Rudy: Vote Republican or YOU WILL DIE

If this dog -- not you, dog, but the metaphorical dog -- still hunts, then this country has lost what's left of its mind.
Jesus, Rudy, unless we put you in charge, 9/11 will happen? No, wait....
Where you going to out the Emergency Response HQ in this case? On the White House lawn?

 

Yeah, we want to pay more oil-and-military-$ tribute to be handled/distributed by the Mafioso thugs who have run this country into the sewer since '01.

Go put on lipstick and a dress, Rudy, and leave the adults alone.

 

Fen, if America loses its mind, will it lose you?

 

What a non-story. The Republicans, & Rudy specifically endorse the notion that we are in a war against terrorism, that Iraq is a key battlefront in that war, and that it is a war in which our national defense is at stake. The Democrats, for the most part disagree. The implication of this, which everyone knows, is that Republicans think that the policies endorsed by Democrats would make us less safe - this is obvious. Republicans know that there is sacrifice, but think that our safety is at stake so it is worthwhile. Democrats say it isn't. What is wrong with him saying the rest of the sentence out loud? Democrats say that if the Republican win, more soldiers will die, which is equally obvious, and equally fair. What's unfair, is saying something you don't believe to be true in order to gain political advantage, like that if a Republican is elected, abortions will be illegal or if a Democrat is elected they will disarm policemen etc.

 

How many terrorists have you throttled today, tough guy?

 

That card's gonna backfire big time if the Republicans try to keep playing it in 08. It may've worked a few years ago, but most Americans are disgusted and see right through that scare-tactic bullshit now.

 

Sorry, the concern that a Republican would try to further stack the Supreme Court with justices who would vote against Roe V. Wade is every bit as legitimate as this idea that the country would not be as safe with a Democrat in the White House. Frankly, I have my doubts about making either statement, but the way you put those two above just shows your own political bias.

And this isn't a statement of belief. This is the use of scare tactics to try to secure votes. Maybe he actually believes it. Maybe not. But the motivation is clear and I'm betting you are smart enough to realize that. The issue many of us have with these statements is not honesty, it is the attempt to use fear to win an election.

That and the ridiculous idea that having a Republican in the White House makes us safer, since it didn't exactly help us on 9/11.

 

He just lost any potential for my vote. Good-bye.

 

First, in the unlikely event that Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortion would not be illegal, which is what I referenced. A Democrat running using "scare tactics" that a Republican would appoint (did Clinton "stack" it with Roe proponents?) judges that might overturn it would be perfectly legitimate, and since they do, it is. What I object to is the dishonesty in terms of results.

I have never hidden my political biases on this board, though I have steered clear of the talks lately because I find them unproductive. Sometimes I have trouble holding back.

And it isn't scare tactics any more than anything else is. The stakes in elections are high, why should the candidates have to pretend they aren't? Are Democrats using scare tactics when they say more soldiers will die? That the environment will be in danger? That minority rights will erode? I disagree with them on all of these issues, but they believe them, so they are correct to put them out there to encourage those who agree to realize what is at stake. Gulianni thinks we're in a dangerous battle, and that his approach is safer than his opponents, he'd be commiting political malpractice not to make that clear.

 

I stay off of these because political arguments give me a headache.

My point wasn't that either scare tactic was fair. Just that each is as legitimate as the other. Your initial post was saying that Giuliani was simply saying what he believes while Democrats who paint a Republican White House as a threat to Roe V. Wade are just engaging in political posturing. To paint one as a statement of honest belief and the other as lying for political gain, which is how I read your initial post, is unfair and incorrect.

 

And then I explained that that is not what I said.

 

Just clarifying my point, as you did. I definitely got what you are saying more on the second post. I still disagree about it being a non-story. The tactics a candidate uses to win an election, and this was absolutely a tactic for political gain, are very much a story.