Skip to comments.Giuliani fears ex-wife will hit presidential bid
Posted on 01/07/2007 11:46:24 AM PST by wagglebee
click here to read article
Not for long.
I thought that was GWB in 2000...
2008 is not going to afford a similar opportunity to Duncan Hunter or any other congressman.
If the new Rosie O'Donnell wing of the Republican party keeps equating the Christians with the Taliban, I wouldn't count on that.
I should have said that his leadership skills were not tested. How many stars did he have when he retired?
You are completely ignorant of Hollywood history.
He did earn big points when he told that Saudi prince to stick his check where the sun don't shine, though.
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Mayor Rudy Giuliani said Thursday the city would not accept a $10 million donation for disaster relief from Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal after the prince suggested U.S. policies in the Middle East contributed to the September 11 attacks.
"Meanwhile, in 1862, Ohioans elected him to Congress. President Lincoln persuaded him to resign his commission: It was easier to find major generals than to obtain effective Republicans for Congress. Garfield repeatedly won re-election for 18 years, and became the leading Republican in the House.
At the 1880 Republican Convention, Garfield failed to win the Presidential nomination for his friend John Sherman. Finally, on the 36th ballot, Garfield himself became the "dark horse" nominee."
So will be be Mitt, Rudy, or John? Any prediction?
As far as Reagan goes, there are a lot of differences.
Hollywood WAS NOT the leftist bastion in the 1940s and 50s that it is today. Look at guys like John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, etc., they were totally pro-America. They supported blacklisting communists. Hollywood started going downhill during Vietnam.
Most importantly, Reagan more than proved himself as governor of California and he was the undisputed leader of conservativism after Goldwater's defeat in 1964.
It is the soldier who wins the wars on the field. Does he risk any less?
Anyone who cares about conservative or even middle-of-road values will disregard Giulliani's former wife because she was in the disgusting Broadway show, Vagina Monologues. Any shred of credibility she may have is completely overwhelmed by this disgusting lapse in judgment. No wonder Rudy wanted out.
Yea, i guess i must have forgotten all the pro america and pro war films that came out in the 40's.
There you go again.
The circumstances of Reagan's divorce were not the same. Moreover, the divorce was more than thirty years behind him. He had consitently demonstrated exceptional emotional and moral stability and integrity by the time he ran for president.
Giuliani has not demonstrated requisite emotional and moral stability and integrity. A man who cannot exercise the necessary self-discipline to be faithful to his wife and children cannot be trusted to be faithful in other things.
Ding ding ding... we have a winner...
Perhaps they just want to set us true conservatives up with another round of "it your fault that republicans didn't win" in 2008 arguments.
Guiliani is a loser on so many levels that is appalls me that people even consider him.
I'll vote for Bullwinkle too. We might just be getting a grass-roots movement going here.
I haven't decided who I'm voting for, but I hate to see everyone dumping on someone who has clearly shown backbone when we are in the middle of a war of survival.
If this were another time, I probably wouldn't even consider the man, but I want someone in there who is going to stand up to the terrorists and make them quake in their boots.
-he won't last the year out. Just my prediction.
It does not matter who did what long ago... it only matters what happens now...
Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary will not get my vote.
I'll take Reagan's advice and vote with my feet...
The problem with Ex-Wives is they remember EVERYTHING. Every tittle and jot. They have photographic memories. Shakespeare was right about women scorned.
Giuliani's problem is he was so flagrant about it...He publically humiliated his wife. Infidelity is one thing. Flagrant in your face ,public infidelity is another.
If Hannover wants to keep Giuliani on the tabloid front pages I'm sure she has a quiver full.
Who would marry a woman that would do "Vagina" anything?
And the majority of Americans just voted for the dems who promised to cut and run out of Iraq. Queen nancy is reveling in her plans to do just that.
But there was a time when a divorced person such as Reagan could not have been elected, just as Catholics were out of the running prior to Kennedy. After Clinton, what can anyone say about infidelity, the media is showing a lot of hypocricy here. When we find the perfect candidate with all the morality and views some here wish for, he or she probably won't have the other qualities needed to reach the electorate or to lead if by some miracle there is a victory by the GOP in '08 with a currently unknown perfectly devoted husband/father/conservative.
Of course, any real conservative won't even get that far because they will already know that Rudy is not a conservative in any sense of the word.
Opps, after three kids, I retract my previous statement as misleading.
I can't support someone who is a scum. Maybe you will lower yourself with that kind of rationale, I won't.
What? Are you entitled to your own facts and version of history? What a stupid post.
only if you're a 'rat
Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt come to mind. They were cousins too, twice removed I think.
First off, Hollywood of the 30`s, 40`s and 50`s wasn't the same Hollywood of today. Since the beginning of civil marriages, most divorces ahve been acrimonious. Until 1962, Reagan was a Democrat, a conservative Democrat! Finally, Patty and Ron Jr were the two Reagan children who didn't get along with their Father in their younger days. Maureen and Michael never had big problems with their Father.
Btw, Rudy Giuliani is no Ronald Reagan. The comparision is insulting to the legacy and memory of a great American.
"OK, this is to all the boneheads who are going to push for a Tancredo or Hunter or anything else presidency: "
Most other elections you'd be right. But the four top guys are deeply flawed this time around, and the last time we ran a campaign picked by the country clubbers like yourself was with Bob Dole. Come to think of it, the 2006 mid terms were run by you guys too. Rules are meant to be broken.
I freely admit that infidelity in a marriage is one of the few, absolute litmus tests I apply to discard political candidates running for high office. As you have expressed, I also believe it is a reliable indicator of overall strength of character.
I stopped listening to Bill Clinton on the campaign trail in 1992 after he appeared in the CBS 60 Minutes interview with Hillary and basically admitted to extramarital affairs without coming out and saying the words.
Drama from Rudy's personal life isn't going to hurt him.
What can sink him, if Rudy isn't aggressive, is this. People like Rahm Emmanuel and Chris Lahane will probably try to take Giuliani's greatest advantage, 911, and turn it against him. People will support a scoundrel these days, but they are skeptical of heros.
If Giuliani is aggressive and goes out with a kick-ass attitude, that won't be a problem. If he looks like an incompetent, flatfooted politician like Bill Frist during the primary fight, well, he'll lose-- it would sound like Kerry droning on about how he served in Vietnam. Hopefully the Giuliani from the national convention shows up, and not the Giuliani who lost a 140-page document last week.
Trial by fire during the primary season is the only way to know. And unlike FR, most Republicans in 3D space want someone who can win.
"It's simple. MSM loves Rudy because they know it's the best they can hope for. Imagine a race between Rudy and Hillary or Obama. There's no way liberals can lose ... or conservatives can win."
Ain't that the truth.
Darwin at work.
Reagan was an FDR Democrat, a bigtime new dealer.
OK, I am laughing really loud at your bumper sticker!
If Rudy gets the nomination, the party will splinter. A lot of people will leave if a pro-gay, anti-gun, and anti-life lib is carrying the Republican banner. And many of them will be very hard to woo back.
Are you saying Newt was once a woman? ;)
You have GOT to be kidding. There is no man else that I would have wanted at the helm of 9/11!!!
I am glad that my vote renders yours impotent!!!
So what. Reagan even called himself a liberal Democrat in the 1930`s. With the outbreak of WWII, that began to change. By 1952, Reagan voted for Eisenehower and the rest is history.
OTOH, Rudy Giuliani was born a liberal, and will die a liberal. He can call himself a Republican. As with most conservatives, he won't ever get my vote. Not now, not ever!
Possibly, but pictures of Rudy strutting around as a drag queen, e.g., the cover of National Review a few months ago, most certainly will.
As evidenced by the growth of social welfare programs while he was governor.
Excellent points, TD. Giuliani is an imposition on the body politic in an effort to dramatically change the values system upon which our republic was built.
Rudy is the linchpin in The Plan to takeover the Repub party and ditch all us pesty social conservatives. Now The Plan to dislodge the conservative GOP power base ignorantly depends on the false assumption that conservatives are going to roll over and play dead. Fat chance. Repubs cannot---and will not---win without social conservatives.
Here's The Plan straight from the horse's mouth, conhead guru Irving Kristol (Fox pundit Billy Kristol's father, who are avid Rudy backers): "The historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism would seem to be.....to convert the Republican Party and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy."
Oh yeah, that idea worked really well elsewhere (/sarc). Luckily, professional help for that dictator fixation of his is available.
Second cousins only share about 6% of the same genetics. I don't think that is great, but it's not really like first cousins, who would share over 10%.
It is the soldier who takes orders.
And when he gives orders, he receives salutes, not opposition.
It isn't a matter of what he risks. And after Kerry, Webb, Murtha, etc. I have no patience for people who use military service as a shield from criticism or as some sort of indicator of every variety of intellectual prowess.
Does that apply to Duncan Hunter's military service?
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.