Posted on 08/30/2006 9:09:02 AM PDT by Reagan Man
Rudy Giuliani, a contender for the presidency in 2008, is receiving an inordinate amount of positive attention. That's quite understandable since Rudy is charismatic, did a great job on the campaign trail for President Bush in 2004, and his phenomenal performance after 9/11 was much appreciated. However, likeable or not, having Rudy as the GOP's candidate in 2008 would be a big mistake. Here's a short, but sweet primer on some of Rudy's many flaws.
Rudy's Strong Pro-Abortion Stance
As these comments from a 1989 conversation with Phil Donahue show, Rudy Giuliani is staunchly in favor of abortion:
"I've said that I'll uphold a woman's right of choice, that I will fund abortion so that a poor woman is not deprived of a right that others can exercise, and that I would oppose going back to a day in which abortions were illegal.
I do that in spite of my own personal reservations. I have a daughter now; if a close relative or a daughter were pregnant, I would give my personal advice, my religious and moral views ...
Donahue: Which would be to continue the pregnancy.
Giuliani: Which would be that I would help her with taking care of the baby. But if the ultimate choice of the woman - my daughter or any other woman - would be that in this particular circumstance [if she had] to have an abortion, I'd support that. I'd give my daughter the money for it."
Worse yet, Giuliani even supports partial birth abortion:
"I'm pro-choice. I'm pro-gay rights,Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. "No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing," he responded." -- CNN.com, "Inside Politics" Dec 2, 1999
It's bad enough that Rudy is so adamantly pro-abortion, but consider what that could mean when it comes time to select Supreme Court Justices. Does the description of Giuliani that you've just read make you think he's going to select an originalist like Clarence Thomas, who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade -- or does it make you think he would prefer justices like Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy who'd leave Roe v. Wade in place?
Rudy's abortion stance is bad news for conservatives who are pro-life or who are concerned about getting originalist judges on the Supreme Court.
An Anti-Second Amendment Candidate
In the last couple of election cycles, 2nd Amendment issues have moved to the back burner mainly because even Democratic candidates have learned that being tagged with the "gun grabber" label is political poison.
Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani is a proponent of gun control who supported the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapon Ban.
Do Republicans really want to abandon their strong 2nd Amendment stance by selecting a pro-gun control nominee?
Soft on Gay Marriage
Other than tax cuts, the biggest domestic issue of the 2004 election was President Bush's support of a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani has taken a "Kerryesque" position on gay marriage.
Although Rudy, like John Kerry, has said that marriage should remain between a man and a woman, he also supports civil unions, "marched in gay-pride parades ...dressed up in drag on national television for a skit on Saturday Night Live (and moved in with a) wealthy gay couple" after his divorce. He also very vocally opposed running on a gay marriage amendment:
His thoughts on the gay-marriage amendment? "I don't think you should run a campaign on this issue," he told the Daily News earlier this month. "I think it would be a mistake for anybody to run a campaign on it -- the Democrats, the president, or anybody else."
Here's more from the New York Daily News:
"Rudy Giuliani came out yesterday against President Bush's call for a ban on gay marriage.
The former mayor, who Vice President Cheney joked the other night is after his job, vigorously defended the President on his post-9/11 leadership but made clear he disagrees with Bush's proposal to rewrite the Constitution to outlaw gays and lesbians from tying the knot.
"I don't think it's ripe for decision at this point," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
"I certainly wouldn't support [a ban] at this time," added Giuliani..."
Although Rudy may grudgingly say he doesn't support gay marriage (and it would be political suicide for him to do otherwise), where he really stands on the issue is an open question.
Pro-Illegal Immigration
As Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics has pointed out, Rudy is an adherent of the same approach to illegal immigration that John McCain, Ted Kennedy, George Bush, and Harry Reid have championed:
"While McCain has taken heat for his support of comprehensive immigration reform, Rudy is every bit as pro-immigration as McCain - if not more so. On the O'Reilly Factor last week Giuliani argued for a "practical approach" to immigration and cited his efforts as Mayor of New York City to "regularize" illegal immigrants by providing them with access to city services like public education to "make their lives reasonable." Giuliani did say that "a tremendous amount of money should be put into the physical security" needed to stop the flow of illegal immigrants coming across the border, but his overall position on immigration is essentially indistinguishable from McCain's."
That's bad enough. But, as Michelle Malkin has revealed, under Giuliani, New York was an illegal alien sanctuary and "America's Mayor" actually sued the federal government in an effort to keep New York City employees from having to cooperate with the INS:
"When Congress enacted immigration reform laws that forbade local governments from barring employees from cooperating with the INS, Mayor Rudy Giuliani filed suit against the feds in 1997. He was rebuffed by two lower courts, which ruled that the sanctuary order amounted to special treatment for illegal aliens and were nothing more than an unlawful effort to flaunt federal enforcement efforts against illegal aliens. In January 2000, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal, but Giuliani vowed to ignore the law."
If you agree with the way that Nancy Pelosi and Company deal with illegal immigration, then you'll find the way that Rudy Giuliani tackles the issue to be right down your alley.
A More Charismatic Version of Arlen Specter
Rudy Giuliani may have many fine qualities, but he is not a conservative, nor has he always been a loyal Republican.
For example, back in the mid-nineties, when he was actually running New York City, Rudy could have fairly been said to have governed as a moderate at best and to the left-of-center at worst:
* "The National Journal’s rating system put him at 56 percent conservative and 44 percent liberal on economic issues in 1996 and assessed him as liberal by 59 to 40 percent in looking at his social issues votes."
The New York Observer also had a very interesting selection of quotes from and about Rudy over the years that may give his conservative supporters more than a little pause. Here are a few of those quotations:
* Some ask, How can the Liberal Party support a candidate who disagrees with the Liberal Party position on so many gut issues? But when the Liberal Party Policy Committee reviewed a list of key social issues of deep concern to progressive New Yorkers, we found that Rudy Giuliani agreed with the Liberal Party's stance on a majority of such issues. He agreed with the Liberal Party's views on affirmative action, gay rights, gun control, school prayer and tuition tax credits. As Mayor, Rudy Giuliani would uphold the Constitutional and legal rights to abortion. -- N.Y.S. Liberal Party Endorsement Statement of R. Giuliani for Mayor of New York City April 8, 1989
* Mr. Rockefeller represented "a tradition in the Republican Party I've worked hard to re-kindle - the Rockefeller, Javits, Lefkowitz tradition." -- Rudy Giuliani, New York Times, July 9, 1992
* What kind of Republican? Is [Giuliani], for instance, a Reagan Republican? [Giuliani] pauses before answering: "I'm a Republican." -- Village Voice, January 24, 1989
* "Shortly before his last-minute endorsement of Bob Dole in the 1996 presidential election, [Giuliani] told the Post's Jack Newfield that "most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine." The Daily News quoted [Giuliani] as saying that March: "Whether you talk about President Clinton, Senator Dole.... The country would be in very good hands in the hands of any of that group."
* Revealing at one point that he was "open" to the idea of endorsing Clinton, he explained: "When I ran for mayor both times, '89 and '93, I promised people that I would be, if not bipartisan, at least open to the possibility of supporting Democrats." -- Rudy - An Investigative Biography of Rudolph Giuliani, Wayne Barrett, Page 459
* "From my point of view as the mayor of New York City, the question that I have to ask is, 'Who has the best chance in the next four years of successfully fighting for our interest? Who understands them, and who will make the best case for it?' Our future, our destiny is not a matter of chance. It's a matter of choice. My choice is Mario Cuomo." -- Rudy Giuliani: Emperor of the City, Andrew Kirtzman, Page 133
* "[Quite] frankly, you have to understand the fact that Rudy Giuliani was a McGovern Democrat, he was endorsed by the Liberal Party when he ran for Mayor. In his heart, he's a Democrat. He's paraded all over this country with Bill Clinton and, in fact, he's very comfortable with Mario Cuomo. But what Rudy Giuliani wants is to be bailed out in the city, in the mess he's in, and everybody understands very clearly in politics that they struck a deal, that Mario's going to continue to be the big spender, save Rudy the options of raising taxes by pouring money statewide into the City of New York and bailing it out. Quite frankly, I predict that he will join the Democratic Party." -- Interview with Michael Long, Chairman N.Y.S., Conservative Party, CNN Crossfire, October 25, 1994
Does this really sound like the sort of candidate we want as a standard bearer for the Republican Party?
He Can't Keep His Pants Up
There has only been one man who has ever made it to the White House after being divorced and that was Ronald Reagan, who had been married to Nancy for more than 25 years before his campaign in 1980. Rudy, on the other hand, is on his third wife.
Furthermore, his second divorce from Donna Hanover was extremely ugly. Hanover accused Rudy of "open and notorious adultery." She also claimed Rudy had an affair with a staffer, Christyne Lategano-Nicholas, which both Giuliani and Lategano-Nicholas denied. However, Rudy has acknowledged that he started seeing his current wife, Judith Nathan, before his divorce from Hanover was finalized in 2002.
Given how recent this divorce was, Rudy's adultery, and the fact that he married, "the other woman," the press can be expected to cover Rudy's marriage to Hanover exhaustively if he gets the nomination and needless to say, Rudy, quite deservedly, will not come off very well.
Does He Have The Judgment To Be President?
As you've just seen, Rudy hasn't necessarily made the best decisions in his personal life. Unfortunately, the Bernard Kerik incident shows that Giuliani's poor judgment can spill over into political matters as well.
Rudy recommended his friend and business partner, Bernard Kerik, for the position of Homeland Security Secretary and the Bush administration, perhaps because Rudy vouched for him, didn't do a very thorough job of vetting him.
Soon after Kerik's nomination became public, allegations surfaced that Kerik was having two simultaneous affairs, had ties to a construction company "linked to the mob," and had an illegal alien nanny whose taxes hadn't been paid. Under fire from the press, Kerik withdrew his name from consideration for the Homeland Security position and the Bush administration was left with egg on its face for putting up such a scandal ridden nominee.
While the whole debacle was embarrassing for the Bush Administration, it raised even more serious questions about Rudy. After all, if Bernard Kerik is the sort of person Rudy sees as an appropriate friend, business partner, and nominee to run the Homeland Security Department, it makes you wonder what kind of people he is surrounding himself with on a day to day basis.
How Electable Is Rudy Giuliani Really?
One of the biggest selling points for Rudy Giuliani is supposed to be that he's "electable" because a lot of independents and Democrats will vote for him. The problem with that sort of thinking is that if he becomes the Republican nominee, the very liberal mainstream media will spend nine months relentlessly savaging him in an effort to help the Democrats. Because of that, Giuliani's sky high polling numbers with non-Republicans are 100% guaranteed to drop significantly before election time rolls around in 2008.
That is not necessarily a problem; after all the mainstream media is always against the Republican nominee, if -- and this is a big "if" -- the GOP nominee has strong support from the Republican base.
The big problem Rudy has is that he isn't going to be able to generate that kind of support. For one thing, as a candidate, he offers almost nothing to social conservatives, without whom a victory for George Bush in 2004 wouldn't have been possible. If the choice in 2008 comes down to a Democrat and a pro-abortion, soft on gay marriage, left-of-center candidate on social issues -- like Rudy -- you can be sure that millions of "moral values voters" will simply stay home and cost the GOP the election.
The other issue is in the South. George Bush swept every Southern state in 2000 and 2004, which is quite an impressive feat when you consider that the Democrats had Southerner Al Gore at the top of the ticket in 2000 and John Edwards as the veep in 2004. Unfortunately, a pro-abortion, soft on gay marriage, pro-gun control RINO from New York City just isn't going to be able to repeat that performance. Even against a carpetbagger like Hillary Clinton, it's entirely likely that you'll see at least 2 or 3 states in the South turn from red to blue if Rudy Giuliani is the nominee.
Also, the reason why George Bush's approval numbers have been mired in the high thirties/low forties of late is because he has lost a significant amount of Republican support, primarily because his domestic policies aren't considered conservative enough. Since that's the case, running a candidate who is several steps to Bush's left on domestic policy certainly doesn't seem like a great way to unite the base again.
Conclusion
Despite all of his charisma and the wonderful leadership he showed after 9/11, Rudy Giuliani is not a Reagan Republican. To the contrary, Giuliani is another Christie Todd Whitman, another Arlen Specter, another Olympia Snowe. He's a throwback to the "bad old days" before Reagan, when the GOP was run by moderate Country Club Republicans who considered conservatives to be extremists. Trying to revive that failed strategy again is likely to lead to a Democratic President in 2008 and numerous setbacks for the Republican Party.
Without a Supreme Court that will overturn the Ninth Circus Court, the Second Amendment is DEAD in Kalifornia. It's also DEAD in the nation's capitol.
Room Service will be providing iced tea in hell before I cast a vote for an anti-gunner. Ever.
If the Republican Party can't get that simple message, then they just aren't listening. If Al Gore had been pro-gun, he probably would have taken his home state of Tennessee and might be President today. If Bush was anti-gun, that is what I believe would have happened.
Republicans just need to get over the idea that an anti-gun candidate is compatible with long term success.
Why don't you just join the losertarian party, because you cannot possibly be telling us that Rudy passes the smell test for Reagan-Republicans.
Sorry MikeA, but some of us are not "win-at-any-cost" RINOS. We know that elections have results, and those results impact our daily lives -- from tax and social policy to gay marriage.
Your "attach the messenger" response is typically liberal.
You make a great case for him to be the Mayor of any number of large cesspools that were once great cities.
But for president, no way does he get my vote. No way in hell and no matter who the Dem candidate is.
He might make a suitable head of Homeland Security but only if he puts a muzzle on his weirdo views on social issues. Rudy has some serious soul-searching and inner spiritual prayer work to do before he meets his Maker. It might be better in the long run for him to attend to that. We don't need a pro-abortion president.
Every new poll with Rudy at the top gives these kooks heartburn. :)
"Name a single American politician- who Social Conservatives would readily accept- who has a chance of being elected President in 2008."
Maybe the Social Conservatives don't have that kind of clout any more. We'll have to see.
While I feel he fits New York, I would not want him for POTUS. Democrats will have a field day with him.
Then there is his fear to take on Hillary for the Senate.
Thanks for the oh-so predicable reply of "you're a liberal." That's always the place of last resort for the witless.
I guess the plurality of Christian voters who voted in a poll taken by a Christian organization that showed Guiliani in the lead with Christian CONSERVATIVES, I guess they're all liberals too, right?? Do a keyword search of FR's search. This was posted yesterday.
And grow a brain. Guiliani had to adopt liberal positions to maintain political viability governing New York City. You can't govern New York City like you're the mayor of Boise. Neither would he govern that liberally as president. I'm sure he will move right to govern the nation. Why do such simple concepts of political reality escape people like you?? Oh that's right, you're too busy labelling people in your tired and uninspired way to bother thinking.
P.S. Any reply you post won't be read so save your time. You've already wasted enough of mine with your childishness.
Thanks for the oh-so predicable reply of "you're a liberal." That's always the place of last resort for the witless.
I guess the plurality of Christian voters who voted in a poll taken by a Christian organization that showed Guiliani in the lead with Christian CONSERVATIVES, I guess they're all liberals too, right?? Do a keyword search of FR's search. This was posted yesterday.
And grow a brain. Guiliani had to adopt liberal positions to maintain political viability governing New York City. You can't govern New York City like you're the mayor of Boise. Neither would he govern that liberally as president. I'm sure he will move right to govern the nation. Why do such simple concepts of political reality escape people like you?? Oh that's right, you're too busy labelling people in your tired and uninspired way to bother thinking.
P.S. Any reply you post won't be read so save your time. You've already wasted enough of mine with your childishness.
We heard all that crap when the guvernator wanted conservative votes. LOL!
Rudy is a lefty. A far left lefty. He will govern like one. No thanks.
Keep those eyes swirling counter clockwise.
"No way I vote for Rudy - no way"
"I'll take my little trucks and go home first"
"I'll get my way or I quit"
My advise is be prepared to call your Mommy.
"You are right. But what are the chances that Zell would be nominated?"
None. The point is that the quality of the candidate should be determined by what positions he holds on the issues, not necessarily whether there is an "R" or "D" after their name. It's true most conservatives are Republicans but there are many liberal Republicans and a few conservative Democrats.
I don't know what will happen in '08, but the disrespect some here show toward Rudy is just vile. They are no better than the DUmmies and the Kos kids.
Thanks for that post Veronica - I have been back and forth with the Rudy haters all day.
"If Rudy is our nominee - we won't vote"
CAN YOU IMAGINE ???
Childish.....
Okay, vote for Macaca Allen then who couldn't even win a debate with Barbara Boxer on CNN, another time against Chuck Schumer, yet another against Jane Harman yet another against Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed. In each one he looked like a deer in the headlights and couldn't even mount a reply to the lies they were telling, and trust me, these were no brainers a 5 year old could have hit out of the park. Not Allen! He couldn't even go off script to refute these hacks and their utterly flimsey deceptions. The man's a dunce. He'll be chum in the water for Hillary to gobble up, nothing more. So enjoy President Clinton Part Deux. You'll be the first to bitch about her presidency and then wonder why you didn't support a candidate with more than a room temperature I.Q.
Dear Sabramerican,
"You build a straw man re Giuliani and then you knock him down."
Actually, I think the strawman builder is you.
It's you who believe that large numbers of liberals - WHO ARE MOSTLY AGAINST THE WAR AS FOUGHT - are going to vote for Mr. Giuliani - WHO IS FOR THE WAR AS FOUGHT.
"Name a single American politician- who Social Conservatives would readily accept- who has a chance of being elected President in 2008."
It's a bit early, but Mr. Allen is more than electable, even in spite of his current problems. Unless you think that a politician who occasionally makes an untoward remark is less electable than a politician who cross-dresses. LOL.
Although he has so far indicated that he won't be a candidate, Haley Barbour would be a formidable nominee.
I don't know how the process will treat Sen. Brownback or Sen. Frist, or anyone else who is running, but I've learned the hard way not to think that someone who seems a "dwarf" two years out will not be able to win the presidency.
I remember my mother's laughter (and my own - but I was kind of young, just a teenager) when we heard that a peanut farmer from Georgia was running for president. I remember seeing Mr. Clinton give the nomination speech in 1988 for Mr. Dukakis and laughing that he'd never be president, either (who else remembers that 3-hour stemwinder??).
However, this argument - that there is no one else to run - is hardly much of an endorsement of Mr. Giuliani. "Vote Giuliani - he stinks less than all the others!"
Even if that is the case, Mr. Giuliani doesn't meet my minimum standards to receive my vote. I believe that he will not meet the minimum standards of millions of actual conservative voters.
sitetest
First, he's been a liberal his entire life. Second, if your statement was true then it would demonstrate a severe lack of principle on Giuliani's part making him unworthy of a conservative's vote.
You can't govern New York City like you're the mayor of Boise.
And you shouldn't govern New York City like a teenaged girl with a pilfered credit card racking up unprecedented debt.
Neither would he govern that liberally as president.
You're psychic?
I'm sure he will move right to govern the nation.
Oh, well, that's enough for me. MikeA on Free Republic is "sure" that Giuliani will move right to govern the nation. Well, you might be right. Giuliani is so damned liberal he couldn't move any other direction than to the right.
Why do such simple concepts of political reality escape people like you??
Because you're full of $#!+.
Oh that's right, you're too busy labelling people in your tired and uninspired way to bother thinking.
Giuliani has amassed a long record of being a liberal. Heck, he was endorsed by the Liberal Party in his run for Mayor because of his openly liberal position. Labelling Giuliani as anything other than liberal is dishonest. He is, by definition and by his own record and statements and views, a liberal.
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.