How typical, there are major issues which is why this country couldn't survive another Republican president but the reason the idiotic right wing of this country would shun their criminal party is not the crimes but that their front runner might have supported women's freedom of choice. Just goes to show what a piece of shit Republicans are!

Ho Hum, same old, same old.

Republicans lie.

Top republicans (e.g., Giuliani) lies more.

The top republican (Bush) never not lies.

What's next in the news, dog bites mailman, Britney scratches twat in public?

Maybe I'll vote in the republican primary and vote for Guliani just to do my part to see that this happens. The important thing for me is that a democratic is in the white house next term. If Hillary is the nominee, a third party candidate like this may be here only hope.

In my previous comments I've said that there is a large segment of voters who will not under any circumstances vote for a pro-choice candidate. In my experience there are people for whom this is not only the single most important issue in the world today, but it is the issue that they will be first and foremost judged upon in the afterlife. I don't think for the rank-and-file evangelicals that they will abandon this belief just to "stay in power." This issue has transcended ordinary politics for them.

"Giuliani has a habit of saying things...that are demonstrably untrue." Uh, yes, he does.

Here's a guy with a family history in organized crime, who has had three wives and isn't on speaking terms with his own children. He cleaned up New York and happened to be its mayor at the time of a terrorist attack on the city; that's his claim to fame, which he wants to parlay into the presidency. He has a nasty disposition, has been on every side of key issues, and lies a lot. Makes you wonder just who is supporting him, doesn't it?

Never thought I'd hear myself say "Thank god for the religious right"

Guiliani is Mousilini x3, He scares me.

Suppose Giuliani did win.

We'd have an Attorney General nicknamed 'mi Consiglieri', a Secretary of Defense named 'Louie da Bomber', a Secretary of State known as 'Strangler', a Secretary of Treasury referred to as 'Da Jew', a head of the CIA called 'Icepick', and a mystery VP known only as 'Da Boss'.

And Columbus Day would be renamed Columbo day, and last for a week

Rude-Rudy is as much a self-delusional skitzoid ego maniac as the FRAT BRAT with a self-exposing death wish which is well on its way to throw him off the Empire State Building to prove that he can fly like an eagle, so it is probable that his innate insanity will take him out of this world before some fundy kook will take him down..., one or the other, well before the '08 election.

Why is it taking so long for everyone to finally get it that Greedy Juliephoney is nothing but a complete faker right out of a Carnival Sideshow. Oh yeah, that's right. The MSM is nothing but a Carnival Sideshow and they are protecting one of their own. Keith Olbermann and Countdown is our only hope for truth.

There are also plenty of moderates and liberals who would be willing to vote for a third-party candidate if given the choice of Hillary or Rudy. Wouldn't it be a great big blow to the current political monopoly to have the winner of the election with only 35-40 percent of the vote? Imagine how the results might look if the ballot is something like this:
Dem - Clinton
Rep - Guliani
Lib - Paul
Ind - Kucinich/Gravel/Gore?
CC - Huckabee?
Grn - Nader

I wouldn't bee all that surprised to see such a lineup generate an outcome of something like 35-32-15-10-5-3. This could be the best thing to happen to our democracy in a long time. The first result would be that there would have to be a move to require 50% plus for victory and an enhanced voting system, with rankings or runoffs. The second result would be that many Americans would be disabused of the notion that voting for candidates other than R or D is wasting your vote.

Which is good news for Rep. Ron Paul. One of the books I'm currently reading is "Rudy" by Wayne Barret. Though only half way through, I've found that Guiliani is a magnificent chameleon. Which makes me wonder why even the Rabid Right rejects him. I thought they would fall for anything. Maybe it's the packaging. I bet Rudy is working on that now.
Peace.

In other news, Bono had some nice things to say about NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg:

"He's a great and gifted manager and I think he could do an awful lot of good inside or outside the White House."

Regardless of whether they label themselves as (R), (D) or (I), it's always a good thing to have bright, capable, moderate people in public office who don't feel they personally need to be any richer.

The Rabid Religious Right wants to split off from their better-heeled Rockefeller Repub bedmates? Fine. Let 'em. It makes their craziness more noticeable...and avoidable. This will leave the field open for the Rockefeller Repubs to be singled out for what they are: rapacious Gordon Gekko type plutocrats. It's time to let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out...

MargeAggedon @ 24:

So sad it's funny. The evangelicals aren't happy because repug front runners aren't carrying their hate banner into the fray.

Step right up ladies and gents! Be the first to grab the "anti-woman, pro-lie, anti-glbt, pro-war, anti-thought, pro-hate, pro-apocalypse" xian fundie banner and YOU could be the new presidential candidate for the "flat earth jebus hugging cro-magnon" party.
How easy it would be. Just swoop in, do your best phred phelps impression and you're in!

I thought there were two 'e's in Jeebus and you left out anti-sciense and anti-truth. Other than that, PERFECT! :)

nemo @ 25:

The Rabid Religious Right wants to split off from their better-heeled Rockefeller Repub bedmates? Fine. Let 'em. It makes their craziness more noticeable...and avoidable. This will leave the field open for the Rockefeller Repubs to be singled out for what they are: rapacious Gordon Gekko type plutocrats. It's time to let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out...

funny how it took so long to expose Wreckefeller as a repug in dems clothing!? first he's mum on the surveillance and then he wants to give immunity. but your right on the point: now they are easier to expose as either demagogues or plutocrats.

I registered democratic to filter that party in the next primary.
no dlc/dscc/dccc and my incumbents are skating on thin ice.

Just like the republicans supported green party candidates to offset democratic votes, I would certainly make a generous donation to the christian/evangelical candidate.

:) - Sal

There third party candidate would be nuttier than Ross Perot who would stand no chance of winning the general election but if it will fracture and take down the GOP I'm all for it! Run nutmegs! Run!

Good. Not because it splits the Republican party but because then we can have a Democratic split too from Hillary to someone with outspoken liberal values instead of the corporatist right-of-Mussolini "middle ground" everyone is targeted toward today.

A Rudy nomination is the Dem's best chance for a White House victory.

Hey, fuck this. I am pro-life. I have, at last count, two children and NO abortions. But I am also resolutely pro-choice: I don't think our legal code should be rewritten to impose a subjective view of "morality" that is held by a vocal minority.

With a few possible exceptions (state governors who mock condemned criminals, for example), I cannot even conceive of anybody NOT being pro-life. So it's pro-choice and anti-choce.

And fuck Frank Luntz for perverting language beyond all possible comprehension, too.

I have never understood why a Christian group would align itself with the money mongers that Christ hated so much. If they want to be politically active and want a sense of how the country feels about their concerns, the development of a political party makes perfect sense. Meanwhile, I'll be on my knees praying that they actually do it.

Jamey @ 39:

Hey, fuck this. I am pro-life. I have, at last count, two children and NO abortions. But I am also resolutely pro-choice: I don't think our legal code should be rewritten to impose a subjective view of "morality" that is held by a vocal minority.

With a few possible exceptions (state governors who mock condemned criminals, for example), I cannot even conceive of anybody NOT being pro-life. So it's pro-choice and anti-choce.

And fuck Frank Luntz for perverting language beyond all possible comprehension, too.

Wrong. The evangelical xian death cultists only believe in the sanctity of life from conception to birth. From that point on, your life is only sacred if you happen to be a member of their club. If you're not, they pray for your conversion or death, whichever comes first - and it doesn't make much difference to them which one.

Steve Benen:

We’ve seen a growing body of evidence of late that far-right social conservatives really are prepared to break with the Republican Party if Rudy Giuliani is the GOP’s presidential nominee.

The religious right is assuming that the Republican presidential candidate can't win in 2008, given Bush's and the party's negatives. By going with a third party candidate who's more vocal in support of their issues, they reinforce the meme that the Republicans can't win without them - even though the Republican can't win anyway.

No wonder Giuliani is trying to reposition himself as pro-life.

They won't buy it unless he comes out in favor of the death penalty for "abortion doctors"; only the self-righteous blood-lust this would induce in the hardcore would be sufficient to blind them to Guilani's past behavior and positions. Notice how subdued the mishomists' responses were to Ted Haggard's and Larry Craig's outings; the "purity" of their moral positions goes out the window when the object is or was a useful tool.

I would like to say thank you to Mr. Krugman for the good article on Guilia and Romney's health care lies.

To the rank and file rapture crowd -- Please go - take your faithful and start a third party. You deserve this - do it for yourselves and your children, your future. Go.
*

Tomazulob @ 41:

I have never understood why a Christian group would align itself with the money mongers that Christ hated so much. If they want to be politically active and want a sense of how the country feels about their concerns, the development of a political party makes perfect sense. Meanwhile, I'll be on my knees praying that they actually do it.

It's about as easy to understand as is why they want war so much. They are very unChrist like.

Eric in Ottawa @ 6:

A third party would be great... and a 4th...5th...
I think around 4-6 would be optimal. Wouldn't be so easy to polarize every single political discussion that occurs, which is exactly how politics get manipulated these days. Once you frame both ends, you've pretty much controlled it.
Not a healthy thing in a so called democracy.

I totally agree. The two party sytem is not good. Look at these two issues that prevent the country from getting on with important business: Abortion and gay rights.

The gays aren't going anywhere, just look around you. Yes, they'd (we'd, but I'm Canadian and... ) like rights, but they have learned to live with things the way they are. And rich people, with unwanted pregnancies will just go abraod, to, say, Canada/Europe, and get it done. Poor people will be forced to offer up their kids on Craigslist, and then be charged with a crime; use a coat hanger; or go to a "back alley clinic". All very very sad, indeed.

So the alternative is to vote in a bunch od neo-cons, to bomb the planet????

. It’s my responsibility as a citizen to vote for what I think the country needs and that is not it. If the party chooses Hillary and she can’t beat whatever crazy Republican she’s matched up against then it’s not my fault for voting for someone else, but the fault of everyone else that put up such a flawed candidate to begin with. FYI, don’t start preaching to me about Ralph Nader either. Gore couldn’t even carry his own home district or state. Florida was only in play because he ran such a shitty campaign. Gore couldn’t win debates because he couldn’t refute “funny math”. That’s his own damn fault, stop blaming everyone else.

I'm not a fan of Sen Clinton and I can understand your desire for the "perfect" candidate...hate to burst your bubble but there ain't no such thing...anyone can find fault with anyone..but the point is you choose not vote or throw away your vote you may just tilt that election to a repug...and when he appoints conservative judges or further carries on the conservative/rightwing agenda don't come here and rant and rave....

Vote for the "kinder-gentler" war-monger.

A cross party ticket would be interesting .... if it were feasable?? Running as a 3rd party? Paul/Kucinich. These are the only two that seem to have anything even close to the public interest in mind... aren't neck deep in special interest money... and won't try to convince every last american that there may be an islamo-fascist under your bed.

Hmm.... Maybe I haven't noticed, but isn't

"So, more than half of white evangelical Republicans[...]"

coming directly from the Department of Redundancy Department?

I love watching the Republic Party's most offensive members eating their own fellow Rethugs. (no offense Senator Craig, Jeff Gannon, etc, too many to name)