Posted on 02/09/2007 6:22:55 AM PST by BunnySlippers
[snip]
Giuliani transformed a city whose budget and workforce were larger than those of all but five or six states. He and police chief William Bratton famously cracked down first on quality of life crimes like panhandling and public urination. Teenagers who leaped over the turnstiles at subway entrances were arrested — a departure from the practice under Mayor David Dinkins. Giuliani later quipped that the police under his predecessor had become "highly skilled observers of crime." Those turnstile jumpers turned out to possess a huge number of illegal guns, which were confiscated, and criminals throughout the city discovered that the New York police were breathing down their necks. The number of murders dropped from 1,960 in Dinkins's final year in office to 640 in Giuliani's last year. The overall crime rate dropped 64 percent, to levels not seen since the 1960s.
Giuliani accomplished this in the teeth of a genuinely ferocious assault from liberals, so-called "civil rights" figures like Al Sharpton (with whom Giuliani declined to meet), the New York Civil Liberties Union and the New York Times. Actors and artists protested in the streets, and leading chin pullers in national magazines pronounced themselves troubled by Giuliani's "tactics."
[snip]
His approach toward the homeless was similar. Those who were able to work were encouraged to do so. Those who rejected an offer of shelter and insisted upon blocking public spaces and harassing passersby were issued summonses. For this Hillary Clinton lectured the mayor that Jesus was a homeless person.
There is no question that Giuliani's position on abortion and gun control will offend many Republicans. But let's be clear, he is no liberal. His conservatism has been tempered in New York City — so it is steely indeed.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Read the whole article for lots more details
Good morning.
Needs pinging. :)
Is Guiliani a conservative?
No.
If you have to ask, he isn't conservative. However, he is strong, and right, on national security and I'll take that if Newt doesn't run.
Yeah, sure. Pro-choice to the point of getting awards and campaign contributions from NARAL. Pro-gun-control to the point of revoking permits from long-term holders. Pro-gay-rights. Pro-amnesty to the point of defying federal court rulings to stop NYC's sanctuary city policy.
In favor of CFR. Out of sixty judicial appointments while mayor, two were pubbies. Endorsed Cuomo over Pataki in 1994.
Nah, he's not a liberal.
I'm really getting sick of spinnners thinking we are dumb enough to join them at the Koolaid trough.
Nice try, Mona, but the definition of "conservative" only stretches so far. At best, he can be called "moderate." Maybe an unofficial libertarian.
His stances on abortion, gun owner rights, and gay rights disqualify him from legitimately being called a conservative.
His stance on gun rights disqualifies him from being a libertarian. But the truth is, if he is our candidate in 2008 we HAVE to vote for him because the alternative will be so much worse.
Sure is easy to manipulate people. We hear a couple of pundits shilling for this leftist, and within minutes we have a bandwagonful of FReepers willing to shed blood for him. Unreal.
Hell No.
Fixed it! :)
So, if the final choice is Guiliani or Hillary?
and we conservatives sit home, guess who wins?
Good catch on the gun issue. And I agree about supporting him vs. whatever Dem ends up in the race. I'm thinking it'll be Richardson when the dust settles from Hillary's run. Problem is, I don't think we can win with a candidate like Giuliani who is simultaneously "liberal light" and "conservative light." We're going to need someone who stands in sharp contrast on the issues and can articulate the differences as well as the consequences of the choice. Running a "moderate" is an attempt to sway voters from the left by playing nice, and that's proving increasingly hard to do. Being nice to their Dem counterparts during the years of Republican majority just left them looking like incompetents, and left them with no ammo to repel the Dem takeover last November.
No doubt Rudy has a terrifc record and he is a strong leader.
No one is asking to drink the Koolaid, my friend. Those of us here who support Rudy do so for two reasons. He's right on national security, the War on Terror, and that is the ONE overriding issue in 2008. And he can win the election. All we're asking of you is that you listen to Rudy, with an open mind, as he tries to win your vote..No more, no less. Is that too much to request?
(((((PING))))
There is no question that Giuliani's position on abortion and gun control will offend many Republicans. But let's be clear, he is no liberal. His conservatism has been tempered in New York City — so it is steely indeed.That is the problem that many conservatives have with Giuliani. On issues imperative to the preservation of our Constitutional, he is on the wrong side.
Good Morning Bunny Slippers! I'm pinging away! ;-)
You cannot really call a guy a moderate who is a full conservative on cutting taxes, arresting criminals, and defending the country, but doesn't care about social issues.
If the Federal government resumed its proper functions, abortion and gun control would not be a Federal issue at all.
People have a right to vote form whom that wish without threats and intimidation. Are do you not believe that?
But he can beat Hillary and that is the most important issue.The Duncan Hunters out there are all losers and spell disaster for the Republican Party.
Thanks for posting this. I saw it on Townhall.com and was just reading up on posting an article - never done it before. I like Mona and it's good to know she likes Rudy.
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.