It does set Giuliani apart from all of the Democrats. Maybe that’s what Rush meant. This is why, if I am forced to choose between any of the Democrats, Giuliani, and any 3rd party, I vote for Giuliani. A 3rd party vote will only help to elect an anti-war liberal, and that would be worse than a pro-war liberal IMHO.
Still with or without my vote Giuliani can’t win the presidency. He won’t be able to draw enough Republicans to the polls, and the Democrats (even blue Dog Dems) aren’t going to vote for him instead of a true Dem.
Fred Thompson is the only Republican that can fire up the party, and he alone will have the attractiveness to draw cross over votes in sufficient quantities to put a Republican in the White House in 2009.
I think Rush might have meant it sets him apart only because he is leading and will take a lot heat from the dems. You are correct - Rudy's view is NOT unique among our candidates. Not at all.
HOWEVER, I disagree that this doesn't "set Rudy apart" from the other Republicans. Many of these things are tied together---Gonzolez, WoT, etc. So when McCrazy comes out and says Gonzolez should resign, and the same day Rudy ATTACKS DEMOCRATS, there is a huge gulf opening up. Romney, while he has been critical of Dems, isn't being INCINDIARY, which is what I think the GOP candidate needs to do at this point.
Put it this way: I predict, barring Fred getting into the race, that the first candidate to emphatically call for Harry Reid's resignation will win the nomination in a landslide!!