January 30, 2007
Giuliani's drag appearance for the NYC Mayor's Inner Circle Press Roast (whatever that is):
Hah, I never saw this before. I thought the drag references were to appearances on SNL. I know he played an Italian grandma once, who just kept waddling around muttering about the pasta fazoul (which was pretty funny), and I think he was in drag on SNL in an opening (can't be sure-- maybe I'm confusing that with this bit).
I dunno. This is going to tank the guy's chance at the presidency?
Next thing you know and they'll be saying Graham Chapman was a homo just because of all that drag-work he did on Monty Python.
Everyone's Got Black Marks...
Perhaps we're so early in the season people are still thinking about their Dream Candidate. As we trudge through this fresh hell, everyone will begin to remember there is no such thing as a Dream Candidate, and get on with selecting from a number of non-ideal candidates each with a range of strengths, weaknesses, and personal failings.
Posted by: Editor at January 30, 2007 03:42 PM (adpJH)
But Obama does blow and it's not?
Posted by: Ace at January 30, 2007 03:46 PM (4qddO)
Posted by: EC at January 30, 2007 03:48 PM (p9V75)
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 30, 2007 03:51 PM (YdMYG)
Posted by: spmat at January 30, 2007 03:56 PM (T0eyj)
Uh, Ace, I made my comment before you had added Rudy's clip. I was commenting on McCain.
Rudy's clip was quite funny, really. Something people might like because he's not taking HIMSELF too seriously, but they know he takes the issues seriously.
Newt is my "Dream Candidate", but come on - this guy took on the effing mob. That's serious fortitude. I respect him very much.
Posted by: Editor at January 30, 2007 03:57 PM (adpJH)
Posted by: MikeZ at January 30, 2007 04:01 PM (GLMrI)
Oh. My bad.
Posted by: Ace at January 30, 2007 04:02 PM (4qddO)
Posted by: spmat at January 30, 2007 04:03 PM (T0eyj)
Posted by: Pablo Honey at January 30, 2007 04:04 PM (T58r2)
Posted by: Al Gore at January 30, 2007 04:06 PM (DbybK)
The thing about McCain is that if it weren't for the finance reform and the gang of 14 thing, you guys would probably love him. He isn't really religious. He is a man's man. He tells dirty jokes and he's a badass tough guy. I know he blew it with libertarians, but it wasn't a political calculation. He did the things he did because he believed in them. Take it or leave it. I understand people's anger with him, but he is still the only one who can beat Hillary.
Now I'm done talking about him! (for now)
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 30, 2007 04:08 PM (YdMYG)
He's also blown it with gun owners.
Seriously RWS, you're blinded by your support for McCain. I like to think your motives are good, but it's starting to creep me out.
Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at January 30, 2007 04:12 PM (qZ40r)
Posted by: Savage George at January 30, 2007 04:13 PM (ZsV9R)
RWS, you know we love you, but this assertion is just not true.
Posted by: Slublog at January 30, 2007 04:15 PM (avyTs)
My motive is simple...I DON'T WANT A HILLARY PRESIDENCY! Geeze! That is pretty much it.
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 30, 2007 04:18 PM (YdMYG)
I have said before that I could be wrong. I hope that I am. But I honest to God believe that McCain is the only one who can beat her.
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 30, 2007 04:19 PM (YdMYG)
Posted by: Slublog at January 30, 2007 04:21 PM (avyTs)
Posted by: bonhomme at January 30, 2007 04:23 PM (iaV9O)
If my vote alone made the difference in Hillary winning or Rudy winning, then of course I would vote for Rudy. But I am one who cares about politics. I just think that most who share my values will not bother voting for two sides of the same coin (morally speaking).
Immigration reform, finance reform, even gun control don't bring out the evangelical vote, Christian values do. McCain may not be a bible thumper, but he has voted right on the issues that matter to the religious right. Rudy is wrong on all of them.
I guess we will have to wait until the primaries to see, won't we?
If Rudy wins the primary and then beats Hillary I will buy each and and every one of you a beer here in Houston.
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 30, 2007 04:27 PM (YdMYG)
If anyone can beat Hillary, it would be Edwards. But I don't see it. This woman will do what she has to do to win. Anything. And she has a machine behind her to do it. She will squash them all like a bug.
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 30, 2007 04:30 PM (YdMYG)
Plus, she is terrible on the stump. I've seen her speak, and she is truly awful.
Posted by: Slublog at January 30, 2007 04:42 PM (avyTs)
McCain is smart, funny, articulate and charismatic, so is Rudy, both I believe also have character and integrity. McCain might be more more likely to gain the nomination because he would more acceptable to the Christainists in the Republican party. I would vote for Romney in the general election but I'm sure he would lose badly. I'm also afraid that Romney will get the nomination.
Posted by: joan at January 30, 2007 04:56 PM (eN8y0)
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 30, 2007 05:04 PM (YdMYG)
My great hope is that Sublog is right and that Hillary will not end up getting the nomination. I believe that is possible. She has all the warmth of ice covered windshield and she has some baggage that may make her vulnerable to attack.
It also has yet to be proven that even with the machine backing her and her ruthlessness and calculation that she can stand up the the scrutiny and criticism she will experience running for president.
Posted by: joan at January 30, 2007 05:23 PM (eN8y0)
That doesn't mean that Romney can win, but it won't be the Mormonism that finishes him off.
Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at January 30, 2007 07:33 PM (qZ40r)
I hate to say it but a lot of women who are apolitical and normally not interested in politics are excited by the idea of a woman as president. Hillary would get a very high percentage of the female vote and a large turnout of female voters. It would not take very high percentage of the male vote then for her to be elected.
Posted by: joan at January 30, 2007 07:56 PM (eN8y0)
Posted by: someone at January 30, 2007 09:55 PM (I/t4f)
Every liberal I know hates Hil. Whom do they love? Edwards.
Posted by: someone at January 30, 2007 10:03 PM (I/t4f)
Posted by: Karol at January 30, 2007 10:37 PM (D7glQ)
Romney may have a good chance. It just remains to be seen if he can hold up against the machine that is Hillary.
Posted by: rightwingsparkle at January 31, 2007 04:27 AM (YdMYG)
Anyway - with that off my chest: my dream candidate is Newt, but I'll support Rudy. Not without some hard swallowing, of course, since I don't support his stances on either abortion or gay marriage.
However - a president, as we know, can't really do much about either issue. What he can do is appoint SCOTUS judges who will stay true to the text of the Constitution and not create nebulous "rights" out of whole cloth. If Rudy says Alito and Roberts are his kind of judges, that comforts me both as a Republican and a Catholic.
And as for his Catholicism. How seriously does Rudy take it? As a divorced man, he shouldn't present himself for Holy Communion. Does he? Not good, but it would be a great teaching moment were he (or his bishop, though the RC bishops in NY are generally a pack of Marxist fools) to say, "while I consider myself a Catholic, I understand and respect the Church's teachings. I will, therefore, recuse myself from participating in the Sacrament until such time as I can reevaluate my own positions with those of the Church." If nothing else, it would show a depth of understanding and it would shine a light on hypocrites like Pelosi who scandal the church with their "sure, I support abortion, but who are you celibate boy-molesting freaks to tell me I'm not Catholic?"
Rudy's good on taxes, crime and the WOT - which is the paramount issue of the day, and one for which I (and I think, a lot of believers) will forgive him for not being lockstep with Christian values. And while it sounds awfully cynical and hypocritical, don't forget how many on the right would nearly sell their souls to make sure Hillary! has a stake put through her heart. In short, while I think Rudy's got some rough seas ahead, I think he has the intelligence, sure-footedness and hard-headedness to get the nomination and the White House.
One last thing - RWS, I can tell you why I hate John "Charles Keating Who?" McCain. Screw his voting record, and screw his jacking the Contitution around. Those are bad enough, but what frosts me is that he's a collaborationist. Sure, he eventually comes around to supporting W or the GOP, but in the meanwhile he gets a lot of pleasurable mileage and tongue-baths from the TSM while he's kicking the party in the nuts. I want a President who supports the party first, not Pinch Sulzberger. I also loathe him for his goo-goo act with Hillary. Were these normal times, perhaps it wouldn't anger me, but that woman and her party have spent every day since 9/11 hamstringing the President, undercutting the war, engaging in near-treason, giving overt and covert support to the enemy and poisoining the well of discourse with their continuous "BUSH LIED!" screams.
No compromise with a copperhead - ever!
Posted by: Christopher at January 31, 2007 04:48 AM (SjUPQ)
I never understood the pass he gets on this.
Posted by: roc ingersol at January 31, 2007 05:09 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: roc ingersol at January 31, 2007 05:10 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: joan at January 31, 2007 05:37 AM (XmgJX)
If you take that issue off the table it's hard for me to see how he isn't a much better candidate with less baggage than either McCain or Rudy. He's not a career politician which is part of the attraction for me but it also means he will take a little more time than the others to get up to speed in the media. But he is smart, articulate, has some national presence thanks to the Olympics and his families legacy and let's face it, he looks like a President. Yea, that matters. He also hasn't had years in the spotlight like a McCain or even a Rudy where people have long held views.
Most importantly and something that always seems to get overlooked, he's not a Senator. Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush II, there's a trend there. Governors tend to do well in the election if they can get the nomination.
Posted by: JackStraw at January 31, 2007 06:02 AM (t+mja)
Posted by: roc ingersol at January 31, 2007 06:42 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Hippocrass at January 31, 2007 11:01 PM (bCrhA)
Posted by: qq at November 10, 2011 09:33 PM (Qbr+h)
62 queries taking 1.302 seconds, 275 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.