Giuliani has been an ardent supporter of Bush and the war in Iraq. There's no need to "spin" what he clearly has expressed on numerous occasions. Hey, you sound like you're trying to put distance between Giuliani and Bush. Why? Don't you like Bush? D&D. A Reagan is Worth Two in a Bush.
If Guliani has clearly expressed it on so many occasions why did mcmark have to go back to 2004 to find evidence of that? What I am disputing is that Guliani is a "diehard" supporter of all of Bush's policies. And, no, I'm not too big a supporter of Bush at the moment.
from the times, take it for what it's worth http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/14/us/politics/14rudy.html In every speech he makes, Rudolph W. Giuliani talks about Iraq and makes clear that he sides with President Bush, endorsing the war and the deployment of 21,500 more troops.
...in discussing the deployment of more troops,Mr. Giuliani has been alone in saying that such a strategy may not succeed, potentially providing him cover should the situation in Iraq deteriorate further. And he has put the strategy in a broader context that plays down the importance of Iraq. Terrorists “are going to continue to be at war with us, no matter what the outcome in Iraq,” Mr. Giuliani said recently in New Hampshire. The night before, he said that “there are no sure things,” and that if the United States fails in Iraq, “we have to be ready for that, too.” In California a few days later, speaking of “the danger of focusing on Iraq too much,” he said that complete success there would not win the fight against terrorism, and that failure there would not lose it. ...for Mr. Giuliani to admit that Iraq might not work out — even as the president continues to insist that it will — is new. Mr. Giuliani leaves the impression that he would be prepared to try a new approach, whatever that might be. I wouldn't describe that as "diehard" support for Bush.
My nod goes to Huckabee... the Good Guy candidate, the Republican Clinton without the lustiness etc, etc
Why is it okay to joke about Mormons like they're Heaven's Gate freaks or something? I'm not just talking about this post; it's a common thing. I read an anti-Jazz post (a thing I can totally get behind in itself) in the GARM recently that said something like "as long as a lot of Mormons are crying I'll be happy." One of my best friends is Mormon. So is Clutch, by the way. I'm fairly certain both come by their faith honestly and take it seriously. I know my friend does. She's a 37 year old virgin with a huge and frustrated sex drive because she hasn't met the right Mormon guy, so I'm pretty sure it's a big thing to her. I've had problems with the way the Catholic church dealt with pedophile priests and I've had problems with rules prescribed by the Catholic church to be sure. I think they endorse homophobia and I'm totally not okay with that, but that's what I'm not okay with -- not being Catholic. If somebody has a problem with a teaching of the Mormon church, they should feel free to say so. But dissing Mormons for being Mormon is way uncool. And I would never post or say or think something like "no love for the Catholic!" I'm not singling you out, rodrick. And I'm not even sure that's what you're doing. But this is like the ninth cutesy joke about Mormons I've read here over the years and it's a drag to me. Try this rule out: if you wouldn't say it about Jews or other Christians, don't say it about Mormons (or Muslims for that matter). And I know you wouldn't have posted "No love for the Catholic!" or "No love for the Jew!"
I think this was just a way of saying as long as the Jazz lose. Like it or not, there are a ton of Mormons in Utah, it is about the only religion/team connection that could be made. He didn't want Mormons crying because they are Mormons, he wanted Mormons crying because they are fans of the Jazz who would have lost. Has nothing to do with being against Mormons, just that the Jazz happen to play in Mormon country. If they played in Amish country, Mormon would be replaced with Amish.
Why would you ever even make a "religion/team connection?" How is that any different from saying "I hope a lot of blacks will be crying?" Oh, right. Here's how. Every NBA team is majority black. No NBA team is majority Mormon. As far as I know no NBA team even has a Mormon player. Bringing religion into NBA games is stupid as hell. And, I repeat that you would never be okay with replacing "Mormon" with "Jew" or "Catholic" or "Baptist" or "Methodist" or "Protestant." For whatever reason, it's okay to mock Mormons. I'm just saying it's not okay with me. It is okay with you? Cool. Good to know.
Craig Crawford (who I believe is Mormon himself) made a crack the other day on Imus: ~"Of all the leading Republican candidates, isn't it ironic that it's only the Mormon who has had one wife...."
If most of the Catholics in America all congregated in Utah, I would be fine with someone saying "... as long as Catholics are crying, I'll be happy." when dicussing NBA results. Or Jews, or Baptists, or Episcopalians, or Unitarians or whatever. The point is, it has nothing to do with the religion and everything to do with someone trying to be clever when taking a shot at the Jazz. That is why it is okay with me, not because I think it is okay to mock Mormons (though to be honest, I think it is okay to mock everyone, but I wouldn't expect everyone to share my sense of humor so I would probably not make the argument based on that), but because in this instance, Mormons are not being mocked at all. Got it? Good.
This is at the very least, an extremely irresponsible statement. I challenge you to prove the veracity of that statement. Calling for border enforcement doesn't equate to hate.
Nixon was raised a Quaker. I don't know why Romney should be affected by being a Mormon. D&D. Go Figure.
Mitt would make a great president, too bad he doesn't have the name recognition, and he is not being propped up like Obama. Hope he will make some headway in the coming month.
I have yet to see Obama being propped up. I see interest being given to Obama because his style and charisma generate that.
You don't go from a relative unknown to presidential candidate/media darling in a couple of years without being propped. Not that there is anything wrong with it, it's not a knock against him. Although I do question his experience level. But hey Deval did it, maybe Obama will too.
When I read the Democratic party platform and the performance of their candidates I feel like if I vote for them it is a sin of commission. I did the wrong thing. When I read the Republican party platform and the performance of their candidates I feel like if I vote for them it is a sin of ommission. I could have done the right thing and I didn't.
