wouldn't that make them COMPLETE hypocrites?
2007-10-10 07:14:59 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You would think that Liberals, the 'all accepting, anything goes' party, would relish the thought that Rudy is not perfect. But the fact is that, he CAN beat Hilary, and they fear it. If Hilary weren't running, a lot of libbies would support Rudy(I bet a lot will support him anyway).Why, because most of his social views are very left, they want her.
Personally, I don't want him, nor do I EVER want Hilary. But if it's a toss up, I have more faith in Rudy.
2007-10-10 08:22:26 · answer #1 · answered by FRANKFUSS 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think you are putting the cart before the horse. we don't bash Rudy for divorce or dressing in drag. We were wondering why the Republicans aren't bashing him.
We have problems with someone in the "family values" party who doesn't display those values in his own life. By definition, Giuliani is a hypocrite.
2007-10-10 07:20:43 · answer #2 · answered by chemcook 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It would, "only if" , there were Democratic candidates that had been married as often as Rudy. Or if there were Democratic candidates that were cross dressers.
I find it more hypocritical that Conservatives don't "bash" Rudy for his stances. He is also pro-choice and supports gay marriage.
2007-10-10 07:22:18 · answer #3 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nah, those are just the fun little digs to take at the hypocrisies of the "family values" party. Personally, as long as it's between consenting adults, I don't care who they 'shag'. I'm more worried about who really 'shares their bed', and in many cases, makes it for them. This holds true for ANY politician.
In Rudy's case, he's "in bed with" Paul Singer, a billionaire who makes all his money from "vulture funds" has backed the Republican Party for quite some time now. He's backed Bush and now he has pledged to raise $10-$15 million for Rudy Giuliani's campaign:
http://www.gregpalast.com/vulture-fund-threat-to-third-world/
http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?st=&zip=10024&last=SINGER&first=PAUL
2007-10-10 08:05:41 · answer #4 · answered by sagacious_ness 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I won't speak for all liberals, but *I* haven't been bashing him for that.
I've been bashing him for his incredible arrogance with respect to first amendment issues prior to 9/11 ... and that he is trying to take 9/11 over as his issue because people remember him fondly as a leader in that time.
What did he actually DO during that time that was so impressive?
Rudy is not very impressive, and if it wasn't for 9/11, nobody would look at him twice.
2007-10-10 07:18:33 · answer #5 · answered by Elana 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely.
I bash Rudy on his "not in big cities" approach to gun control.
Believing in 2a and saying people shouldn't have guns in big cities(precisely where they are most needed for self defense) is also hypocritical.
2007-10-10 07:30:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They don't bash him for multiple marriages and dressing in drag.
They bash him for doing that while posturing as a "family values" conservative candidate, whatever THAT is supposed to actually mean.
That would make them anti-hypocrisy.
2007-10-10 07:36:15 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It isn't his multiple marriages or the fact he likes women's clothes. It is the hypocrisy. There are far better issues to go after Giuliani for. I still can't believe he is considered a serious candidate!
2007-10-10 07:26:01 · answer #8 · answered by gone 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Compared to the conservs "family values" ala Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Ned Stevens, Dan Young and Steve Viter chasing little boys for sex? Probably not . . . . .
2007-10-10 07:19:29 · answer #9 · answered by commonsense 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Both sides are equally responsible for their party bashing, name calling and rude attitude to the opposite party.
Both sides are also guilty of "the pot calling the kettle black" etc... I must admit though, sometimes it's fun to just lay into a Democrat.
2007-10-10 07:20:44 · answer #10 · answered by Colonel 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋