September 11."

As mayor, Giuliani sued gun makers and distributors and once described the National Rifle Association as a group of extremists. He explained his current thinking five days after he sought to reassure the NRA of his support for a constitutional right to bear arms and as his rivals, Fred Thompson and John McCain, sought to exploit his past support for strict gun control measures.

On the Second Amendment, Giuliani has said the right to bear arms applies to militias, but he also said recently that it applies to individuals, as addressed by the federal court ruling.
 

P95Carry

New member
It's the man's history that damns him - doesn't matter now what he says to try for votes - sorry Rudy. Too late fella!!
 

rabywk

New member
Well I have to say if it is Rudy vs Hillary or Obama, I would have to vote for Rudy. I can't say I would like it, but you would have to pick the least of all evils and I think he would be it.
 

XD45

New member
MrG.jpg



A picture is worth a 1000 words!!!
 

Dakotaranger

New member
IF he would become Sec of State or Defense that would be a great job(which I realize is in the line of succession), but I don't want him anywhere near the Presidency
 

Torch

New member
Well I have to say if it is Rudy vs Hillary or Obama, I would have to vote for Rudy. I can't say I would like it, but you would have to pick the least of all evils and I think he would be it.

I certainly respect your opinions but I just couldn't do it. Rudy's stance on life issues is one that I will just not support, ever.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. In 2004 I voted for the Constitutional Party candidate and if Rudy or any other pro-choice, anti-gun RINO gets the nomination I'll do the same in 2008.
 

BluesStringer

Les Brers
The conservative wing of the Republican Party is all but dead anymore. There are at least two unquestioningly conservative candidates, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, and a couple of others with only a couple of questions surrounding their conservatism, Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee, and yet Rudy and Mitt are getting the limelight. I don't get it.

Personally, I would never vote for Rudy or Romney unless the Democratic alternative was so repulsive and dangerous that I could see their presidency destroying this country. Well, I can foresee that with almost any Dem candidate, and especially the presumed front-runner, so my decision will be either vote for Rudy or Romney or sit out the election and allow Hillary or Obama to slide in there unopposed by me. Tough choice. I haven't made it yet.

Blues
 

rabywk

New member
Personally, I would never vote for Rudy or Romney unless the Democratic alternative was so repulsive and dangerous that I could see their presidency destroying this country. Well, I can foresee that with almost any Dem candidate, and especially the presumed front-runner, so my decision will be either vote for Rudy or Romney or sit out the election and allow Hillary or Obama to slide in there unopposed by me. Tough choice. I haven't made it yet.

Blues

Well how things are going the Dems are going to be putting up Hillary or Obama for their person, so it all falls to the Reps on how they play this out. I can't sit on the side lines and use the "Well I didn't vote for them, so it is not my fault" thing. If it comes down to Rudy or the other I will have to vote for Rudy and only hope that the Reps. in the Senate and House keeps him in check.

Obama has already shown that he is anti and so has Hillary. So what do we do because staying away from the voting booth is not really an option.
 

BluesStringer

Les Brers
Obama has already shown that he is anti and so has Hillary.

And so has Rudy.

Like someone else has already said, voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. That's the question for me, is it really a "lesser" evil as far as 2nd Amendment issues go to vote for a Giuliani, or is it an *equal* evil? Considering his track record in that regard, I don't see any difference at all, except the contortions he's going through presently to convince the unthinking masses and party-loyalists-at-any-cost that they should pay no attention to said track record.

With that in mind, sitting out the election if it's between the Devil I know and the Devil I don't know is indeed an option. Not a good option. Not one I have already made up my mind about, but an option that's on the table nonetheless.

Blues
 

Torch

New member
With that in mind, sitting out the election if it's between the Devil I know and the Devil I don't know is indeed an option. Not a good option. Not one I have already made up my mind about, but an option that's on the table nonetheless.

Blues

Please don't just not vote. I voted for the only true conservative party in the 2004 election, the Constitution Party. Do they have a chance of winning a national election? Of course not, not yet at least. However, the Republican party knows that 100% of the votes that the CP gets would be votes for the GOP if they would return to being conservative.

Send the GOP a message and vote for true conservatives only. This is their entire platform. Their stance on gun control is below.

Gun Control

The right to bear arms is inherent in the right of self defense, defense of the family, and defense against tyranny, conferred on the individual and the community by our Creator to safeguard life, liberty, and property, as well as to help preserve the independence of the nation.

The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution; it may not properly be infringed upon or denied.

The Constitution Party upholds the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. We oppose attempts to prohibit ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens, and stand against all laws which would require the registration of guns or ammunition.

We emphasize that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them. In such circumstances, the peaceful citizen's protection against the criminal would be seriously jeopardized.

We call for the repeal of all federal firearms legislation, beginning with Federal Firearms Act of 1968.

We call for the rescinding of all executive orders, the prohibition of any future executive orders, and the prohibition of treaty ratification which would in any way limit the right to keep and bear arms.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
Link Removed


On the Second Amendment, Giuliani has said the right to bear arms applies to militias, but he also said recently that it applies to individuals, as addressed by the federal court ruling.

What part of "... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" do gun grabbers such as Giuliani not understand? I certainly don't believe he is a friend to gun owners. Don't we all remember 3 years ago when John Kerry "affirmed" his belief in 2A, saying he had been a hunter all is life? What a crock. After the passage of the assault weapons ban in 1994 and subsequent Democratic losses in Congress, I believe that anti gun politicians from both parties have figured out that endorsing gun control is a losing proposition, and that they have a better chance of gaining votes if they spin their positions in a way that makes it seem as if they won't restrict gun rights. I know better, however. My vote is for Ron Paul.
 

BIG E

New member
I don't understand why everyone thinks it's ok to vote a former mayor into presidential office. He was a MAYOR! What qualifies him to lead this country?

I am however for shooting him out of a cannon.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,434
Messages
623,592
Members
74,268
Latest member
zyvaaprilia
Top