Any other expectation, IMHO is wishful thinking or projection of desire that it be otherwise. But when you look at what he’s worked for, it’s hard to believe he’d compromise his core values after getting elected. I believe lots of politicians will say whatever they need to say to get elected. That’s what looking at track records are good for. What does he do and stand for and vote for and work for when he has power?
I'm not trying to be snippy, but please, just what has RG 'worked for'?
"Core Values"? It seems he is more flexable than a Gumby figure.
Rudy Guiliani was a great mayor of NYC because NYC is so liberal that it would not elect a conservative and Guiliani was the only liberal who would do the things essential to the livability of the city.It's pretty hard to be upbeat about an election where we are offered unknowns like Duncan Hunter and knowns like Guiliani and McCain when what we know about the "knowns" is that they care about their own power and position more than they care about the Constitution. Romney, like Guiliani, has the sort of track record which is what you expect from someone who got elected in a very liberal constituency. And even Fred Thompson is IMHO far too cozy with the perspective of John McCain.
We are brought to this pass, I'm afraid, by George Bush. Mr. Bush is a good man, as men go, but like his father not a good future builder for the Republican Party. He needed Guiliani to campaign for him, and as a result the party heirarchy owes Guiliani. And nothing this article says against a Guiliani nomination overstates the case. To it you must add the flamboyantly messy personal life.