Posted on 11/15/2006 7:30:55 AM PST by 300magnum
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani enjoys "a lot of good will" from Republicans from his handling of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but his stance on social issues like abortion and gun control make him an unacceptable candidate in the 2008 presidential election, according to conservative analysts.
Giuliani, who announced Monday that he has filed papers to form an exploratory committee as the first step towards a White House run, is "absolutely unacceptable under any circumstances" as a presidential candidate, Colleen Parro, executive director of the Republican National Coalition for Life, told Cybercast News Service.
"The core values of the Republican Party with respect to life issues -- which is where our main concern is -- and the issues of the homosexual movement, etc., cause his candidacy for the nomination to just be dead in the water," she said.
Giuliani has described himself as "pro-choice" and said he would not support a ban on partial-birth abortions. He promoted gun control programs and civil unions for same-sex partners during his two terms as New York City mayor.
While serving in that post, Giuliani saw his private life become a regular subject of media scrutiny, especially in 2000, when he announced at a press conference that he was seeking a separation from his second wife without first telling her of his decision.
"Despite Giuliani's charm and his obvious leadership abilities, as far as social and cultural issues are concerned, not only his personal life but his public views make him unacceptable," Parro said.
Supporters of a Giuliani bid launched a group a year ago called Draft Rudy Giuliani for President.
Co-founder Nicholas Tyszka said in a statement this week that, "with the current climate [of divisiveness] in Washington," Giuliani would be an excellent nominee, as "he has such a broad base of appeal, even cutting across political lines."
The group, whose other co-founder is veteran Republican political consultant Allen Fore, said that "America needs and wants this great man to lead our nation."
"Named Time Magazine's 'Person of the Year' in 2001, Rudy Giuliani has been a proven leader during one of the toughest periods in American history," the organization's website states.
"Giuliani exemplifies leadership, courage and compassion," it says. "Rudy Giuliani has dedicated his professional life to serving the United States, including assistant attorney general in the U.S. Justice Department under President Reagan and as the crime-fighting U.S. attorney in the state of New York.
"He has an unrivaled record of honesty and integrity, always putting the people's interest above politics," the website continues. "His service as mayor of New York City, particularly after the devastating terrorist attacks against our country on September 11, 2001, made him America's mayor. Now it's time to make him America's president."
Although forming an exploratory committee does not guarantee that an individual will run for president, Giuliani's announcement Monday drew a quick response from the Democratic National Committee:
"It's unclear whether or not Rudy Giuliani will be able to just 'explain away' the fact that he's consistently taken positions that are completely opposite to the conservative Republican base on issues they hold near and dear," said DNC Communications Director Karen Finney in a press statement.
"Throughout his career, Giuliani has tried to paint himself as a moderate, but now that he's vying for his party's nomination, will he undergo an extreme makeover in an attempt to cozy up to the far right?" Finney asked.
The DNC also issued a speedy response after Sen. John McCain made a similar announcement on Sunday.
Brian Darling, director of Senate relations for the conservative Heritage Foundation, told Cybercast News Service that "it's going to be virtually impossible for Giuliani to woo voters who put the Second Amendment and family values as their top issues."
However, Giuliani "clearly has a lot of good will with Republicans, and his goal should be to shore up his conservative credentials on the issues of federal spending and anti-terrorism," Darling said.
Since he was mayor of New York City during 9/11, Giuliani "can trumpet anti-terrorism as one of his major policies. But he also needs to talk about limiting the federal government and restricting out-of-control federal spending so he can shore up support among conservatives who care about pocketbook issues," Darling said.
While acknowledging that Giuliani is "a presumptive front-runner" for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, Darling said the former mayor is enjoying good poll numbers "merely because he has high name recognition."
Strong approval figures don't guarantee victories when the party's primaries begin, Darling noted.
"Just ask [early 2004 Democratic front-runner] Howard Dean about that," he said.
Trolling for DU now, are ya? ;-)
But I DO disgree with your comment about Libertarians--and I would like to quote my hero on the topic--
“If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”---Ronald Reagan, 1975
I wouldn't vote for him. Period.
And if the GOP names him their nominee I'd consider the party to have lost all conservative ideals.
"So the Religious Right doesn't like Rudy, doesn't like Mormon Romney, doesn't like McCain, doesn't like Newt.
Looks like Clinton '08!"
Newt is unfortunately unelectable.
As for the rest, I don't like any of them.
I like Hitlery even less.
I will vote for any of the three.
I would vote for Attila the Hun before I vote for Hillary.
If infidelity is disqualifying, scratch McCain off your list.
I must've missed the place where someone, anyone, was suggesting he be put to death.
A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and, based on your post #6, your knowledge of Christianity and the Bible appear to fall in that category.
Go back and finish reading the post. I didn’t say Rudy supporters are irrelevant. I said ALL "I'll vote for whoever the party nominates" voters are irrelevant because the politicians don't have to earn their vote.
Rudy is way ahead right now because the MSM is pushing him and he has name recognition. He can’t win the general election because he can’t get big chunks of the conservative vote. Even if by some miracle he did squeak into a win, the MSM would have a liberal in the office. They would prefer a Democrat liberal but will accept a Republican liberal over a conservative.
So if you really don’t want Hillary as president, you need to start pushing for a conservative nominee and start telling the party establishment you will not vote for a liberal. That’s how you make them listen.
Read your history, magnum. The belief in individual liberties and the attendent restraint of government power by the governed, ARE liberal ideas.
The belief that government is the solution to every political or social problem, and the direct application of it's coercive powers can somehow be "more just" in the hands of fallible human beings (solong as they are the "right kind" of political and social thinkers), is most certainly NOT.
Believe me, Hillary Clinton and the rest of the gang are certainly NOT liberals. They are power-worshippers,plain and simple.
That's not true...he doesn't want to take away your guns. People just look for a reason to hate the man.
"I must've missed the place where someone, anyone, was suggesting he be put to death."
Nice try, putting into that kind of context.
In effect, he is being stoned to death because the purpose of this article. and most of the rest I've seen in the last two days, is to stifle debate, and to cause dissention in the ranks.
I know in my heart of hearts that barring some earth-shattering event that causes a complete re-evaluation of the political landscape, theman is doomed to fail at the primary level. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have anything to add to the debate, and that is exactly what is being done here: by concentrating on the negative, we're discounting the possibility that there's a positive in there somewhere.
If that's how you choose to practice your politics, then I hope you are happy with whatever lock-step-ideological, pure-as-the-driven-snow (wink, wink), no-idea-that-didn't-originate-in-Scripture, milquetoast eventually garners the nomination.
Yes, nobody's perfect, but the goal should be winning the White House in '08, not feeling good about our candidate (and ourselves).
I lived in Jersey when Rudy was Mayor.
Look at the bright side, by getting the window washers and beggars off the street, you didn't have to worry about shooting one.
Like I said earlier, The Second Amendment for me is a deal breaker. Rudy could be the second coming but until he changes his ideology on the second, he will not get my vote.
It is too late for Rudy to change on the second amendment. He had his chance when he had power. Now, talk is cheap.
As a "single issue voter" (the 2A) he will NEVER get my vote. Not even for dog cather!
You must be too young to know that when you accuse someone of 'lock step', you are accusing them of collaboration with Nazism. Is that what you're doing?
No, he's for gun control.
America is going to have to decide in 2008 if they want an ideologue a politican or a leader to run this country. You get to pick two of the three. That's how it works.
Rudy is about as honest and credible as Harry Reid!
They both follow their own agenda ahead of anyone else's, and take credit for the work of others.
I wish people would stop salivating over the candidacy of RINO's like Rudy, it discourages actual conservatives from running.
I totally agree and what scares me is the fact that as a prosecutor he does not believe in the 2nd and cherry picks from the USC. If elected he will take an oath that means nothing.
NEW LIBERALISM...supporter of abortion rights, anti-gun, gay marriages....everthing I am against.
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.