Debate:Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.

!

THIS IS A DEBATE PAGE, NOT AN ARTICLE. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Conservapedia. Your opinion is welcome! Please remember to sign your comments on this page, and refrain from editing other user's contributions. New Users: Please read our "Editing etiquette" before posting

Giuliani is a Republican but as for social conservative issues, he is too liberal. He might be the Presidential nominee of our party. I kept asking myself, how could I vote for somebody pro-abortion and pro-gay rights? Then I heard a unique viewpoint I thought I should share. If we do not elect a President strong on defense, strong on national security and strong on foreign policy, there might not be an America left to have abortions. I certainly want my child to grow up in a safe secure America. Giuliani is strong on defense, strong on national security and strong on foreign policy. In a time of war, this nation cannot afford to take chances with a Democrat President.

Giuliani was mayor of New York City, he has no foreign policy experience at all, none. He also has no experience in National security he never served in the military and avoided service during the Vietnam War so he could become a lawyer. He is not fit to be Command in Chief of the US military or lead this country in global affairs. His moral values are none existant, married and divorced several times and having very public affairs. If he is the best 'Republican' for the job, that is a sorry state to be in.--Eljoe2 02:41, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

What makes you think being the mayor of New York City does not involve foreign policy? Republican leadership maybe in a precarious position, would you trust America to a Democrat leader??? What makes him not fit to Commander-in-chief besides his backwards social issues? He says keep up the fight against terrorists. He believes in a strong miltary like Reagan. Eljoe, believe me, I am with you, his gun rights stand, his equal rights for gays stand, his abortion stand is terrible, multiple marriages. I am married and do not believe in divorce either. He is the front runner, you have to think of the consequences of letting a Democrat in the White House or a former Democrat, Giuliani. If it comes down to it, an abortion right Democrat versus an abortion rights Republican, we lose no matter what. But, we do not have to lose America as a result of not voting. It must be a Republican in our future. We cannot afford a liberal defeatist the top job in the land. Just my OP --jp 22:08, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

What would make Giuliani unfit for Commander-in Chief? How about Bernard Kerik for starters?

"Federal prosecutors have told Bernard B. Kerik, whose nomination as homeland security secretary in 2004 ended in scandal, that he is likely to be charged with several felonies, including tax evasion and conspiracy to commit wiretapping.

Kerik's indictment could set the stage for a courtroom battle that would draw attention to Kerik's extensive business and political dealings with former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who personally recommended him to President Bush for the Cabinet. Giuliani, the front-runner for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination according to most polls, later called the recommendation a mistake.

Kerik rose from being a warden and police detective to become Giuliani's campaign security adviser, corrections chief, police commissioner and eventual partner in Giuliani-Kerik, a security arm of Giuliani Partners, which Giuliani established after leaving office in 2001. Kerik resigned his positions in Giuliani's firm after he was nominated to the homeland security job." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/30/AR2007033002425.html?hpid=topnews

That was his first big national move for the administration and his contribution to the security of our country, a corrupt crony. He then apologizes and says he didn't really vett him properly, I guess this is how he'd choose his administration too, and what that for our country?! No thanks.

So Giuliani got some media exposure from 9/11 big deal. His so called 'leadership' ended the search for firefighters and victims remains so early that remains are still being found today and remains from victims of the World Trade Center that were carted away early as debris has been used to fill potholes and pave city roads. Real nice, the family's have to sue the city to stop using their deceased loved ones as road filler. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070323/ts_nm/sept11_remains_dc

He would be an utter disaster for the U.S.--Eljoe2 02:41, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Kerik is a non issue the liberals like to wash Giuliani with. Firefighters still love the guy, it's the liberal firefighters union that does not. I can't think of any democrat nominee with any commander-n-chief experience what so ever. Speaking of firefighter rants. Nothing but cheers for Hillary from the union. Even though she did not attend a single funeral, not one firefighter funeral after 9/11. Liberals are just scared of Giuliani, its the same old attack strategy. I still hold to the fact Giuliani says stay on the attack against terror. Thats all I want to hear. I don't want some politically correct, balance the line, foreign policy. I want to add to thee 2000+ days of no attack on the USA.--jp 02:19, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Kerik was a major mistake and it is an example of how Giuliani will operate, he's careless, he's not a competent leader. As for firefighters, there are about 1 million firefighters in the US out of which 250,000 are full time the rest are volunteers the International Association of Fire Fighters has over 280,000 members, they are the major voice for firefighters and they do not support Guiliani, firefighters do not love the guy, not even when he's out on the town wearing a dress and high heels, he is not Presidential material. I agree that staying on the attack against terror is a good strategy but it is not the only method. To suggest that is the sole reason there has been no attacks in the US is ridiculous, by that rational you could claim that after the first attack on the trade center in 1993 that Clinton's plans/policy kept the US safe for 2000+ days too. Giuliani needs to do more than come up with sound bites about how he'll "stay on the attack" policy is more complicated than that.--Eljoe2 02:10, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

I would consider voting third party to send the Republican Party a message that they can't just nominate any old fool and expect me to vote lockstep for them. MountainDew 02:11, 7 April 2007 (EDT)