Posted on 11/15/2006 12:26:14 PM PST by Keyes2000mt
Two reasons are commonly cited for backing Rudy Giuliani for President. The first is fighting the war on terror and the second is his ability to defeat Hillary Clinton.
Plenty of candidates can defeat Hillary Clinton without causing the ideological firefight a Giuliani candidacy would bring on the Republican Party, but the issue of the War deserves to be addressed.
Giuliani's view as most capable to prosecute the war hinges on his conduct on 9/11 and immediately afterwards. I've never been a huge fan of Rudy's, but his performance was nothing short of magnificent. His resolve and courage on that day was inspiring. He handled the disaster and it's aftermath with guts, grit, and grace.
The same could be said of many leaders. Do you remember the Congress standing together singing "God Bless America?" Who could forget President Bush at Ground Zero with the megaphone? Bush throwing out the first pitch at Yankee Stadium in Game 3 was a moment that moved New Yorkers and Americans of every partisan stripe. His tough talking rhetoric and quick action into Afghanistan, led to job approval ratings that stood in the 80% range for 5-6 months. Rarely has any President had an era of such popularity.
What happened? When the grieving and the talking were over, Bush had to go and fight the war. In the process, we have killed or captured countless Al Qaeda operatives, but mistakes were made along the way and a price was paid from the battering of the opposition press.
Bush declined. Other politicians who in that moment enjoyed new-found respect for simply leading our country have all come falling back to Earth, but not Rudy. In 5 years, Rudy has not had to make a tough political decision, he has not had a scandal or a controversy as a result of fighting the War on Terror. In the minds of the American people, unlike Bush, our image of Rudy is frozen in time.
The problem becomes after he begins to campaign in his own right. He's no longer an untouchable superstar, but another politician seeking power. When Rudy went out campaigning for Republican Candidates the last few years, no one in the media would bring up his long-forgotten adulterous tryst while serving in Gracie Mansion and his subsequent remarriage without approval from the Catholic Church.
On the campaign trail, it'll become open territory. Of course, what will bring him down to Earth faster than anything else is Rudy himself. The gaffes will come and few people will be thinking of his September 11th performance.
When it's all said and done, what will be left standing before us is a liberal New York politician with just enough common sense to know terrorists who blow up our buildings are evil, but not enough to know that Partial Birth Abortion is wrong. We can and must do better. Rudy Giuliani's supporters are urging us to vote for the myth, but our country must live with the man.
Because we want to win. As miserable as we all felt last Tuesday, can you imagine the feeling if Hillary were to win in 08 and her lip-biting, side-kick was back on the world stage for 8 more years? I think it has to be an Al Davis election -- "Just win, baby!" It has to be ABH - Anyone But Hillary. We can go back to being principled AFTER 08, can't we? Look what all those conservatives standing on principles got us this time.
We have to figure out who can beat Hillary and rally around that person. Rudy, McCain, Romney or X??
<< Rudy's Riding His Moment ... >>
... Off into the sunset!
(Orrrrrr-gee-whiz, it's seventeen after, already, already, Mr Guiliani. Y'15's up!) )
Remember, back in 2000, when we were on different sides? Good to be in agreement on this one! :)
I'd have no problem voting for Rudy Giuliani.
Yet another Rudy thread, eh? There must be a roomful of people in New York on laptops working for the exploratory committee pushing this worthless candidate.
Given that Rudy has stated publically that he agrees with Clinton on most issues, there's really no point in further discussion of him as a viable Presidential candidate.
And how about "Warrior Rudy" DEFENDING the Clintons?
When Bill Clinton had that televised contretemps with Chris Wallace recently, Clinton told Wallace it was "neocons" stopping him in his attempt to fight terrorism.
Oops. Shouldn't have said that. Blaming neocons is a Big no-no.
Then low and behold, 9/11 WOT Warrior Rudy, emerges unasked, and tells the world that the Clintons were NOT to blame for the spread of terrorism (Who told you to say that Rudy? Billy Kristol?)
Doesn't Rudy know the Clintons spent the past 6 years doing every thing possible (using Bush-hater Soros' dollars) to encourage the insurgents to rout US troops?
Rudy rushing to defending Clintonism takes care of the desperate cries from Rudy rooters who insist conservatives must sacrifice everything, and nominate Giuliani-----in order to to keep Hillary out of the White House.
Bubba, Hillary, and Rudy are cut from the same cloth. They believe they have the magical ability to "cloud men's minds" so that everything they ever said or did---anything that gets in the way of their ambitions---- is magically erased.
Name one.
C'mon....
Just one (along with why he/she can beat Hillary)...
Awfully quiet here!
- John
By virtue of the fact that he can win in NYC means he probably doesn't stand a chance winning anywhere else.
NYC is a world unto itself.
Is Brownback thinking of running? Tommy Thompson? Haley Barbour?
NYC. If you can make it there, you can't make it in the GOP primaries. Because you can make it there (NYC) only by being a liberal.
I'll throw a possible name out there and why.
Mark Sanford
For one he's more telegenic than Rudy in looks. Plus he's got the right policies. He just won re-election and on his own principles not just an attempt to appeal to voters.
He's Governor of a southern state so he would have that sewn up. He was born in Florida and for that reason I think he'd have broader appeal.
He's pro-military and currently a reservist in the Air Force. He could probably beat Hillary on the Bloated Budget alone because he's a fiscal conservative that has walked the walk. He has no tolerance for pork which would appeal to swing voters.
He may not be a well known 'star' but he has substance that can get the base motivated to get out the vote and go to the polls.
If the base is split there is little hope of winning enough swing voters to get to the WH. It didn't work in '92/'96 and I'm not for risking it in '08 with a Guiliani/McCain nomination.
Brownback was actually an early favorite of conservatves, but he came out on the wrong side of immigration. Barbour has denied any interest, but he is a dark horse favorite due to his excellent of handling the Katrina disaster recovery in Mississippi. Tommy Thompson has been virtually invisible since he left his cabinet position.
"Because we want to win"
If a liberal wins, "we" won't have won.
Regardless of party.
"We can go back to being principled AFTER 08, can't we?"
We've had to say that EVERY ELECTION. "Maybe next time"....
Where has that gotten us?
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.