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.
Inner Circle charity event. Happens every year. The point is for the mayor to dress as "out of character" as possible. Rudy was such a hit at the event that Lorne Michaels talked him into doing it on SNL.
Rudy's very male. :)
I just looked up Bloomberg's Inner Circle skit. It was called Spent (a parody of Rent). Maybe that's the homosexual agenda at work, too. Or the elitist agenda, because the play is based on the opera La Bohème. But then again, it was written by Puccini, so it's clearly pandering to New York's Italian community.
Oh deary me, they all chime in, Rudy in a dress? Why, he MUST be a homosexual!
I could see if the pictures they post ad nauseaum were taken at WIGSTOCK, but they weren't.
The thing really has nothing to do with Rudy. There is a natural antipathy for NYC. I understand this and it makes sense. What works in NYC doesn't work for most of the country. What they fear is a former NYC mayor trying to turn heartland America into NYC. Rudy in a dress is just ammunition against that possibility.
The yahoos, here, who are using this tactic either have NO idea at all that the pictures, they so love to post, are from an annual show, whose roots go back a very long time, or they are disingenuously using them to promote their extreme homophobia; some of which may be based in a few of them having latent homosexual tendencies.
I find it difficult to believe anyone thinks Rudy is gay.
The other thing, which is more subtle, is that folks feel overwhelmed by the NYC/LA/SF/Chicago-centric spin of the media. Not only are there real and very troubling problems in the heartland/flyover states, but those areas seem more and more marginalized by the day.
I think that you've really hit on something, in that post; a BIG something.
I've seen that "big something" up close and personal in my travels. I've seen it here in NYC -- the professional classes of all these small to medium-sized towns sending their kids to out of state college and then buying "starter condos" for them on the Upper East Side.
And for the record, I don't believe in "red state"/"blue state" America. I just believe in plain ole America. Ya know, that "one nation under god" America.
I believe in just a single AMERICA too, but we're just old fashioned fuddy duddies.
I've talked to a number of these kids moving to the "big city." Many of them are from families that go back six and seven generations in a home town. At first they're contemptuous of their home towns, but speak to them a little longer and they'll confess that there's a lack of opportunity "back home."
This is a distinct change from years past when the town "misfits" would leave for NYC or LA or Chicagoland. Now it's the children of the country club set -- the establishment -- moving out.
A little while ago I sat in a park in a small town on a sunny Saturday with a picnic lunch. The park was almost completely empty when it should have been filled with young couples with kids.
If it had happened one time, it would have been for "a" show. Judy Riuliani appeared many times in dresses, hose, pumps, wigs, tights, makeup, etc. At least once it was for a Pride Agenda (radical gay group) fundraiser. I don't know what he wore to all the perverse gay pride parades that he voluntarily attended - and he attended EVERY gay pride parade while mayor and since. NAMBLA had contingents in at least one of those parades too. He also, for a while since 2000 lived with 2 openly gay roommates and would give them a little peck on the cheek when he left each day. This points to a serious character flaw and a pro-radical gay agenda streak I've never seen before in any Republican. Like Bill Clinton was our first "black" President, Rudy would be our first "queer" President. And I will do everything I can to prevent that from happening. I've seen some liberal Republicans before, but the more I dig into Giuliani's record and positions I find that he's about the most liberal Republican I've ever heard of aside from Arlen Specter.
perverts... have no use for them...
That pic reminds me of the game Liesure Suit Larry.
Well for starters if Rudy wins he will take an oath the defend the Constitution. He has no concept of the 2nd Ammendment. If he cannot recognize the most basic founding document of our country he has no business being in a position of power. Very easy really.
You missed my point completely. If Rudy does not accept the 2nd Ammendment then then he offers no protection for the whole document. One cannot pick and choose support of certain Ammendments. It is all or none.
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.