Posted on 09/22/2006 9:25:45 AM PDT by areafiftyone
Radnor - Rudy Giuliani spoke at Radnor High School in Delaware County on Wednesday. Sponsored by the World Affairs Council, the former mayor of New York City outlined his understanding of how the War on Terror began, how it will continue and what's at stake if America gives up.
"Somewhere, someplace, people are planning to do it again," he said in regards to the Sept. 11th tragedy, "This is a lot more of a psychological war."
One of the biggest mistakes, Giuliani insists, that Americans can make is believing that the War on Terror began after the tragedy. The mayor stated that the conflict with Islamic terrorism goes further back than 9/11 or even the bombing of embassies and the USS Cole in the 1990s or the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. It goes back to the 1960s.
Giuliani described world reaction to terrorist attacks such as the 1972 Olympic hostages in Munich, Germany and the hijacking of the Achille Lauro in 1985 as "defensive." The terrorists involved in the Achille Lauro specifically were arrested by Italian authorities, but released two hours later in order "to save Italy from [future] terrorist attacks."
Because there was "no real reaction or reaction out of fear," it legitimized terrorism, Giuliani argued and sent the message that "if they do terrorism, they'll succeed, and gain access to the bargaining table."
People also made the mistake that terrorism was the product of Western injustice. Giuliani said that this was "an analysis of us rather than an analysis of them ... a projection of our thinking." How else would Yassir Arafat, a renowned terrorist, win a Nobel Peace Prize. "Was anything more absurd?" Giuliani asked the audience.
While America and the world treated terrorism as a criminal matter and reacted defensively to Islamic terrorists, "President Bush realized the fact that they had declared war on us." If America was to seize the offensive, "We would be more secure, [but] not perfectly secure, if we go on the offensive ... It's the only way we're going to stay safe."
Giuliani urged the audience that America is up against more than just Osama bin Laden or al-Qaida.
"It's not one organization or one person... They're all separate groups, there are many of them, they don't always work together... but there's a unity of purpose - they hate us. They hate what we stand for."
Specifically, they hate our freedom of religion: "Everyone has to be Muslim." They hate our freedom for women: "Women were killed in Afghanistan for showing too much skin."
Giuliani compared the position that some politicians and partisans make by emphasizing that America should focus only on Osama bin Laden or al-Qaida to how the Department of Justice would fight organized crime by focusing on only one family. He said that while authorities took out one crime family, rival crime families prospered, and the cycle of organized crime continued.
The solution, Giuliani said, is to focus on all terrorist groups and support states simultaneously.
Giuliani did not downplay the threat of Saddam Hussein and his regime.
"...the threats we would be facing is even greater... He would have been more powerful if he was still in power," he said.
For those who didn't think Iraq is a central front on the war on terror, Giuliani said the terrorists disagree. "Why are so many terrorist groups pouring so many resources into Iraq?" he said.
Coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq help deter other state sponsors in terror, Giuliani said. He pointed to how Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi decided to give up his nuclear ambitions. "Why did Gaddafi do that? It wasn't like it was a conversion of St. Paul," Giuliani joked, "I think he said to himself, 'I'll make a deal.'"
Giuliani discussed how military power is the only true bargaining chip in the War on Terror. "Whenever America is reluctant or unwilling to use power, you got nothing. Ronald Reagan ended communism because they were afraid of him," he said. "He use to get criticized so much by the New York Times and liberal media," especially for labeling the Soviet Union as the "evil empire."
The increased military spending during the 1980s, Giuliani reflected, was necessary in order to defeat the Soviet Union by bankrupting the power. The Soviets "realized that he wasn't going to stop until he spent them into oblivion," he said.
Peace is achieved, "through strength, not weakness That is how we have to deal with terrorism," Giuliani said.
Giuliani outlined the long term strategy for the War on Terror, which involves understanding the real root causes of terrorism. Terrorists come "out of regions in the world where there are repressive governments and repressive people."
"The reason they have miserable lives has nothing to do with you or me or Israel. The people of these countries are taught to blame their problems" by projecting them onto Israel and the United States, Giuliani said.
In the long run the United States must, whenever feasible, replace repressive governments in the world with accountable, democratically-elected ones. It won't happen everywhere but America must do it where we can, he said.
Giuliani contended that the present condition of violence in Iraq was worse under Saddam Hussein, the only difference is that the Iraqis voted in their elections in high turnout when the New York Times predicted low turnout.
While there are still sectarian violence, Sunnis and Shiites gathered together and formed a new constitution in hopes of protecting majority rule while respecting minority rights. "That is how you create a peaceful world," Giuliani said.
Giuliani ended his speech by asking the audience why there hasn't been a terrorist attack on America since September 11th. He also said that we ought to "prepare ourselves for the fact that we will have another terrorist attack" at some future juncture. Every municipality in America should have an emergency plan in place, because the terrorists will try something new - something American authorities have not contemplated.
Giuliani believes that terrorists will try to attack remote places in America next instead of just big cities.
Is this your High School???
(((PING))))
Once again Rudy demonstrates the words, the sounds, and the demeanor of a leader.
He Leads.
Myself, Liz, Tommy and Reagan Man would like to be included on your Rudy ping list.
Thank you.
The New York State Liberal Party on Rudy Giuliani:
Some ask, How can the Liberal Party support a candidate who disagrees with the Liberal Party position on so many gut issues? But when the Liberal Party Policy Committee reviewed a list of key social issues of deep concern to progressive New Yorkers, we found that Rudy Giuliani agreed with the Liberal Party's stance on a majority of such issues. He agreed with the Liberal Party's views on affirmative action, gay rights, gun control, school prayer and tuition tax credits. As Mayor, Rudy Giuliani would uphold the Constitutional and legal rights to abortion.
--N.Y.S. Liberal Party Endorsement Statement of R. Giuliani for Mayor of New York City April 8, 1989
On the Republican Party:
Mr. Rockefeller represented "a tradition in the Republican Party I've worked hard to re-kindle - the Rockefeller, Javits, Lefkowitz tradition."
--Rudy Giuliani
New York Times
July 9, 1992
What kind of Republican? Is [Giuliani], for instance, a Reagan Republican? [Giuliani] pauses before answering: "I'm a Republican."
--Village Voice
January 24, 1989
On Attending 1996 Republican Convention:
Rudy even expressed his pleasure when he wasn't invited to the Republican National Convention in San Diego. "If I take three or four days off from city business, I want to do it for a substantive purpose. It didn't seem to me any substantive purpose could be served by going to the Republican convention."
--Rudy - An Investigative Biography of Rudolph Giuliani,
Page 459, Wayne Barrett
On Barry Goldwater:
He [Giuliani] described John Kennedy as "great and brilliant." Barry Goldwater was an "incompetent, confused and sometimes idiotic man."
--New York Daily News,
May 13, 1997
On President Bill Clinton:
Shortly before his last-minute endorsement of Bob Dole in the 1996 presidential election, [Giuliani] told the Post's Jack Newfield that "most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine." The Daily News quoted [Giuliani] as saying that March: "Whether you talk about President Clinton, Senator Dole.... The country would be in very good hands in the hands of any of that group."
Revealing at one point that he was "open" to the idea of endorsing Clinton, he explained: "When I ran for mayor both times, '89 and '93, I promised people that I would be, if not bipartisan, at least open to the possibility of supporting Democrats."
--Rudy - An Investigative Biography of Rudolph Giuliani,
Wayne Barrett, Page 459
Rudy Giuliani's October 1994 Endorsement of Democratic Governor Mario Cuomo:
"From my point of view as the mayor of New York City, the question that I have to ask is, Who has the best chance in the next four years of successfully fighting for our interest? Who understands them, and who will make the best case for it?' Our future, our destiny is not a matter of chance. It's a matter of choice. My choice is Mario Cuomo."
--Rudy Giuliani: Emperor of the City
Andrew Kirtzman, Page 133
Reaction to Giuliani Endorsement of Cuomo:
"Once again, Rudolph Giuliani has demonstrated that liberalism is the foundation of his political philosophy. While Giuliani sold a bill of goods to trusting Republicans and Reagan Democrats that he had abandoned his roots as a McGovern Democrat, in his endorsement of Mario Cuomo, Mr. Liberal himself, he has shown his true colors. Giuliani's argument that Cuomo will be better for the city has a hollow ring to it. Perhaps Rudy wants a governor who will sign over a blank check to constantly bail out the city from its fiscal problems. Giuliani knows, as do all New Yorkers, that Cuomo's liberal policies have been an economic disaster for our city and state."
"But Rudy doesn't care. He has proven he will do anything to stop the election of a conservative Republican - but he won't succeed."
--Michael Long, Chairman N.Y.S. Conservative Party Press Statement,
October 25, 1994
"[Quite] frankly, you have to understand the fact that Rudy Giuliani was a McGovern Democrat, he was endorsed by the Liberal Party when he ran for Mayor. In his heart, he's a Democrat. He's paraded all over this country with Bill Clinton and, in fact, he's very comfortable with Mario Cuomo. But what Rudy Giuliani wants is to be bailed out in the city, in the mess he's in, and everybody understands very clearly in politics that they struck a deal, that Mario's going to continue to be the big spender, save Rudy the options of raising taxes by pouring money statewide into the City of New York and bailing it out. Quite frankly, I predict that he will join the Democratic Party."
--Interview with Michael Long, Chairman N.Y.S. Conservative Party,
CNN Crossfire, October 25, 1994
On Gay Domestic-Partner Rights:
National Republicans can lump it if they don't like his new domestic-partners bill, Mayor Giuliani said yesterday.
"I really haven't thought about what the impact is on Republican politics or national politics or Democratic politics," Giuliani said.
The bill he submitted to the City Council would extend the benefits city agencies must grant to gay and lesbian couples.
"I'm proud of it," Giuliani said of the bill. "I think it puts New York City ahead of other places in the country."
--New York Daily News, May 13, 1998
On Gay-Rights\Gay Rights Bill:
Giuliani favors extended civil-rights protection for gays and lesbians. Giuliani urged, by letter, to the New York Senate Majority Leader to pass the state's first ever gay rights bill, but did it privately.
"I am writing to convey my support for the current legislation to prohibit discrimination against gays and lesbians, and to urge you to allow the bill onto the floor of the Senate for prompt action."
"...It is my belief that we can penalize discrimination [against gays] without creating any potentially objectionable special privileges or preferential treatment."
--New York Post, June 5, 1993
Now Rudy Giuliani has jumped on the bandwagon, pressing the state Republican Party to release a gay-rights bill to the Senate floor for a vote. Marching in Sunday's [Gay Pride] parade, he has enlisted in the struggle to destroy the family. What a perfectly abominable springboard to seek high political office.
--Ray Kerrison
New York Post, June 30, 1993
Giuliani said homosexuality is "good and normal."
--Ray Kerrison
New York Post, July 7, 1989
On Gay Domestic Partnership:
"I have no objection to the concept of domestic partnership."
--Rudy Giuliani
Informed Sources
New York T.V. Show (PBS), May, 1992
On Abortion:
Leaflets distributed by the Giuliani campaign .... said that he opposes restrictions to Federal Medicaid financing for abortions and opposes the Hyde Amendment, which is intended to deny support for that financing.
--New York Times, June 18, 1993
"I'd give my daughter the money for it [an abortion]."
"I never called for the overturning of Roe vs. Wade."
--Rudy Giuliani
New York Newsday, September 1, 1989
As mayor, Rudy Giuliani will uphold a woman's right of choice to have an abortion. Giuliani will fund all city programs which provide abortions to insure that no woman is deprived of her right due to an inability to pay. He will oppose reductions in state funding. He will oppose making abortion illegal.
--New York Times, August 4, 1989
On Partial Birth Abortion:
Mr. Giuliani has said that New York State law should not be changed to outlaw the procedure.
-- New York Times, January 7, 1998
On School Choice:
"I wanted to know if he supports tuition tax credits and vouchers, which he doesn't."
--Sandra Feldman,
President of N.Y.C. Teacher's Union, 1993
On Taxes:
[Giuliani] says ruling out a tax increase is "political pandering."
--Newsday, August 31, 1989
“We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all.”
--- Ronald Reagan, 1965
No Problem! :-)
Although Rudy is very liberal on social issues I would have to give him the nod over McLame. But I think he would have a tough time overcoming the Kerik scandals and the nasty divorce.
LOL (We'd better ask the others first, I think it polite to get their permission!)
Rudy Giuliani has proven, both during his tenure as mayor of New York and through his subsequent rhetoric, that he is a pro-growth Republican in the mold of Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, and Newt Gingrich. As mayor, Giuliani cut city taxes by more than eight billion dollars, reducing the tax burden on New Yorkers by 22%. Giuliani's low-tax views remain intact. As Race42008 correspondent Kavon noted yesterday, Rudy’s recent visit to Minnesota included an emphasis on achieving economic growth via low taxes and less regulation on the economy. Rockefeller he ain’t; Rudy’s a Reagan Republican.
Rudy: Gingrich-style government reformer
Conservatives who liked Newt’s welfare reform and GWB’s attempt at entitlement reform have an ally in Rudy. As mayor, Giuliani reformed welfare in New York with the same tenacity as the class of ‘94 in Congress. Once again, this ain’t Christie Whitman we’re dealing with; Rudy’s a Newt Republican who also made a serious attempt to take on the teachers’ unions in NYC and fund school choice via charter schools. A President Giuliani means a conservative reformer who will fight for market-based revisions to our age-old bureaucratic messes in Washington.
Rudy Giuliani: Fiscal conservative
As mayor, Rudy Giuliani cut the New York City government payroll by 19%, eliminating unnecessary civil servants from the public dole. Can anyone remember the last time a Republican president was able to send lazy federal workers packing? Inheriting a multi-billion dollar deficit, Rudy turned it into a surplus, delivering eight consecutive balanced budgets. Folks, this ain’t Linc Chafee we’re talking about here.
Giuliani: Tough enough to take on the bad guys
Unlike the Democrats, who are too nuanced to acknowledge that the “bad guys” in life even exist, Rudy Giuliani knows how to identify a threat to safety and security and pound that threat into submission. Giuliani’s record on crime in NYC is well-documented; if Rudy is able to do to the terrorists what he did to the crime lords of the Big Apple, Americans will once again be able to feel secure in an uncertain world. Sure, every Republican will talk tough on terror, but only Rudy’s proven he actually knows how to eliminate a threat terrorizing a population.
Rudy will secure our borders
An essential component of national security includes securing America’s borders. Unfortunately, President Bush has been unwilling to take the necessary steps to accomplish that task. While John McCain and Mitt Romney discuss “comprehensive” solutions, Rudy is ready to do what it takes to prevent individuals from illegally entering the United States. During his recent visit to Minnesota, Rudy laid out his immigration plan, which begins with sealing the borders and also involves ensuring that immigrants learn English so that they can be better assimilated into American culture. As such, Rudy is to the right of President Bush on this issue.
Giuliani would appoint strict constructionists to the judiciary
Social conservatives who want to see Roe v. Wade overturned and who fear the imposition of same-sex marriage on unwilling populations by judicial fiat have a friend in Giuliani. Rudy has now explicitly voiced support for the appointment of strict constructionists to the federal bench. His recent trip to Minnesota included an admission that he would appoint judges like Roberts and Alito. During this same trip, Rudy also confirmed that he believes legislatures, and not judges, should set policy. A Giuliani presidency would now almost certainly fail to yield judicial rulings from the federal bench in favor of gay marriage, and would be at least as likely as any other Republican presidency to see abortion returned to the political process, where it belongs.
Rudy believes that marriage is between a man and a woman
Mayor Giuliani has made clear his belief in traditional marriage only; that marriage should be defined as being between a man and a woman, and in no other form. Says Rudy:
“I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, that it should remain that way, it should remain that way inviolate, and everything should be done to make sure that that’s the case,…”
Some social conservatives are uncomfortable that Rudy doesn’t support amending the Constitution to make sure this definition of marriage stands. But Rudy has made clear that he’ll do whatever it takes to maintain the traditional definition of marriage; he just thinks the constitutional amendment is the wrong strategy right now. I agree. As long as judges like Roberts and Alito are on the bench — the type that Rudy would appoint as president — a constitutional amendment is unnecessary.
Giuliani understands the party he’s leading
Unlike McCain, who basically told southern, religious conservatives where they could go back in 2000, Rudy understands that he’s campaigning to lead the party of the sunbelt — a party that is more pro-life and pro-gun than his New York constituents. As such, the mayor has given no indication that he will turn his presidency into some sort of pro-abortion, pro-gun control crusade, and every indication that he will defer to his base on those issues. We’ve yet to get definitive statements from Rudy regarding abortion or the Second Amendment in the last few years. While Rudy opponents trot out statements from the 1990s or even the 1980s on those issues, let’s wait and see where Rudy stands in 2006 before passing any judgment. Mayor Giuliani might just surprise pro-life, pro-Second Amendment conservatives with his interpretation of how the president, and not the mayor of the most liberal city in the country, should handle these hot-button cultural issues. At the very least, Giuliani appears prepared to do no harm to conservatives on these issues while promising to advance their causes via the appointment of conservative judges.Â
Rudy Giuliani is absolutely electable
Despite what John Hawkins says, Rudy is probably the most electable Republican in the country right now. In fact, it would be very, very difficult for me to imagine a scenario in which Rudy would lose to any Democrat, and the mayor would easily trounce the Gore/Kerry sort of Democrat that the Left insists on nominating time after time. If Hillary or Gore is the nominee in 2008, Rudy would win the electoral college in a walk. Here’s why.
First, the impact of an ethnic Catholic leading a presidential ticket must not be understated. The entire industrial north is a region filled with Catholics of eastern and southern European descent. This includes states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, which went for John Kerry by only two and three percentage points in 2004, respectively. Identity politics alone would likely garner Giuliani a couple of extra percentage points across the Rust Belt, just as President Bush likely benefited from his southern evangelical status in states filled with southern evangelicals.
Secondly, Rudy’s fiscally-conservative profile is very similar to the Republican executives elected by the voters of states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. By reminding upper-midwestern voters of their favorite governors, like Tommy Thompson, John Engler, and Tom Ridge, Rudy would likely garner another few points out of the Rust Belt.
So let’s say that Rudy’s ethnic Catholic, working class background, combined with his Rust Belt-style positions on the issues, is able to increase the GOP presidential ticket’s vote share by five percent from 2004 across the Rust Belt, which includes the states bordered by Minnesota and Iowa in the west and New Jersey in the east. The result of this sort of a swing would send the following states into the “red” column: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. That’s another 58 electoral votes for the GOP ticket.
Now, John Hawkins will argue that’s all for naught, as Rudy, who is unable to pound the podium regarding life issues with the same tenacity as President Bush, will likely lose a few points across the South. Okay, I’ll bite. Let’s assume that Rudy’s presidential ticket loses five points from Bush’s 2004 totals in every single southern state simply because he’s a) not an evangelical, b) he can’t call himself pro-life, and c) he’s not for amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage. I think assuming a five point loss in every southern state is more than generous to John’s argument in this case, and I suspect Hawkins would agree. Now, let’s see how many southern states Rudy loses with that five point loss across the South…
Absolutely none.
In fact, the only state that would be teetering on the edge with a five point reduction in the South from Bush’s 2004 numbers would be Florida, a state filled with ex-New-Yorkers who would almost certainly make up for any sort of Bush-Giuliani gap in the region. The fact of the matter is simply that the GOP has succeeded in Republicanizing the South to the extent that most southern states are simply no longer in danger of turning “blue” during a presidential election. Mark Warner might be able to win a few of them against Arlen Specter, but as has been demonstrated above, Rudy’s no Arlen Specter. And Hillary Clinton is no Mark Warner.
Further, Hawkins’ argument that Rudy couldn’t survive without the support of the GOP base is very true. As such, it’s a good thing that Rudy has been able to attain the support of that very base. Rudy generally garners between 85% and 90% of Republicans in a hypothetical matchup against a standard blue-state Democrat like Hillary Clinton. These numbers are just ever-so-slightly shy of Bush’s 90-plus percent GOP support against Kerry in 2004. And while it’s true that Rudy’s support among independents and Democrats will fluctuate, it’s probably also true that Rudy will at least win independents in the general election, which the president couldn’t do two years ago. Given those considerations, it’s hard to see how Rudy can be viewed as anything other than supremely electable.
Conclusion
Of the current GOP 2008 field, Rudy Giuliani is the only candidate who brings to the table the charisma and leadership of a Reagan, the transformative conservative policies of a Gingrich, and the seriousness regarding the GWOT of a Bush. Giuliani is perfectly suited to lead today’s sunbelt center-right GOP due to his belief in low taxes, fiscal responsibility, market-based government reform, traditional marriage, conservative judges, securing the borders, and, last but certainly not least, the destruction of the terrorist threat against America. Only Rudy can package all of this conservatism in a manner that appeals to large numbers of swing voters while still maintaining solid levels of support among the Republican base. Rudy Giuliani would almost certainly sweep the electoral college against any Democrat by holding all of the red states, most of which are now so heavily Republican that only a very conservative Democrat has a chance of winning them, while flipping the electoral-rich Rust Belt that has at least as much of a cultural connection with Giuliani as the South did with President Bush. Tough, conservative, and electable, conservatives could do a lot worse than Rudy Giuliani.
He's got my vote!!!
(((SIGH)))) I give up on posting that one. LOL I don't see it on the HTML but when it posts these stupid things pop up! I guess I'll have to do it manually from now on.
I sure never listened to real stuff like that when I was in high school! Rudy's the one.
Me neither. Never had anyone exciting at our school.
Giuliani discussed how military power is the only true bargaining chip in the War on Terror. "Whenever America is reluctant or unwilling to use power, you got nothing. Ronald Reagan ended communism because they were afraid of him," he said. "He use to get criticized so much by the New York Times and liberal media," especially for labeling the Soviet Union as the "evil empire."Very true.
Rudy Giuliani has proven, both during his tenure as mayor of New York and through his subsequent rhetoric, that he is a pro-growth Republican in the mold of Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, and Newt Gingrich. As mayor, Giuliani cut city taxes by more than eight billion dollars, reducing the tax burden on New Yorkers by 22%. Giuliani's low-tax views remain intact. As Race42008 correspondent Kavon noted yesterday, Rudy’s recent visit to Minnesota included an emphasis on achieving economic growth via low taxes and less regulation on the economy. Rockefeller he ain’t; Rudy’s a Reagan Republican.
Rudy: Gingrich-style government reformer
Conservatives who liked Newt’s welfare reform and GWB’s attempt at entitlement reform have an ally in Rudy. As mayor, Giuliani reformed welfare in New York with the same tenacity as the class of ‘94 in Congress. Once again, this ain’t Christie Whitman we’re dealing with; Rudy’s a Newt Republican who also made a serious attempt to take on the teachers’ unions in NYC and fund school choice via charter schools. A President Giuliani means a conservative reformer who will fight for market-based revisions to our age-old bureaucratic messes in Washington.
Rudy Giuliani: Fiscal conservative
As mayor, Rudy Giuliani cut the New York City government payroll by 19%, eliminating unnecessary civil servants from the public dole. Can anyone remember the last time a Republican president was able to send lazy federal workers packing? Inheriting a multi-billion dollar deficit, Rudy turned it into a surplus, delivering eight consecutive balanced budgets. Folks, this ain’t Linc Chafee we’re talking about here.
Giuliani: Tough enough to take on the bad guys
Unlike the Democrats, who are too nuanced to acknowledge that the “bad guys” in life even exist, Rudy Giuliani knows how to identify a threat to safety and security and pound that threat into submission. Giuliani’s record on crime in NYC is well-documented; if Rudy is able to do to the terrorists what he did to the crime lords of the Big Apple, Americans will once again be able to feel secure in an uncertain world. Sure, every Republican will talk tough on terror, but only Rudy’s proven he actually knows how to eliminate a threat terrorizing a population.
Rudy will secure our borders
An essential component of national security includes securing America’s borders. Unfortunately, President Bush has been unwilling to take the necessary steps to accomplish that task. While John McCain and Mitt Romney discuss “comprehensive” solutions, Rudy is ready to do what it takes to prevent individuals from illegally entering the United States. During his recent visit to Minnesota, Rudy laid out his immigration plan, which begins with sealing the borders and also involves ensuring that immigrants learn English so that they can be better assimilated into American culture. As such, Rudy is to the right of President Bush on this issue.
Giuliani would appoint strict constructionists to the judiciary
Social conservatives who want to see Roe v. Wade overturned and who fear the imposition of same-sex marriage on unwilling populations by judicial fiat have a friend in Giuliani. Rudy has now explicitly voiced support for the appointment of strict constructionists to the federal bench. His recent trip to Minnesota included an admission that he would appoint judges like Roberts and Alito. During this same trip, Rudy also confirmed that he believes legislatures, and not judges, should set policy. A Giuliani presidency would now almost certainly fail to yield judicial rulings from the federal bench in favor of gay marriage, and would be at least as likely as any other Republican presidency to see abortion returned to the political process, where it belongs.
Rudy believes that marriage is between a man and a woman
Mayor Giuliani has made clear his belief in traditional marriage only; that marriage should be defined as being between a man and a woman, and in no other form. Says Rudy:
“I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, that it should remain that way, it should remain that way inviolate, and everything should be done to make sure that that’s the case,…”
Some social conservatives are uncomfortable that Rudy doesn’t support amending the Constitution to make sure this definition of marriage stands. But Rudy has made clear that he’ll do whatever it takes to maintain the traditional definition of marriage; he just thinks the constitutional amendment is the wrong strategy right now. I agree. As long as judges like Roberts and Alito are on the bench the type that Rudy would appoint as president a constitutional amendment is unnecessary.
Giuliani understands the party he’s leading
Unlike McCain, who basically told southern, religious conservatives where they could go back in 2000, Rudy understands that he’s campaigning to lead the party of the sunbelt a party that is more pro-life and pro-gun than his New York constituents. As such, the mayor has given no indication that he will turn his presidency into some sort of pro-abortion, pro-gun control crusade, and every indication that he will defer to his base on those issues. We’ve yet to get definitive statements from Rudy regarding abortion or the Second Amendment in the last few years. While Rudy opponents trot out statements from the 1990s or even the 1980s on those issues, let’s wait and see where Rudy stands in 2006 before passing any judgment. Mayor Giuliani might just surprise pro-life, pro-Second Amendment conservatives with his interpretation of how the president, and not the mayor of the most liberal city in the country, should handle these hot-button cultural issues. At the very least, Giuliani appears prepared to do no harm to conservatives on these issues while promising to advance their causes via the appointment of conservative judges.
Rudy Giuliani is absolutely electable
Despite what John Hawkins says, Rudy is probably the most electable Republican in the country right now. In fact, it would be very, very difficult for me to imagine a scenario in which Rudy would lose to any Democrat, and the mayor would easily trounce the Gore/Kerry sort of Democrat that the Left insists on nominating time after time. If Hillary or Gore is the nominee in 2008, Rudy would win the electoral college in a walk. Here’s why.
First, the impact of an ethnic Catholic leading a presidential ticket must not be understated. The entire industrial north is a region filled with Catholics of eastern and southern European descent. This includes states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, which went for John Kerry by only two and three percentage points in 2004, respectively. Identity politics alone would likely garner Giuliani a couple of extra percentage points across the Rust Belt, just as President Bush likely benefited from his southern evangelical status in states filled with southern evangelicals.
Secondly, Rudy’s fiscally-conservative profile is very similar to the Republican executives elected by the voters of states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. By reminding upper-midwestern voters of their favorite governors, like Tommy Thompson, John Engler, and Tom Ridge, Rudy would likely garner another few points out of the Rust Belt.
So let’s say that Rudy’s ethnic Catholic, working class background, combined with his Rust Belt-style positions on the issues, is able to increase the GOP presidential ticket’s vote share by five percent from 2004 across the Rust Belt, which includes the states bordered by Minnesota and Iowa in the west and New Jersey in the east. The result of this sort of a swing would send the following states into the “red” column: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. That’s another 58 electoral votes for the GOP ticket.
Now, John Hawkins will argue that’s all for naught, as Rudy, who is unable to pound the podium regarding life issues with the same tenacity as President Bush, will likely lose a few points across the South. Okay, I’ll bite. Let’s assume that Rudy’s presidential ticket loses five points from Bush’s 2004 totals in every single southern state simply because he’s a) not an evangelical, b) he can’t call himself pro-life, and c) he’s not for amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage. I think assuming a five point loss in every southern state is more than generous to John’s argument in this case, and I suspect Hawkins would agree. Now, let’s see how many southern states Rudy loses with that five point loss across the South…
Absolutely none.
In fact, the only state that would be teetering on the edge with a five point reduction in the South from Bush’s 2004 numbers would be Florida, a state filled with ex-New-Yorkers who would almost certainly make up for any sort of Bush-Giuliani gap in the region. The fact of the matter is simply that the GOP has succeeded in Republicanizing the South to the extent that most southern states are simply no longer in danger of turning “blue” during a presidential election. Mark Warner might be able to win a few of them against Arlen Specter, but as has been demonstrated above, Rudy’s no Arlen Specter. And Hillary Clinton is no Mark Warner.
Further, Hawkins’ argument that Rudy couldn’t survive without the support of the GOP base is very true. As such, it’s a good thing that Rudy has been able to attain the support of that very base. Rudy generally garners between 85% and 90% of Republicans in a hypothetical matchup against a standard blue-state Democrat like Hillary Clinton. These numbers are just ever-so-slightly shy of Bush’s 90-plus percent GOP support against Kerry in 2004. And while it’s true that Rudy’s support among independents and Democrats will fluctuate, it’s probably also true that Rudy will at least win independents in the general election, which the president couldn’t do two years ago. Given those considerations, it’s hard to see how Rudy can be viewed as anything other than supremely electable.
Conclusion
Of the current GOP 2008 field, Rudy Giuliani is the only candidate who brings to the table the charisma and leadership of a Reagan, the transformative conservative policies of a Gingrich, and the seriousness regarding the GWOT of a Bush. Giuliani is perfectly suited to lead today’s sunbelt center-right GOP due to his belief in low taxes, fiscal responsibility, market-based government reform, traditional marriage, conservative judges, securing the borders, and, last but certainly not least, the destruction of the terrorist threat against America. Only Rudy can package all of this conservatism in a manner that appeals to large numbers of swing voters while still maintaining solid levels of support among the Republican base. Rudy Giuliani would almost certainly sweep the electoral college against any Democrat by holding all of the red states, most of which are now so heavily Republican that only a very conservative Democrat has a chance of winning them, while flipping the electoral-rich Rust Belt that has at least as much of a cultural connection with Giuliani as the South did with President Bush. Tough, conservative, and electable, conservatives could do a lot worse than Rudy Giuliani.
Thanks so much! That was very kind of you.
The only question in 2008 is who will fight the War on Terror like our lives depend on it -- which they do?
Nobody comes close to Rudy on this. And I see no other candidate that will appeal to moderates like him.
As for those who don't like is views on Social Issues -- well, if you insist on getting someone who agrees with you 100% of the time, you might get Tancredo as the nominee, but you will get Shrillary as President.
If you don't want nukes killing millions of us, Rudy has to be the nominee.
Don't forget to go to pg. source and copy my post #17, then save it as a document. And feel free to copy and save my other posts regarding Giuliani, Quotable Rudy - The Knight and the Queen - etc. :^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.