Posted on 03/11/2007 10:46:27 AM PDT by jazusamo
Sunday, March 11, 2007
I 'll confess, like many conservatives, I'm charmed by Rudy Giuliani. "America's mayor" is not my kind of Republican presidential candidate. He's pro gay rights and not pro-life; he has an exceedingly messy, and public, private life that poses moral as well as political problems.
But, then again, Americans don't elect presidents on paper. There is the Rudy the U.S. attorney who decimated the Mafia. There is the Rudy who turned New York City around with tax cuts, welfare reform, tough-on-crime action and zero tolerance for politically correct cant. There's Rudy 9/11, the mensch of Manhattan and, in the process, America. And there is Rudy the presidential candidate, stressing common ground with GOP traditionalists -- strict constructionist judges from John Roberts to Antonin Scalia, democratic instead of judicial fixes to controversial issues -- and treating them with a respect they didn't get from past intraparty foes. And putting up big numbers in the polls.
My own openness to Rudy surprises me. Many other social conservatives probably know the feeling.
I suggest we all take a cold shower.
There's a long way to go until the first primary. Today's polls showing Giuliani over John McCain reflect name recognition more than anything else, and Giuliani's name ID is chiefly about 9/11. Between now and the first primary, Rudy 9/10 will get as much attention as Rudy 9/11. For some voters, this will be a reminder. For many more, it will be new information. Not all of it will be pretty.
He will have to answer pointed questions about his new and old positions. He'll have to square past statements with more recent pronouncements. How does his current opposition to activist judges jibe with his past belief that Roe v. Wade is "good constitutional law"? Is his recent embrace of a ban on partial-birth abortion inconsistent with his past opposition? What about his past support for McCain-Feingold's assault on free speech in campaigns?
Giuliani may have answers to all these questions, and many more to come. Terrific. But it's far too early to throw in with Rudy. It's critical to hear from other announced candidates with less name ID (Mitt Romney) or conservatives with equal name ID who may get in (Newt Gingrich, Fred Thompson).
Are social conservatives ready to shortchange stands they've championed for decades because of Giuliani's 9/11 performance or poll numbers? Or a few promising words or winks? What makes social conservative leaders so sure he will live up to his part of any deal after he's won the nomination or White House? Or that the party's pro-life, traditional-values base will stick with an abortion-rights, gay-rights standard bearer? Are post-2006 social conservatives so keen on winning that they'll sign on with a candidate who opposes them on key cultural issues? What would a Giuliani candidacy do the GOP's largely successful "brand"?
These are not loaded questions. They're questions I wrestle with these days. I want a president who is committed to fighting radical Islam and can articulate why we're doing all we can under the Constitution to crush this enemy. Rudy's clearly one among many GOP candidates who fill the bill. But he comes with many unanswered questions.
Answer these questions in Giuliani's favor, and questions about his personal history remain. Yes, it's his private life. But he himself put his private life on gaudy public display as mayor. We'll see reruns of the tawdry soap opera that was the simultaneous end of his marriage to Donna Hanover and his about-town affair with Judith Nathan as surely as we'll see his comforting and inspiring 9/11 footage.
It's odd. Many conservatives who properly dismiss the electric, conservatively correct Gingrich because of his two divorces and "marital issues" are open to a Giuliani equally burdened by libido and ego. Forget the moral questions here. Somehow I doubt Democrats will give Rudy 9/10 a pass on this if the GOP picks him.
Was 9/11 so psychologically searing -- and Rudy's healing role so central -- that some social conservatives are no longer thinking clearly. Or is the trauma of Election Day 2006 to blame? Or today's polls?
How else to explain their premature openness to a GOP presidential candidate whose social liberalism and liberal social life that would have once made such a candidacy unthinkable.
David Reinhard, associate editor, can be reached at 503-221-8152 or davidreinhard@news.oregonian.com.
Was 9/11 so psychologically searing -- and Rudy's healing role so central -- that some social conservatives are no longer thinking clearly.
How did I move on without Rudy? How did I ever manage without.... that guy.
Or is the trauma of Election Day 2006 to blame?
Oh the trauma.
Or today's polls?
WTF is this dweeb talking about?
How else to explain their premature openness to a GOP presidential candidate whose social liberalism and liberal social life that would have once made such a candidacy unthinkable.
There is no such condition. Giuliani is promoted by MSM for the easy candidate to defeat that he would be.
Rudy is Hillary's best hope. With a 48% negitive rating she needs someone to split the Republican vote and he can do it.
I like Rudy also, but I'm not tempted to vote for him in the primaries.
He's right in saying Rudy is tempting to some Repubs but not to me. There's no way I would vote for him in the primary and I sure hope I don't have to vote for him in the general.
Giuliani did well on 9/11. Hit the right notes, didn't embarrass anyone. There are thousands of mayors in America who'd have done as well. It's no reason to make him POTUS.
The real question is:
DO CONSERVATIVES WANT TO SEE PRESIDENT HILLARY or a Republican President with a Republican Congress?
The only way to STOP Hillary IS to nominate Rudy and be sure to turn out and vote for him in the general election.
Nominating some "fine conservative" who couldn't get any of the votes of independents of Dems in the general election, is a SURE PRESCRIPTION to ensure Fuhrer Hillary.
Conservatives need to take off their blinders and not let the Dems do a "divide and conquer" act on them.
"I like Rudy also, but I'm not tempted to vote for him in the primaries"
See my post 7.
If people don't vote for Rudy in the primary, someone else may get the nomination, someone whom Hillary will roll over efortlessly. You ARE voting for or against Hillary in the primary also.
ALL evidence points to the exact opposite of what you are stating.
Rudy IS the only one who can beat Hillary -- ALL polls show that.
Ignoring reality doesn't make it go away.
The MSM was promoting McCain, HE could easily be beaten by Hillary. The MSM is exactly trying to get conservatives all riles up AGAINST Rudy, whey do you think they start every article about him with statements to try to emphasize his differences with conservatives?! They don't start articles about Hillary that way, do they?
How gullible are conservatives going to be? Are they going to fall for the Dem propaganda to scuttle the nomination of the only person who can beat Hillary?
AND Rudy is strong on terror, a real leader, and also a fiscal conservative. In the area of social conservatism, he did say he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman AND he did say he will nominate judges like Scalia and Alito. What more do conservatives want, President HILLARY?!
Over a year from the nominating conventions, and you're going to place your faith in MSM polls?
A lot can happen between now and convention time, and that is why I don't believe that Rudy OR Hillary is going to get the nominations of their respective parties.
Rudy won't because he personifies the term 'RINO', Hillary won't because she is so inept and politically clumsy that she will be her own worst enemy once the primaries get underway, and she has to face her competitors in the inevitable debates.
This "nobody can save us from Hillary but Rudy" mantra is nothing but 100 percent bullsh*t.
I respect your opinion but respectfully disagree with you. We're too far out to say only Rudy can beat Hilly and you also assume Hilly will be the Dem nominee, I don't believe she will be.
I second it.
Wrong.
Some of the polls in this last week state that as much as 60% plus of the Republican voters do NOT know Rudy's stance on abortion and gun control. You'll lose up to 2/3rds of the right to lifers and gun guys with his history.
Even Brownback polled 41% to 46% yesterday against Hillary and he's a 1%er in the nomination race.
Hillary polls a consistent 48% negative. She CANNOT win the general election without splitting the Republican vote. Rudy is the man to do just that.
I know of no better support for Hillary than nominating a gun-grabbing abortionist with gay rights and amnesty agendas for a Republican candidate..
Rest assured, Hillary Clinton is NOT going to win the nomination. You have to win primaries for that.
Heck, even the DUmmies can't stand her.
"Some of the polls in this last week state that as much as 60% plus of the Republican voters do NOT know Rudy's stance on abortion and gun control. You'll lose up to 2/3rds of the right to lifers and gun guys with his history. "
THIS is EXACTLY what the Dems are hoping, otherwise Hillary is toast.
Bottom line is still Rudy in the primary and general election, all the way, OR HILLARY.
Peter Pan type wishful thinking WILL result in Hillary witn a Dem Congress. Then think of National Security and Judges.
We can only choose among the candidates who are running.
This is not a question of what candidate, who doesn't exist, would we wish to run, it's a choice between the available candidates.
I personally would like Jeb Bush, but he isn't running and if he would be, he couldn't get the nomination and may or may not beat Hillary, on account of the hatred the MSM and Dems were able wo whip up against President Bush.
So I can't vote for Jeb, he isn't running.
I don't see anyone jumping in the race who would have any chance against Hillary or the Dem candidates. People engaged in wishful thinking and attacked those of us who said that a Dem Congress in 2006 is a real possibility, unless conservatives stop pouting and get and vote for Republicans, or we'll get Nancy Pelosi. Well, they didn't believe us and we did get a Dem Congress. We must do everything to keep from having an UNCHECKED Dem majority -- a Dem President, a Dem Congress, which will also result in Activist Judiciary, appointed by leftis Dems. If that isn't a nightmare scenario, I don't know what is.
People bring up Fred Thompson, but if you saw some of those threads -- did you know he supports McCain? If he jumped in, it would only split Republicans and help McCain. Who would want us to have a choice between McCain and Hillary?
Also, NO Dem nominee is preferable to a Republican one. You can see the damage the Dems are already doing and trying to do to our national security. Just imagine what ANY Dem president with a Dem Congress would do.
1. Nominate Rudy
2. The Right to Lifers and Gun Crowd votes 2/3rds Libertarian in protest giving 10% to 20% of the vote to the Libertarians.
3. Hillary wins
A substantial amount of the Republican base is NEVER going to vote for a gun-grabbing abortionist no matter how loud you Rudybots scream... Simply isn't going to happen...
Nominate Rudy and put Hillary in the Whitehouse.
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.