Catfight!!!----Freddy vs. Rudy

Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson is expected to officially announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination some time in September. Although I do believe getting in the race too late is going to be a great obstacle for Fred to overcome, taking shots like this one at his fellow candidates is a good way to start building you support base, without being "officially" in the race:

"Anybody who knows me knows I've always cared deeply about the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. So I've always felt sort of relieved when I flew back home to where that particular civil liberty gets as much respect as the rest of the Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, New York is trying, again, to force its ways on the rest of us, this time through the courts. First, they went after U.S. gun manufacturers, seeking through a lawsuit not only money but injunctive control over the entire industry. An act of congress in 2005 blocked, but did not end, that effort. Now, the same activist federal judge from Brooklyn who provided Mayor Giuliani's administration with the legal ruling it sought to sue gun makers, has done it again. Last week, he created a bizarre justification to allow New York City to sue out-of-state gun stores that sold guns that somehow ended up in criminal hands in the Big Apple."

Now while not directly attacking former New York City Mayor Rudy Guiliani, Fred's intent is clear. Rudy is strongly pro-gun control and governed that way. I'm not going to get on the who is right or wrong rant at this time(although I will state that I am pro-gun control to an extent), instead I want to take a look at the political implications.

This is a major weakness for Rudy, not just in the republican primaries, but also in the general election. West states such as Colorado will be strongly contested in 2008, and the issue of gun control is a very touchy subject there. Most people in the West, with the exclusion of urban California, are anti-gun control. This was an area where Republicans could take advantage, but not if Rudy is the nominee. In fact he is probably more pro-gun control than all the Democrats in the race. But let me rewind back to the primaries. Rudy's pro-choice stance hasn't seen to affect him too much, his pro-gay marriage views haven't hurt him, but gun control might. The more liberal Thompson and the others can paint him, the less appealing he will become. It might not take out a chunk of his conservative support overnight, like it might once have years ago if he was running, but it can slowly chip away at his base support. Those conservatives who favor Rudy favor him, honestly, because they feel he is the only republican who has a shot at beating Hillary. While I strongly disagree with that assessment, there is no doubt that Fred's attack on Rudy was a smart move. Thompson comes off as the Reagan conservative, while making Rudy look like a wacky liberal to the base of the GOP. This attack, along with Romney's attack on Rudy's immigration views, will slowly erode away Rudy's conservative support, the question is: can they do it in time? My opinion is, in November, when the nation's eyes truly turn to the upcoming primaries, these attacks will be re-visited and will have an impact on Rudy's electability to conservatives. The republican side of the race is still so fluid and interesting; anything could happen. The most interesting issue though that I'm anxiously awaiting to see the result of is the question of whether of not republicans will nominate a social-liberal. They never have before, but if anything can drive them to vote for Guiliani, its the fear of losing to another Clinton.

FreedomWatch.org---a $15 million lie

Freedomwatch.org, a conservative, pro-war organization has just spent over $15 million on an ad pressing the need for support for this war. Now while I do respect the opinions of all people, I do not respect those who straight up lie in order to try to make a point. In this television ad, there is a graphic of the 9/11 attacks, with the airplane flying into the World Trade Center. While this graphic is being displayed, the following statement is read about Iraq:

"They attacked us on 9/11 and they will again"

See, this is what I hate about the republican party, twisting facts in order to fool the American people iton supporting a war that is unnecessary. It has been proven that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. To say that they did is a complete and utter lie. There was not one Iraqi on the hijacked planes. Saddam Hussein had no contact with Osama bin Laden. The "they" that attacked us on 9/11 was al-Qaeda. They were and are still in Afghanistan. By going into Iraq we have done the exact thing that this ad warns us against, just not in the way freedomwatch.org sees it. By focusing our attention onto Iraq, it left Afghanistan to be re-populated with thousands of new al-Qaeda members. By going into Iraq, we let the man who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, bin-Laden, escape. If the Republicans truly wanted to fight terrorism and keep America safe, they would support the re-deployment of our troops into areas, such as Afghanistan, where there ARE men who ARE planning to attack us again.