The Case for Rudy Giuliani

Townhall.com ^ | 1/22/08 | Dennis Prager

[ConorMacNessa]

He’s still pro-choice and I won’t vote for him.

[Sudetenland]

Funny how Rush Limbaugh...certainly the most liberal person in America...always mentions three individuals when he talks about how bad it would be for the Republican Party if Republicans to nominate either Mike Huckabee or Johm McCain: Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani.

Fred is history, if he was ever a serious contender, so that leaves just two Republicans who represent honesty and integrity, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. Of the two, Giuliani is by far the strongest leader and the toughest on securing the nation. He is also as strong as Mitt or anyone else in his conservative history of lowering taxes and spending in one of the most Liberal states in America.

Reason, rationality, and courage of convictions are the most important defining character traits of a true conservative. All of the hateful words being left here by the "I hate Rudy"-bots are the antithesis of what "Conservatism" stands for.

You have a policy difference with Rudy, express it rationally, express it calmly and rationally, If you argue like the Liberals on DU do, with words of hatred and emotion, you've lost the argument before it has even started.

This article is about as accurate an evaluation as I have seen. George Will who has been a pillar of traditional conservatism supports his candidacy, as do many of us who have been fighting for the Conservative cause all of our lives. I would rather have a pro-life, pro-Second amendment Conservative, but to assert, without any rational basis, that there is no difference between Rudy and the Democrats is dishonest and pure demgoguery at its foulest and most vile.

[Alberta's Child]

I will grant Dennis Prager a little leeway here, since it is clear from this article that he is thoroughly ignorant about Rudy Giuliani's background and track record.

Based on my assessment of his positions on various issues, I'd Rudy Giuliani would probably garner a rating from the American Conservative Union of about 20-25, which means this line from the article is so silly it hurts:

But Giuliani is not merely more of a conservative than John McCain. In fact, if it is Ronald Reagan that Republicans want, Giuliani is extraordinarily close to that venerated man.

Giuliani's well-documented track record is one of a big-government, nanny-state totalitarian. There is nothing conservative about him at all.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

He’s still pro-choice and I won’t vote for him.

He is still a gun-grabber just like Hitlery... I won't vote for him either...

[Alice in Wonderland]

With all the negatives surfacing concerning our "9/11 hero mayor," I have yet to read anything referring to what I consider Giuliani's most evil deed. I refer to the cruel and very abrupt closing of the Neponsit Nursing Home.

Resident removal: a modern long-term care saga

U.S. and State Assail City in Closing of Queens Nursing Home

Judge Rules On Neponsit Health Care

Nursing Home Demolition To Be Pursued Despite Ruling

Vallone Says: Reopen Neponsit Home

Neponsit Refugees Win $5 Million Settlement from City

$5 Million Settlement Reached With City Over Evacuation of a Queens Nursing Home

In Queens, Closed Nursing Home Still Open to Controversy

[Badeye]

I’ve seen a ‘Guiliani’ administration. From January of 93 to January of 2001.

The only difference is we’ve never seen Bill Clinton, another guy that can’t keep his pants zipped, in drag.

Anyone that would even consider voting for a guy that thought suing gun manufacturers was a good thing cannot call themselves a Conservative.

Likewise, anyone that would even consider voting for a man that sued the Federal Government to block Welfare Reform cannot call themselves a Conservative.

Anyone that would vote for a man that routinely cross dresses, and LIKES IT...well, they’ve got some serious ‘issues’ of their own, and need therapy.

Just my opinion.

[Senator Goldwater]

As George Will wrote on behalf of Giuliani, “The way to change abortion law is to change courts by means of judicial nominations of the sort Giuliani promises to make.” It is extremely unlikely that John McCain would appoint similarly conservative judges. After all, why would he appoint judges like Scalia and Alito who apparently differ with him on the constitutionality of McCain’s own “campaign finance reform” laws?

Pro-life Republicans need to ask themselves: Will a Democrat or Giuliani as president render abortion less common in America? The best is the enemy of the better. And Giuliani is far better on abortion than any Democratic nominee.

---

That’s the whole kettle of fish in a nutshell.

[AFreeBird]

Sorry, there is no case to be made for Rudy: I will NOT vote for Rudy. <-— Notice the period

[roses of sharon]

Yes, McCain is extremely, and openly hostile to Conservatives. He hates us, and has said so many times. He is campaigning against us, and campaigning for liberals, using liberal speak. He uses his buds in the liberal press against us, and the President. He uses the MSM FOR his friends, the liberals, in the Senate, he flirted with Kerry for VP, during wartime, FGS.

FR may hate RG, but he does not hate us, has not vowed to work against us, hasn’t stabbed the President in the back, has campaigned for prolife, social conservatives since 98, and certainly is not running a liberal campaign, quite the opposite.

If the Mayor opens up on McCain for his weakness in the WOT, torture, his pussyfooting with the ACLU about Gitmo, (RG does hate the ACLU,lol), and reminds voters that McCain is running with the NYT in his back pocket, he could make some headway. Who knows.

[roses of sharon]

And he has Miguel Estrada and Ted Olson working on his campaign.

[CommerceComet]

Anyone that would even consider voting for a guy that thought suing gun manufacturers was a good thing cannot call themselves a Conservative.

If Fred gets out of the race, I don't think a true conservative can vote for any of the remaining guys with a clear conscience. I am now convinced that the conservative movement would be far better off with a brokered convention where we could pick an acceptable candidate than to vote for one of the table scraps left.

[RabidBartender]

"Please do not shoot the messenger."

Don't worry. If Giuliani is elected, most of the guns I have will be banned.

[NavVet]

You forgot to put (Barf Alert). Where do I start, Abortion, Gun control, ethics issues. Rudy is a law and order liberal, but a liberal nonetheless.

[Liz]

"Rudy Giuliani may have made a great mistake by not campaigning in New Hampshire......"

Oh, please. Giuliani is up to his old tricks---manipulating voters.

He recently announced his top staffers are working gratis---Giuliani wants voters to think he managed to spend all his campaign money without having actually competed in any of the early primary/caucus states.

The truth is that Rudy spent all his money because he HAS competed in all those states, and lost dismally. The number of times Rooty went to New Hampshire to campaign was second only to Romney.

Rudy just CLAIMS he hasn't been competing because the results show he is a bigtime loser, rejected by primary/caucus voters.

Although Giuliani talks big, and tries to cast himself as a warrior/hero, he cuts and runs when he feels competitive pressure. He chickened out of the Senate race vs. Hillary. More recently, he cut and run in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and now South Carolina.

He's the gutless wonder....a talker, not a doer. He wins Florida or loses whatever credibility he has left (not much).

[Senator Goldwater]

Great point.

Rudy will appoint strict constructionists to the federal bench, and the Democrats will not.

Ballgame.

[Kuksool]

Isn’t this special? The Rooty Roosters are back to make one last push for their limp wristed Chicken Hawk.

[rineaux]

Exactly!!

Spent money in states he came in last place. Mr. Mayor we see through you.

Also, I so agree and have said/wrote it myself, he had the opportunity to run and possibly beat Hillary but he failed to do so.

Thanks but no thanks. Can’t wait till Saturday when he packs up his purse and leaves. Maybe he will be the VP for Obama or Hillary.

[Alberta's Child]

Rudy will appoint strict constructionists to the federal bench, and the Democrats will not.

Rudy Giuliani wouldn't even know what "strict constructionism" was if it bit him in the @ss.

[Our man in washington]

He chickened out of the Senate race vs. Hillary.

With all due respect to a fine fellow freeper, I'll have to challenge you on that point. I'm just about finished reading Giuliani's book "Leadership." He writes quite a bit about dropping out of the Senate race. He talks about when he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and was looking at all the treatment options. He consulted with a lot of people and felt he just wouldn't have the strength to run a Senate campaign.

I tend to believe his explanation. I've seen other people go through radiation therapy, and it can be draining. There are fair criticisms that can be made of Giuliani, but his withdrawal from the 2000 Senate race was perfectly justifiable under the circumstances.

[Ooh-Ah]

As one who has been following (and fighting) terrorism since the early eighties, I am mostly a single issue voter. I want a President who can articulate THE issue of our time, not be afraid to call it what it IS and DO something about it!

I believe it is an especially critical time in our history when many issues should not be the main issues in a Presidential race. It does not mean they are not important but that we should think of other ways of dealing with them and focus on our security.

I support Rudy now because, not only does HE GETS IT,  he can also best articulate the most important issue of our time--our National Security!  He doesn't have to think about it.

Romney certainly doesn't get it if he thinks you can just pluck someone out of the State Dept.  I like to be able to talk shorthand with people on important issues.  We need a President who KNOWS the history so experts can talk to him or her in shorthand and not have to provide decades (centuries!) of history to get him or her enough up to speed to address emergency situations.  It's not even like the old days when the communications took days and months--everything is instantaneous today!  Imagine the learning curve Romney would need if he can make such a ridiculous statement!

...Frankly, if all we want is somebody who spent a lot of time in foreign policy, we just go to the State Department and pluck someone from that — of the thousands who were there. ...http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,318750,00.html