April 10, 2007: "Fear of Rudy" at the New York Times Posted on 04/11/2007 12:54:29 PM PDT by areafiftyone
April 10, 2007: "Fear of Rudy" at the New York Times
It's not quite as pronounced as Erica Jong's "Fear of Flying" but the "Fear of Rudy" is nonetheless palpable beneath the NYT's routine thumbsucker "Some in G.O.P. Express Worry Over '08 Hopes" by Adam Nagourney and John M. Broder. (subtext: I hope they lose, I hope they lose, Please, God, I hope they lose!)
This is the kind of article the Times prints as serious journalistic analysis when even the slightest perusal demonstrates the usual tawdry mix of bias and wish fulfillment. To make their point they have to resort to the by now comically tired cliché that McCain was once the "presumed front-runner." To whom? Not to anyone paying the slightest attention to the campaign. McCain has been trumped by Giuliani in virtually every poll for the last year. Slaughtered (scroll down at the link) might even be a more apt description. In the most recent Gallup Poll of a couple of days ago, Rudy stands at 38% and McCain at a declining 16. Add Thompson, Romney and Gingrich into the total and only then - put together - do they pass Rudy ... and only by four percent.
So far Giuliani is doing just fine by anyone's standards. He (not McCain) is decidedly the front-runner and has been for some time. So what's the NYT so afraid of? Obviously, that Rudy could win. Hence, the article and its take, emphasizing the disgruntlement of conservatives with the current candidates. This is another cliché that we have been hearing for the better part of a year now. Continuing with this ultra-conventional wisdom, the Times tells us that these same conservatives are suspicious of these same current candidates because they have been hiding their liberal social views. The Times says this even though they know damn well - anyone paying the slightest attention knows this - that Rudy has been very clear in front of conservative audience that his social views are more liberal than theirs. He has not lied about that, as far as I can tell, for a second. And he's still well ahead. What could those "conservatives" be thinking?
But enough of this. It's all, as the Yiddish grandmothers say, bubbe meise. As we all know, in 2007-2008, it's the war, stupid. And not just the Iraq War, but the greater war on Islamofascism. Where that stands a year and a half from now will tell the whole story. And no one knows the answer to that. Not even Adam Nagourney and John M. Broder
(((RUDY PING))))
Yahoooo! Keep ‘em puking their socks up, Rudy...!
Rudy is rolling even with that machine. This shows just how WEAK the opposition is.
Ok - that’s pretty funny - did you do that?
If you did - you’re very clever.
I laughed.
I'm not a big Rudy basher, but he's got his RINO bonafides.
Well I gotta admit it did make me laugh! :-)
The best article I’ve seen on Rudy’s fiscal conservatism:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26604
The city also added approximately 430,000 new jobs during Giuliani’s mayoralty the most dramatic period of job growth in New York’s history. At the same time, Giuliani restored fiscal discipline to the city’s budget, transforming the $2.3 billion annual deficit he inherited in 1993 into the $1 billion surplus he hands over to incoming mayor Michael Bloomberg.
—
Rudy Giuliani: An American Hero
By John Perazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com | January 3, 2002
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1380
From January 27, 2000
Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani today outlined his Financial Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2000-2004. The Plan reflects the Administration’s continued fiscal priorities of cutting taxes to stimulate continued record job growth and economic development; increasing spending in targeted areas, reducing City funded spending year-to-year by 1%, while maintaining overall City spending to less than the rate of inflation; and reducing the out-year gaps.
The Plan reflects the Administration’s success in reducing taxes by $2.3 billion since 1994 — more than any administration in the history of the City. Combined with the more than $2 billion in proposed tax cuts, this Plan will bring the total value of the Mayor’s tax reduction program to $4.5 billion annually by 2004. The Plan projects a surplus for FY2000 of $2.2 billion, the largest surplus in the City’s history. This is the fourth year in a row that the New York City four-year Financial Plan contains a surplus of more than $1 billion.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/html/2000a/pr008-00.html
Rudy is going to have to move further to the left to have a chance to win this.
This picture is crying, “Steal me! Steal Me!!!”
That’s funny!!
The New York Times is actively promoting the candidacy of Fred Thompson . . .
Not because they like anything about him, but because they believe he will function as a useful stooge who will divide the GOP and deliver the Presidency to Hillary or Obama.
I'm pro-Rudy and I think it's funny too!
As this election moves on I’m not sure who will become more hysterical the Rudyhaters on FR or the far left.
Me....I’ll just pull out the popcorn and enjoy the FLOPSWEAT!
Then promote away. Maybe he’ll jump in the race.
HAH — the MSM would love to have Rudy run. Once he’s nominated, aaaallll of his baggage will be amplified. Expect the Today show to run his divorce press conference over and over. Expect the cross-dressing, abortion (especially the funding part), and gun rights stuff to come out in force.
The MSM is far more scared of the GOP winning than of Rudy. They would LOVE him to run, faint protestations now to the contrary!
So why do YOU want to have abortions paid for by my tax dollars? Why do YOU want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens? Why do YOU want to see moral corruption return to the White House?
“So why do YOU want to have abortions paid for by my tax dollars?”
Compared to paying for years for children parents don’t or aren’t capable of taking care of themselves?
>>“So why do YOU want to have abortions paid for by my tax dollars?”
>Compared to paying for years for children parents don’t or aren’t capable of taking care of themselves?
Well, that’s easy. Simply kill those children, right? If cheapest is your highest value, there’s your solution.
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.