Posted on 08/25/2006 9:23:43 AM PDT by veronica
As it now appears a 2008 Rudy run is a sure thing, I thought it was about time to update that column to take a look at how Rudy is looking right about now, almost a full year later. The event that inspired my previous column on Giuliani’s presidential qualities was the response to Hurricane Katrina. The anniversary of the record breaking storm is only days away and provides another reminder of one of the reasons Rudy Giuliani is considered one of the top contenders for the GOP nomination.
Giuliani touches down in three states Tuesday, attending events for Hutchinson, Illinois gubernatorial hopeful Judy Baer Topinka, and Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. Giuliani, who has topped several national 2008 presidential polls in recent months, was to headlined a cocktail reception in Cleveland Monday for two-term Sen. Mike DeWine. (AP Photo/Mike Wintroath) Katrina showed America what an inept response to a national emergency looked like. They had seen, four years earlier, what a competent response to a national emergency looked like when Mayor Giuliani took control, led recovery efforts and calmed a nation in shock. His performance earned him Time’s 2001 designation as Man of the Year and the title of“Mayor of the World.” He was even crowned an honorary knight by Queen Elizabeth in recognition of the service he performed.
In reaction to the deficiencies of the Katrina response, Americans let it be known that they want a President who is engaged in the details when disaster strikes. In the aftermath of 9/11, President Bush was able to provide moral and, even spiritual, leadership and leave the specifics of the recovery effort to people like Mayor Giuliani. Katrina taught us that when a Mayor Nagin, not a Mayor Giuliani, is in charge, the chief executive better step in right away and make things work – or he better at least give the appearance that he is doing that.
A year ago, in the immediate aftermath of Katrina, especially in contrast to the politicians who had just failed so miserably, Rudy Giuliani looked really good. At the time I said he looked downright presidential. A year later, as we observe the one year anniversary of Katrina and, in two weeks observe the five year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, he looks even better.
Giuliani is leading early polls in Iowa and is even being well received in the very important primary state of South Carolina, in spite of his Yankee status. There are still some pitfalls for Giuliani, but nothing that did not exist a year ago, or even a decade ago. Although there are most likely some GOP primary voters who are not aware of all of Giuliani’s positions, it is unlikely that voters will be particularly shocked by them.
Giuliani’s positions on abortion, gay marriage and gun control have not changed in the past year (at least not so far as the public has been informed) but the emphasis that is likely to be placed on those issues may have. There are some voters who will never vote for a President Giuliani due to his position on abortion, or gay rights. The confirmation of Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Alito, though, may have reminded voters that one of the main ways executives affect public policy on such issues is through court appointments.
Through President Bush’s judicial appointments over the past five years, public attention has been focused on the importance of the judiciary, compared to that of the executive, in deciding such issues. Instead of the specifics of Giuliani’s positions on abortion or gay rights or gun control, the focus is likely to be on what kind of judges he would appoint and what their positions are on cases involving those issues.
Another criticism of Giuliani is the subject of his past marital troubles. Those on the left crying Republican hypocrisy for giving Giuliani a pass after criticizing Bill Clinton for his “bimbo eruptions,” and later impeaching him, are particularly peculiar. Evidently many Democrats today don’t see any distinction between the case of Giuliani and that of Bill Clinton.
The case against Giuliani is one of marital infidelity. The case against Bill Clinton includes, among other things, a parade of women claiming sexual harassment, multiple women claiming to have been harassed by private eyes working on behalf of the Clintons, one woman claiming rape, and evidence (including his own words on tape) that he used his influence to get state jobs for women with whom he had affairs. Of course, everyone remembers Clinton’s affair with an intern just a few years older than his daughter, in the Oval Office, meeting with her more times than some members of his cabinet and conducting dozens of phone-sex calls with her setting up a blackmail security threat scenario usually reserved for Tom Clancy novels, then trying to smear her as a lying psycho stalker until the infamous blue dress appeared.
I could continue and even eventually get into the actions that led to the articles of impeachment, but it is not necessary. To witness the complete confusion of Democrats who cannot see the difference in the two cases is to see the incredible legacy Bill Clinton left his party. Even an affair and messy divorce look good in comparison to that. Another reason I don’t see Giuliani’s past marital problems as dashing his presidential aspirations, though, has nothing to do with Democrats, but rather with those he would likely face in a GOP primary.
As Kate O’Beirne pointed out recently, “Should Mitt Romney join a 2008 race that included John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich and George Allen, the only guy in the GOP field with only one wife would be the Mormon."
Events between now and November 2008 will determine which issues ultimately play the biggest role in voters’ choice for President. Over the next two weeks, though, as Americans observe the anniversaries of Katrina and 9/11, the issues of leadership in times of crisis and how best to fight the war on terror will make for an excellent opportunity for Rudy Giuliani to shine.
I'm a lbertarian/conservative and I think Rudy sucks. The most important libertarian issue is the 2nd Amendment and Rudy is too dense to even understand that.
No they were simply using him - in the same callous manner the Dems used Cindy Sheehan
And if he was such a liberal why would they do that?
They were opportunists.
And if he is such a liberal why is he leading in all the polls even in the South?......tiz a puzzlement
Liberals and the press are pushing him, just like they did Dole in order to attempt to get a republican candidate more like themselves. No mystery there.
Indeed.
And if your such a libertarian why do you need help from a hard core social conservative ?
I'm a small-l libertarian with social conservative leanings. I am pro-life but pretty neutral on gay issues. Anyhow, history has shown us that libertarians and social conservatives can get behind a common cause because even if we disagree on some things, we approach our positions based on principle as opposed to cognitive dissonance or pragmatism.
I'm pinging my old freeper friend Mojave to this. He and I have battled for years on War on Drugs threads, him pro and me against. However, there have been several issues where he and I have found common ground and opposed the Bushbot/moderate faction. Such examples include the Arnold/McClintock wars, the Bush administration's record on border security, and the Harriet Miers nomination.
Rudy can look great all he wants but he's not going to sell with those morals here in the South. Neither will the likes of Gingrich.
We've seen what you get when you give public figures a pass on morality. We don't want to see it again.
And if he is such a liberal why is he leading in all the polls even in the South?......tiz a puzzlement
Because most Republicans don't know his liberal record, statements, alliances, postions, etc.
"Because most Republicans don't know his liberal record, statements, alliances, postions, etc."
They don't care ... the man exudes leadership in a troubled time, a quality sorely lacking on both sides of the aisle. And this quality will especially stand him in good stead when the Dems inevitably run Madame Defarge.
It was said often that Bill Clinton exuded leadership. So, I guess that would be reason enough for you to vote for him too.
And, I understand, she has already knitted a verrrrry long hit list. We may all be on it.
Bunch of leftwing socialist gay-loving RINOS.
Rudy cleaned up NYC and provided inspiring leadership in the aftermath of 9/11, and asked President Bush to let him "throw the switch" should bin Laden ever be captured and sentenced to death...
folks, with national security being THE issue of our time, I favor the man whom I believe to be able to wield an "iron fist", as well as be a good manager....
Rudy: the Democrats choice for Republican candidate.
I'm going to start a thread where Condi is the Democrat's best candidate.
He's leading GOP and generic polls.
Yeah, it was often said. However, the difference between Bill and Rudy is that Rudy actually showed some leadership.
Rudy can beat Hillery who is going to be the Dems candidate. I'm not so sure about the other repubs.
Well, compared to Nagin's ability to proceed with an emergency operations plan and a disaster recovery plan, yes, Rudy showed competence as a Mayor of a major American city. Beyond that, I think that you're giving him far too much credit.
"Should Mitt Romney join a 2008 race that included John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich and George Allen, the only guy in the GOP field with only one wife would be the Mormon."
Just who does it leave, that is acceptable to those that demand perfection?
August 10, 2006: Rudy Giuliani Now
Sheryl and I watched Rudy Giuliani tonight on Hannity & Colmes and were impressed. The two hosts, both of whom rate way up on the blowhard platitude scale, seemed to keep their mouths relatively shut for once, sensing they were in the presence of man with a certain amount of real, even good-humored, gravitas.
As of now, Giuliani appears to be leading in the polls for the Republican nomination and for the presidency. But every time I post about that, a number of people, usually more traditionally conservative types, jump on here to point out how Rudy will never win the nomination, that his views on abortion, gay rights, etc. are too liberal or that his private life (as opposed to JFK's, FDR's, Eisenhower's, etc. ad nauseum) is too louche for the Republican faithful.
Well, I have to say to those commenters, with all due respect, get over yourselves. If today's events have taught us anything - and I think most of us already knew it - we are, alas, only at the beginning of the Global War Against Islamofascism. More than ever we need a wartime leader capable of uniting as much of the country behind him as possible. For whatever his pluses and minuses, Bush has been weak in that regard. Giuliani seems to have more abilities in that direction, although that is not to say it will be remotely easy for him. But as of this moment, there is no one else but Rudy with the vitae and the charisma to do it.
And as we also all know, all those other issues that people clutch to their bosoms like so many sacred icons - from the economy to stem cell research - pale by comparison to the victorious resolution of this war. In fact, if we don't succeed, they are all completely and forever irrelevant.
www.rogerlsimon.com
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.