Giuliani for President? Don't count him out.

Wall Street Journal ^ | July 5, 2006 | Fred Siegel

[tkathy]

The only issue for years to come will be the war against islamofascism.

Lose that war by electing a dim, and the country will sink into disaster.

[utahagen]

I think Giuliani was a great mayor of NYC, but he will never get the Republican nomination. Never. His stand on abortion -- he doesn't even want to ban partial birth abortions -- alone makes him anathema to large numbers of Republicans. If the Republican Party were to nominate Giuliani, there would be an exodus from the party itself and a new party, which would be socially conservative, would be born.

[Artemis Webb]

You could fill volumns with the empty threat of "forming a third party".

[utahagen]

You're right, but even if conservatives don't exit the Republican Party, they will not back Giuliani. I listen to Evangelical radio stations and people like Frank Pastore and James Dobson, who have huge followings, are passionately opposed to gay marriage, "civil unions", and abortion. They will oppose Giuliani no matter who(m) he runs against and their listeners will listen to them.

[Artemis Webb]

You are correct as well.

I frankly despise James Dobson (I think he's full of himself). Having said that I can't begin to deny that there is a cult of personality there and a lot of people will do what he or Frank Pastore or Oprah for that matter tells them.

[Sabramerican]

Abortion: President nominates, Senate confirms or not, Justice decides as he will. All takes deliberation, various inputs and time.

Gun rights: Best the President can do is propose something. Congress decides. Court may or may not agree.

Gay issues: Local. Legal. Very little input, if any, from the President. Where he tries- like Bush did- ineffectual, laughable.

Terrorism- The President

Iran- The President

North Korea- The President.

Immediate issues, national security issues, trade and economic issues, and everything that flows from those, we think of the President first and foremost.

Folks should put priorities in order. In our Checks and Balances, Separation of Powers system of Government, the criteria to judge fitness for office should be how the candidate will perform in the area that the Office will dominate. the President dominates security and foreign policy.

For what is needed in a President, think of the major issues confronting Bush, Giuliani is in a league of his own.

[Sabramerican]

Abortion: President input- if any- is a nomination, Senate confirms or not, Justice decides as he will. All takes deliberation, various inputs and time.

Gun rights: Best the President can do is propose something. Congress decides. Court may or may not agree.

Gay issues: Local. Legal. Very little input, if any, from the President. Where he tries- like Bush did- ineffectual, laughable.

Terrorism- The President

Iran- The President

North Korea- The President.

Immediate issues, national security issues, trade and economic issues, and everything that flows from those, we think of the President first and foremost.

Folks should put priorities in order. In our Checks and Balances, Separation of Powers system of Government, the criteria to judge fitness for office should be how the candidate will perform in the area that the Office will dominate. The President dominates security and foreign policy.

For what is needed in a President, think of the major issues confronting Bush, Giuliani is in a league of his own.

[Sabramerican]

Sorry for the double post.

[utahagen]

I don't disagree with your analyses, including with regard to the practical effect a president can/cannot have vis-a-vis abortion. However, people who are passionately opposed to abortion will not be placated by your arguments; they want a president who is himself unequivocally pro-life. You may argue that they "shouldn't" feel this way, but the fact remains that they do. I stand by my assertion that the conservative wing of the Republican party will work very hard to prevent Giuliani from getting the nomination. If Giuliani gets nominated anyway, huge numbers of conservatives will not vote for him, regardless of whether they remain Republicans.

[Sabramerican]

I don't disagree with what you wrote.

The mirror image is Lieberman's troubles. Far left Democrats would throw him overboard because he doesn't conform to their far Left wing ideas of what a Democrat should be.

And many Conservative Republicans will not see what good Giulani can do where it counts because of issues where he is not lock step with their ideology in areas where a President is ineffectual anyway.

They may very well deny him the nomination- to the Nation's loss.

Even more tragic is that in 2008, denying Giulaini the nomination, to a ideological pure candidate, and which non entity would be that lucky person, will assure a Democrat President elected.

[Mogollon]

Rino, Anti-2nd amendment, pro-abortion, pro-illegal amnesty. Sure.. he will be a shoo-in for POTUS. </sarc>