Culture Warrior (Rudy Giuliani)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | February 13, 2007 | Brendan Miniter

[Clintonfatigued]

The book on Rudy Giuliani is that he is too liberal on social issues to win the Republican presidential nomination. Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, put it succinctly: "I don't see anyone getting the Republican nomination who is not pro-life and a staunch defender of traditional marriage."

But Mr. Giuliani is running strong in Iowa and New Hampshire polls and leading most national surveys of Republicans. He's charming crowds of conservatives everywhere he goes. So it's worth wondering if Mr. Perkins is missing an undercurrent coursing through conservative politics.

Republicans have just experienced a bruising midterm election defeat. The president is suffering dismal approval ratings, and the party's erstwhile front-runner for the presidential nomination, Sen. John McCain, made his national reputation as a "maverick." The Giuliani rise evident now may be more than name recognition and residual support from his stalwart leadership following the Sept. 11 attacks. Mr. Giuliani's support may also arise from his having successfully moved an entrenched political culture in New York City, something national Republicans have not been able to do in Washington.

Mr. Perkins has publicly predicted that Mr. Giuliani's support will evaporate once voters learn more about him. And Mr. Giuliani's track record, both political and personal, may hurt him in the primaries. He's been divorced twice, opposes banning abortion, supports gun control, and for a time as mayor lived with two gay men and (as Time magazine noted recently) their frou-frou dog, Bonnie. None of this will endear him to the party's values voters. But it also may not be what tips the scales in the primaries.

Take South Carolina. The state's influence in presidential politics has only grown since it derailed Mr. McCain's Straight Talk Express in 2000. Two weeks ago, Mr. Giuliani made a trip to the state

[Clintonfatigued]

This is another interesting outlook on consevervatives giving the Giuliani candidacy a serious look, not ruling him out.

[pissant]

He's been ruled out by 75% of freepers, I'm guessing.

[Dreagon]

Yawn. You are going to see all kinds of people try and tell you that Rudy's liberalism isn't going to hurt him. And this early in the election, it probably won't as most don't even know about him.

But times will change. And all he can do is lead the Republicans to disaster if he were to win the nomination.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

I'm not voting for a liberal.

[goodnesswins]

Between a Democrat, Guiliani, and McCain.....I'll vote Guiliani!

[Dreagon]

I won't. Between a Democrat, McCain, and Guiliani....I would sit home.

Far better for the Democrats to win the election than for the Republicans to lose their soul.

[dirtboy]

Between a Democrat, Guiliani, and McCain.....I'll vote Guiliani!

If the Republic comes down to that list ... God help us.

[rwh]

I'm not voting for a liberal.

Nor I. I don't care what party he belongs to.

[XR7]

Between a Democrat, Guiliani, and McCain.....I'll vote Guiliani!

How about a Mormon?

[right-wingin_It]

I said this late on another thread. But allow me to repeat, that the real battle is within the Republican party, not between the parties. A Rudy victory will mean the religious conservatives will forever be shut out.

I'd rather see a Hillary victory than our ideals die a slow death under moderate Rudy, only to be followed by a Dem win in '12.

[Clemenza]

Oh, PUH-LEEZE! The Noo Yawk/Cosmopolitan wing of the GOP is REALLY getting desperate to shove this thrice married, gay loving, gun grabbing, Rockefeller Republican down our throats! YEECH!

[Spiff]

Giuliani supports Partial Birth Abortion

TUCHMAN: Giuliani was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions, something Bush strongly supports.
GIULIANI: No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing.
- CNN December 2, 1999

---

BLITZER: If you were in the Senate and [President Clinton] vetoed, once again, the [ban on the] so-called partial-birth abortion procedure, you would vote against sustaining that against the -- in favor of the veto in other words, you would support the president on that.
GIULIANI: Yes. I said then that I support him, so I have no reason to change my mind about it.
BLITZER: All right. So the bottom line is that on a lot of these very sensitive issues whether on guns, abortion, patients' bill of rights, taxes, you are more in line with the president and by association, with Mrs. Clinton, than you are against them.
- CNN February 6, 2000

---

[GEORGE] WILL: Is your support of partial birth abortion firm?
Mayor GIULIANI: All of my positions are firm. I have strong viewpoints. I express them. And I--I do not think that it makes sense to be changing your position....
ABC News February 6, 2000

---

MR. RUSSERT: A banning of late-term abortions, so-called partial-birth abortions--you're against that?

MAYOR GIULIANI: I'm against it in New York, because in New York...

MR. RUSSERT: Well, if you were a senator, would you vote with the president or against the president? [Note: President Clinton was in office in 2000]

MAYOR GIULIANI: I would vote to preserve the option for women. I think that choice is a very difficult one. It's a very, very--it's one in which people of conscious have very, very different opinions. I think the better thing for America to do is to leave that choice to the woman, because it affects her probably more than anyone else....

MR. RUSSERT: So you won't change your view on late-term abortion in order to get the Conservative Party endorsement?

MAYOR GIULIANI: It isn't just that. We shouldn't limit this to one issue. I'm generally not going to change my views
- NBC Meet the Press, February 6, 2000

***Note: the version of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban that Giuliani opposed in 2000, that he said he supported Bill Clinton in vetoing the Republican-controlled Congress's legislation, contained the provision for the life of the mother that Rudy is now trying to pretend is a prerequisite for his support of it.

[SaxxonWoods]

"He's been ruled out by 75% of freepers, I'm guessing."

Guess again:


Free Republic Opinion Poll: If Romney, McCain, and Giuliani were the only names on the ballot for the GOP 2008 nomination, whom would you vote for?

Composite Opinion
Giuliani 44.7% 3,250
Romney 28.6% 2,080
Sit it out 21.3% 1,546
McCain 5.4% 395
100.0% 7,271

Member Opinion
Giuliani 44.6% 1,359
Romney 31.1% 949
Sit it out 19.5% 596
McCain 4.8% 146
100.0% 3,050

Non-Member Opinion
Giuliani 44.8% 1,891
Romney 26.8% 1,131
Sit it out 22.5% 950
McCain 5.9% 249
100.0% 4,221

[right-wingin_It]

I just realized I called Rudy a moderate, which was way too generous of me. He's not a moderate..he's a communist.

[pissant]

A sad state of affairs.

[stockstrader]

Maybe Rudy will use Elvis's song, "KISSING COUSINS" as his campaign theme song!!!...lol

[Enosh]

He's been ruled out by 75% of freepers, I'm guessing.

I've seen the number 200,000 to tally the total number of freepers.

I've seen about 5 who staunchly support Rudy.

That's .000025% in favor and 99.999975% against.

(The 200K figure, I'm sure, is somewhat skewed by attrition and zots. But, hey.)

[vetsvette]

"He's been ruled out by 75% of freepers, I'm guessing."

Unless, of course, he wins the nomination and his opponent is Her Royal Heinous Hildabeast.

Conservatives can be pretty tough on Republicans, but they've got to be smarter than to concede the election to someone that holds views that are 100% in violation of their own, just so they won't have to vote for someone they disagree with 50% of the time.

"Stupid is as stupid does."

[pissant]

perhaps.

[Clemenza]

BWAHAAA!!!

[stockstrader]

I disagree.

Liberal Republicans are much more dangerous than liberal democrats,,,,

because liberal Republicans BLUR THE DISTINCTION between conservatism and liberalism,,,

making liberalism much more acceptable!!!

Not to mention the 'Party loyalty' factor--which would pressure conservative congressmen to support their President--on issues which they never would otherwise.

No thanks, Rudy.

[Enosh]

... or not...

[ikka]

Didn't vote for Arlen Specter. Won't vote for Rudy either.

[madprof98]

A Rudy victory will mean the religious conservatives will forever be shut out.

It's more than "religious" conservatives. It's the Reagan Democrats. We turned to the GOP when the Dems sold their souls to the feminazis and abortionists (and, later, the gay activists). I guess Rudy is supposed to win all those people back to the GOP. But I don't WANT to be in the same party as those people, even if they are so "electable" that they actually win the White House. Instead, I want to be standing outside the place with a picket sign.

[P-40]

He's been ruled out by 75% of freepers, I'm guessing.

That's a *conservative* guess. :)

[mkjessup]

OK, let's talk about culture:

"See, I don't equate abortion with murdering a child, which I guess puts me in conflict with the teaching of the Catholic church. Catholics in public office often make the mistake, a subtle but important one, of saying they agree with the teaching of the church, but because I'm in public office, I have to put conscience aside and enforce the law. They haven't thought out the implication of what they're saying. If you agree with the church, there's no difference between murdering a one year old and eliminating a fetus -- it's the same act. There is a moral consequence to the elimination of the fetus, but it's not the same thing as murder."
- Rudy Giuliani - May 25, 1987

[SaxxonWoods]

"A sad state of affairs."

I agree with you, pissant. It is obvious that hard rock conservative don't have a candidate they think can win. If they did, we would be hearing about that candidate instead of Rudy.

I would like to see a good constructive campaign for the nomination, fought on the issues.

[right-wingin_It]

When we effectively communicate our principles and values, we win. It's just that we had a poor communicator of recent. This is NOT a time to fold and veer left. It's never time to do that.

[right-wingin_It]

"...There is a moral consequence to the elimination of the fetus, but it's not the same thing as murder."

Yeah, Duh, Rudy. The consequence is that we don't elect you (the enabler)

[appeal2]

Well God watches out for children, drunks and the United States. What Freepers are refusing to admit here is that this thing is just about over, before the first shot is fired. I know people will tell you that Duncan Hunter looks good or Sam Brownback or others. And as I much as I agree with them, they are backbenchers who don't stand a chance in the election or of getting the nomination. McPain is finished. And he is a "conservative." That leaves only Rudy. If anyone really believes that some darkhorse candidate can come out of no where and unseat him, just wait. This race is over, so get over his conservative credentials and start thinking about President Hillary. That is your real choice.

[mkjessup]

Oh wait, there's lots more where that came from:

'The Giuliani campaign should emphasize its candidate's independence from traditional national Republican policies. Especially useful in this strategy is Giuliani's role in overturning a Reagan administration attempt to throw disabled people off the Social Security rolls, his prosecution of Republican elected officials -- especially his authorization for calling his boss, Attorney General Edwin Meese III, a 'sleaze,' and his un-Republican views on many social issues of concern to New Yorkers, like abortion, gun control and bias protection for homosexuals.'
- From the 'Guiliani Vulnerability Study - April 1993'

"UnRepublican Views"

Nice.

[pissant]

Not true. Almost all the rock ribbers here support Hunter and or Newt, and would be relatively happy with either.

[mkjessup]

What Freepers are refusing to admit here is that this thing is just about over, before the first shot is fired

You may think that all is lost, but I think I speak for a great number of Freepers when I say to you that "the battle has just begun!"

We're a year away from even being close to the first primary and you think there is no choice but Rudy?

Climb under your bed and take shelter pal, we'll let you know when it's safe to come out.

[mkjessup]

Good Evening Spiff, I find it curious that the Rudy supporters haven't had anything to say in response to your most excellent post #13.

Nicely done.

[vetsvette]

"Liberal Republicans are much more dangerous than liberal democrats,,,,"

Nobody in the country is more dangerous than Hillary Clinton.

"Not to mention the 'Party loyalty' factor--which would pressure conservative congressmen to support their President--on issues which they never would otherwise."

Yes, I've watched how the RINO's, and now even some relatively conservative Senators and Congressmen, have supported the President of late. Truly awe inspiring.

[dirtboy]

This race is over

Let's add another phrase to the pull-string Rudy supporters.

THIS RACE IS OVER!

It's eleven months before anyone casts a vote, but the race is over.

[dirtboy]

I would like to see a good constructive campaign for the nomination, fought on the issues.

All I have seen from the Rudy boosters is that issues don't matter.

[SaxxonWoods]

I would be quite happy with Newt. I like what I know about Hunter so far, except for the "fair trade" position, but that is minor.

They aren't getting much attention, well, Newt isn't even in the race, and may not run. Hunter is about 200 to 1, wouldn't you say?

Rudy has appeal to moderates, some conservatives and some liberals. He is hated by some conservatives. Unless they kill him, that doesn't matter, they get a vote, not a veto.

My guess is that Newt's appeal is not nearly as wide as Rudy's. Hunter is a virtual unknown.

[always vigilant]

Very well said!

[lowbridge]

Between a Democrat, Guiliani, and McCain.....I'll vote Guiliani!

Between a Democrat, Guiliani, and McCain.....I'm gonna smash my head through the voting machine.

[pissant]

Hunter will be getting lotsa publicity soon. So stand by.

[lowbridge]

Culture Warrior

For the wrong side.

[stockstrader]

I said 'pressure' on other Republicans--the operative word is 'pressure'. If you think that there aren't OTHER Republicans right that would break with the President if not for Party loyalty, well,,,,,

never mind, I'll be nice.

[SaxxonWoods]

"All I have seen from the Rudy boosters is that issues don't matter."

With respect, I don't think that's correct. My sense is that Rudy boosters are saying that they are voting on one issue. That issue is survival in the war on radical Islam, and Rudy is strong on that issue, and has the best name recognition. For now, that puts him in front.

But it is early, very early.

[lowbridge]

He's been ruled out by 75% of freepers, I'm guessing.

That's a *conservative* guess. :)

Liberally, one would ASSume.

[dirtboy]

That issue is survival in the war on radical Islam,

Rudy was so serious on this issue that he pushed a corrupt crony for the most important anti-terror job in the country.

So forgive me if I ain't convinced he is the right guy to be POTUS.

[SaxxonWoods]

"Hunter will be getting lotsa publicity soon. So stand by."

Will do.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>What Freepers are refusing to admit here is that this thing is just about over...

Are you always this off the wall!? Even Fred Barnes knows its early man. FReepers are upset enough dealing with all the liberals roaming around this forum, shooting off their big mouths. Get a handle on your emotions man!

[eureka!]

"This is another interesting outlook on consevervatives giving the Giuliani candidacy a serious look, not ruling him out."

I haven't ruled him out. He is a strict constructionist and states rights guy. 'Sides, Reagan was pro-choice at one point and a former 'rat. With the WOT being the number one issue, IMHO, Rudy deserves a good look...