Is that all there is? (If Giuliani is the answer, then Republicans are asking the wrong question.)

Orange County Register ^ | 18 February 2007 | Steven Greenhut

[Spiff]

Is that all there is?

STEVEN GREENHUT
Sr. editorial writer and columnist
The Orange County Register
sgreenhut@ocregister.com

I was dismayed by the stories, but I wasn't surprised by them. During last weekend's California Republican Party Convention in Sacramento, newspapers reported that party delegates – including many grass-roots conservatives and even some conservative party stalwarts – were wildly enthusiastic about the presidential candidacy of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Heck, any "conservative" party that can embrace as governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a man whose recent policies often outflank the Democrats on the Left, doesn't care about principles, only about winning. Hence, my lack of surprise.

We're told that Giuliani – supposedly "America's mayor" for his calming speeches and commanding presence following the 9/11 attack on New York – is that special Republican someone who can beat the nearly invincible Sen. Hillary Clinton.

I dread Hillary as much as the next guy, and am not fooled by her carefully orchestrated "moderation" as a senator. Once in office, we can expect her to push hard for socialized health care and other policies that expand the size and power of government.

But it seems foolish and unprincipled to advance a Republican alternative who is at least equally as committed as the Democrat, and maybe even more so, to a muscular, intrusive and virtually unlimited government.

[snip]

If Giuliani (or McCain or Romney) is the answer, then Republicans are asking the wrong question.

[Spiff]

Can you ping the appropriate ping lists? Thanks.

[freedomfiter2]

If Giuliani (or McCain or Romney) is the answer, then Republicans are asking the wrong question.


Too many are asking "how can we beat Hillary" rather than asking "who would make a good President".

[cripplecreek]

By failing to run conservatives we're encouraging the democrats to run even further to the left and they'll run virtually unopposed. If we thought a Carter presidency was bad, wait till we see a presidency out there in Kucinich territory.

We aren't going to capture any Clinton democrats and shouldn't be trying. We need to recapture the Reagan democrats.

[tiger-one]

Excellent point.

[proxy_user]

Further down in the article:

"A quick perusal of a New York Times archive from the Giuliani administration makes this case quickly and clearly. There's the story about the city forcibly removing the homeless from the streets and district attorneys even prosecuting them. There's Giuliani refusing to grant permits for various groups, from the left and right, that want to hold peaceful protests. There's the Giuliani policy to seize cars from people arrested on drunken driving charges, and the crackdowns on panhandling and jaywalking.

This may or may not be unnecessary roughness, but it is not what most conservatives usually think of as big government.

I believe the liberal approach is to offer the homeless free apartments at the taxpayers expense, rather than arresting them and throwing them in the hoosegow.

[WalterSkinner]

If Giuliani is the answer, then Republicans are asking the wrong question

..reminds me of a Clinton\Gore bumper sticker I saw a few years ago

It applies here too...

[Eclectica]

Too many are asking "how can we beat Hillary" rather than asking "who would make a good President".

Yup...Let's make the next election "too close to call".

/s

[freedomfiter2]

Yup...Let's make the next election "too close to call".


Better yet, let's nominate her to run on the Republican ticket as well. That way we'll be guaranteed a win.

[proxy_user]

Not only that, but when Arafat came to New York, Guiliani chucked him out of Lincoln Center, saying that terrorist leaders were not welcome in the US.

He has no doubts as to which side he is on, and what country he is a citizen of.

[PatrickF4]

but someone has to remind the Republican grass roots that Republicans once were the party of limited government.

Maybe we should ask: Why is there no candidate that has appeal to the limited government section of the party? Well, we have Newt; but he's "unelectable". Then there's Duncan Hunters - a Congressman, unknown, Quixotic.... I could go on to Tancredo, Thompson, etc.

There are candidates out there who have a legitimate claim for the attention of grass roots Republicans. The problem is, the MSM, the nabobs, and those who want to stop Hillary immediately, are willing to sell out the grassroots for a RINO like Giuliani. If the party base decides that it is not worth the effort to back their candidates, then we'll have a big government leader - Republican or Democrat.

[cripplecreek]

That was the democrats strategy in the 04 election.

[Kay Ludlow]

This may or may not be unnecessary roughness, but it is not what most conservatives usually think of as big government.

I agree with you on this, but Guliani doesn't credit those activities with stopping crime. When he was interviewed by Hannity, and asked his position on the 2nd Amendment, he clearly credited the gun control laws (and enforcement of them) for the reduction in crime, not the other activities that got criminals off the streets. Regulating away 2nd Amendment rights does further the power of big government.

[tkathy]

Whining aside, when are the sociocons going to come up with a compelling tough as nails articulate candidate who can WIN???

[EagleUSA]

Too many are asking "how can we beat Hillary" rather than asking "who would make a good President".
-----
Yes, too bad it is the right question -- because given the field we have, it is THE ONLY QUESTION. Hitlery must be kept out of the White House at all cost.

[Emmett McCarthy]

Rudy could serve the country well in a number of roles. Being the President is not one of them.

[Condor51]

... the United States has embarked on ... promoting the idea that government planners will protect and help us, if only we respect and obey them.

Few politicians epitomize this Government Knows Best ideology more than Giuliani .... But, fundamentally, Giuliani is a man who believes in centralizing power, in using the full extent of that power regardless of the effect on liberty.

There's Giuliani refusing to grant permits for various groups, from the left and right ... There's the Giuliani policy to seize cars from people arrested on drunken driving charges, and the crackdowns on panhandling and jaywalking.

"Mayor defends growth of video surveillance." In the article, Giuliani calls for putting surveillance cameras throughout the city to enable police to monitor the behavior of New Yorkers. ... Giuliani refused to provide .. routine documents to the public, forcing people to file Freedom of Information Act requests ... they are legally entitled to receive. .. Meanwhile, Giuliani staunchly supported the city's draconian gun-control laws that kept average citizens defenseless.

As a federal prosecutor, Giuliani staged highly publicized arrests, hauling off the accused from their Wall Street offices in handcuffs to humiliate them and elevate him. After 9/11, he tried to secure an emergency extension of his term .. the consistent strands throughout his public life revolve around his arrogance and lust for power.

An arrogant, power hungry, egomaniac, left-wing, statist!

And he's running in what party again ... the Socialist?

Rudy, you're a Mutt!

Go home & get your Shine Box!

[FreeInWV]

"when Arafat came to New York, Guiliani chucked him out of Lincoln Center"

That and insulting the prince of one of our allies is the entirety of his diplomacy and forign relations experience.

[freedomfiter2]

Yes, too bad it is the right question -- because given the field we have, it is THE ONLY QUESTION. Hitlery must be kept out of the White House at all cost.

A liberal Republican in the Whiute House will do far more damage to this country than Hillary could ever accomplish.

[EagleUSA]

A liberal Republican in the Whiute House will do far more damage to this country than Hillary could ever accomplish.
-----
Nice try -- you apparently have no idea what she is, what she really stands for, including absolute power which the Clintons tried before and came close, and what Marxism is. Her, combined with a socialist Congress, would be devastating to our liberties, our wealth, and the middle class.

Read the Communist Manifesto.