Posted on 09/27/2005 6:37:12 AM PDT by areafiftyone
This is the story of how Hurricane Katrina made this conservative Republican fall in love with Rudy Giuliani all over again. I first developed a fond affection for the mayor when he did what many believed could not be done and cleaned up New York City. In 1999, I cheered him when he stood up for common decency and the taxpayers of New York by rejecting city funding for elephant dung art. My admiration turned to love when Mayor Giuliani reassured the nation, and the world, with his incredible response to the attacks of September 11.
An admirer of Giuliani and a believer that he had a good shot at the presidency long before Hurricane Katrina, I now find myself becoming a full-fledged fan of the prospect. I will likely get some grief from some of my fellow pro-life, social conservatives, but I hope they will consider not only what an attractive candidate Rudy would be in the post-Katrina political climate, but also to consider the attributes Giuliani would bring to the presidency.
On September 11, we saw what a leader looks like during a crisis and it looked like Rudolph Giuliani. In contrast, the recent example of New Orleans’ Mayor Nagin taking to the airwaves cursing the federal government and calling for the cavalry, not only did not look like leadership, but made Giuliani's performance on 9/11 look positively, well, presidential by comparison.
Many of the lessons learned from Katrina highlight Giuliani’s strengths. Considering that he received some of his harshest criticism as mayor for his tough law and order positions, it is impossible to imagine Giuliani giving looters a pass (and, I would argue, encouragement) as Mayor Nagin did in the early days of flooding in New Orleans.
Thanks to the blame-Bush media, it seems the public now believes that the first and ultimate responder to any kind of disaster, whether natural or man-made, should be the federal government, or more specifically, the President. Giuliani is the only potential 2008 candidate that has shown himself capable of handling a challenge of such historic proportions. Because issues of national security and war and peace in the Middle East will outlive the Bush presidency, the nation will be looking for a leader able to perform in a crisis.
Even more than his proven ability to perform under pressure, however, one thing that Giuliani may be able to do, that some other Republicans might not, is unite the country. If Bush, as amiable as he is, and with a reputation as a uniter as governor of Texas, could be painted as an extremist divider, it is reasonable to believe the same will be attempted with the next Republican candidate. Giuliani achieved giant stature in my eyes, and those of most other Americans, with his actions following 9/11. Because he is already known as a uniter and a strong leader, he will be resistant to attempts to portray him otherwise. He can also claim to have received a large number of votes from Democrats in past elections. Not many, if any, of the other potential Republican presidential candidates can say that.
Ironically, Giuliani's positions on abortion and gay rights, while making it more difficult for him to win the Republican primary, make it almost impossible for opponents to paint him as an extremist. Abortion will always be an important issue to Republican primary voters, but with Bush appointments of two (or possibly three) conservative Supreme Court justices, the issue is not as likely to be the deal breaker that it has been in some past elections. Choosing a pro-life running mate might be enough to win over enough pro-life Republican primary voters to capture the nomination. He would definitely have to answer some tough questions about social policy (and he better not have any Bernie Kerik problems), but if he plays things smart, he can win the Republican nomination.
Electability though, while obviously necessary, does not a good president make. Giuliani's effectiveness as mayor of New York and his excellent communication skills convince me that he could be a very successful president. From his words and actions following 9/11, and more recently from his speech at the 2004 Republican National Convention, I know he can inspire. Because of Giuliani's staunch, and often eloquent, defense of President Bush’s policy in Iraq, and because of his personal experience on 9/11, I have no doubt that he would continue to vigorously prosecute the War on Terror and would be a strong defender of Israel and a promoter of democracy in the Middle East.
It is still early. I’m not saying Rudy Giuliani will be my choice in the spring of 2008. I’m just saying that in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and with the mission in Iraq and the Middle East still far from over, “the world’s mayor” is looking pretty good right now.
Lorie Byrd lives in North Carolina where she worked as a litigation paralegal before becoming a stay-at-home to her two daughters six years ago. She has written on political matters at the group blog, Polipundit, since April 2004. She also writes at her own weblog, Byrd Droppings, and is currently a contributor at ConfirmThem.com and MediaSlander.com
Ok, in my one sentence post I said it would be good that we nominate someone who is competent, but I didn't remember to eliminate the possibility that this person could be a mass-murdering fascist. However, since in fact I do not believe there is any evidence to support the contention that "competence" as used to describe the specific individual in question could reasonably include "competence at genocide" I think my omission was not such a damaging one.
So much so that he is going to have government agencies figure out a way for two men to conceive just so that he can then force an abortion. /S
I don't think so. You said Rudy was "competent" - the point is that this is a meaningless attribute since evil men can also be "competent". I remember a woman telling me she voted for Clinton because he had "charisma." See how ridiculous your statement is now? Charisma and competence are swell, but when they are divorced from morality, they can be nefarious.
I expect the mayor of NYC to hand out guns to all comers. /S
All the bad guys already have plenty.
Given a choice between Rudy and Hillary! I would either vote Losertarian or go to work early and skip voting altogether. From where I stand, the two are darn near identical.
I always try to help.
Well, I'll still say "competent" is going to be better than "incompetent" when it comes to running a Republican candidate in 2008. Its the issue we are going to be vulnerable on, and it would be nice if we could nominate someone who clearly has it, with a track record of running a complex and difficult enterprise capably. And no, I don't think Giuliani is "divorced from morality" just because he's "divorced from Donna."
I'm beginning to think that Hillary, friends of Hillary, or maybe RINO-Rudy's relatives, are behind this campaign of post after post after post.
And, by the way, as a former Marine, I'm NOT going to just shut up and take it, justshutupandtakeit.
Not good.
Maybe the one who wrote this on the Town Hall website which is a conservative sight is from Friends of Hillary or one of Rudy's relatives. Why don't you go on the three blogs she has and ask her?
sight=site
He's divored from morality not because he divorced Donna, but because he advocates the murder of babies, the subversion of the institution of marriage and the family, and the violation of the U.S. Constitution. You cannot make a case that a man with such beliefs is "moral" - at least not in the sane sense. With these beliefs, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between him and Hillary. They're both ultra-liberal. Go ahead and vote for Rudy -- just don't pretend you are conservative while doing it.
I agree with exactly what you wrote.
Further, lets discuss "morality".
I lived in NYC before and through his administration.
There is no more street prostitution in NYC. The few strip clubs remaining and adult book stores are heavily regulated.
Although my two trips to strip clubs left me wondering about their appeal, as one who believes in freedom, his high handed methods to stop this activity didn't meet with my approval. In some ways I believe his "morality" is too strict.
But he is what we now need. No one comes close.
The war is a joke. Wide open borders (what homeland security?), political correctness ("Islam is peace"), refusal to identify the real enemy (hint: it's not "terrorism"), delusional belief that "democracy" will defeat terrorism (can someone name a free muslim country?)...such a war is not winnable.
Do some quiet reflection - if you want to preserve the definition of marriage that will find you within a broad consensus; if you want to be mean to gay people, you will find yourself much lonelier.
So, opposing gay marriage (which all nations have done since the beginning of recorded history) is the same as being "mean to gay people"? Folks - please observe the face of the new GOP!
Go ahead, chuck morality and truth, and see how long this country lasts. Go ahead, ignore the warnings of our founding fathers about morality and virtue, and see how long you keep your freedoms.
There are millions of REAL conservatives (not the phoney compromised liberals in the GOP) who object to having gay marriage forced down their throats, who object to a rogue judiciary ruling the country while the President and Congress do nothing and say very little, who object to Bush's betrayal of conservatives withh his drunken-sailor spending and his nomination of the phoney constructionist Roberts, who object to the suicidally politically-correct approach to this war by the Bush Administration (e.g. no racial profiling, fear of offending muslims, etc.), who object to Congress and Bush's repeated violation of the U.S. Constitution with their unconstitutional welfare programs and Patriot Act, and last but not least - to the invasion of our country thru the Mexican border by millions of Mexicans and OTM's (read middle easterners).
The above spells the end of the Republic unless someone has the guts and integrity to stand up and do something about it. Did you notice that Bush's approval rating is in the toilet? We don't need another unconstitutional liberal to carry on the destructive status quo!
I think that morality has to be enforced by each person, NOT the federal government. Republicans that have tunnel vision about 2008 will probably wind up staying home and not voting. If Rudy runs, he will get many democrats who WON'T vote for Hillary but would vote for Rudy! So, my take is Rudy runs, some conservatives stay home, but their lost vote will be made up by the decent thinking Democrats who know what a Hillary presidency would do to this country. Not to mention that if Rudy wins New York (and he will), he wins...that's my 2 cents and I'm a strong pro-life, conservative Christian who believes that if we get a Jew hater in the White House, America is through. (and Hillary IS a Jew Hater!)
I don't see any such campaign as you are hallucinating. And the mild interest expressed for Rudi is far less fanatical than what you claim as well.
Only the politically clueless would believe Hillary is behind any attempt to promote a man who would clobber her. She would be trying to promote candidates as far to the right as possible knowing that they would turn off all but the most conservative. The last thing she wants is to run against a moderate Republican.
But don't let facts get in the way of your raving.
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.