But much has happened since (I hope). The previously loyal Jewish vote is noticing that the Dem's are not behind Israel and the ever helpful Jimma Carter has further driven home the point that left is even anti-semitic.
That said, I can't figure out why Rudy has been anointed as a national security guru. Yes, he has supported the war and the President's anti-terror efforts, but that hardly distinguishes him from millions of other ordinary citizens. He showed leadership in the aftermath of 9/11, but again, what does it mean? Is he being rewarded for not being Ray Nagin? He did his job and was steady in a crisis, so did Haley Barbour, a much preferable candidate from a conservative perspective.
I also have difficulty backing a candidate solely based on his views on Iraq and the WOT. There is a very high likelihood that the Iraq war will be a non-factor in 2008. Congressman David Vitter, no RINO by any stretch of the imagination and the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services committee, stated on Meet the Depressed this morning that the troop surge was, for practical purposes and in his mind, the last stand. If in six months the situation in Iraq has not dramatically improved, the war will be over for all intents and purposes. If that is the case the only issue in the 2008 campaign will be who will get the troops out faster, regardless of the nominee.
I know that there are other national security issues than the Iraq War, but again how has Rudy distinguished himself from any other contender on those issues?