So, we'll just have to agree to disagree (unless Gingrich or Huckabee is the eventual nominee ;-)
Posted on 02/11/2007 12:44:55 PM PST by areafiftyone
Rudy Giuliani Has Got What You Need
Posted by Mark Radulich on 02.15.2007
It won't matter what Giuliani thinks about about abortion if Iran drops a bomb on us. And quite frankly I'm much less worried about Islamic terrorism with President Giuliani in charge than President Brownback or Clinton.
The story right now being bandied about by the mainstream media and the talk radio world is that the GOP has no front-runner for the 2008 Presidential election or that the front-runners are not exactly inspiring anyone. The three most prominent names right now are obviously John McCain, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.
The reason these three contenders fail to ignite the imagination of their base is not because they aren't competent leaders or even forces to be reckoned with in terms of security but rather that they fail to meet the social conservative litmus test of Republican base. They are not anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion or anti-gun control enough for many social conservative voters to trust and therefore many just aren't excited enough to stand behind these while either Clinton or Obama make their way to the White House.
As I've said before, social voting in the age of world wide Islamic terrorism befuddles me. I suppose President Brownback could try and outlaw abortion but a world free of legally murdered babies doesn't stop Mohammed from blowing himself up outside of your local Starbucks. President Huckabee could save the institution of marriage for the next thousand years by sending all homosexuals to France forever but that has nothing to do with Iran or North Korea and the likely possibility that they will facilitate one of many terrorist groups getting their hands on a nuclear device. Stopping stem-cell research doesn't drop the bomb from being dropped on Israel or us for that matter so I fail to see how social vote should supercede security and foreign policy votes.
Let me explain it this way; You have what's called Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs, which is a theory in psychology that Abraham Maslow proposed in 1943 that states as humans meet 'basic needs', they seek to satisfy successively 'higher needs' that occupy a set hierarchy. Maslow wrote that "the study of crippled, stunted, immature, and unhealthy specimens can yield only a cripple psychology and a cripple philosophy." In other words, if your most basic needs weren't met, then your emotional, spiritual and psychological growth would be stunted or crippled.
Maslow's hierarchy of needs is typically represented as a pyramid with the more primitive needs at the bottom and consisting of five levels: the four lower levels are grouped together as deficiency needs associated with physiological needs, while the top level is termed growth needs associated with psychological needs. While deficiency needs must be met, growth needs are continually shaping behavior. The basic concept is that the higher needs in this hierarchy only come into focus once all the needs that are lower down in the pyramid are mainly or entirely satisfied. Growth forces create upward movement in the hierarchy, whereas regressive forces push prepotent needs further down the hierarchy.
As you can see from the pyramid shown above, the first two levels of need are physical survival needs such as water, food, sleep, warmth and exercise and safety and security needs. The other more ethereal needs don't come into play until those two levels have been met.
Now let's look at the candidate most likely to be beat Hillary Clinton should the Democrats opt to give her a run at the White House, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Aside from the fact that he's the most like GOP candidate to actually win NY since probably the Reagan administration, Giuliani's record stacks up pretty well against the first two levels Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
As Mayor of the largest city and arguably the most important city in America, Giuliani had to manage the city public works efficiently and make the city livable for its residents. According to his campaign website, "Rudy Giuliani cut more taxes than any Mayor in New York City history, reducing or eliminating 23 city taxes, saving individuals and businesses a cumulative $8 billion, while reducing New Yorkers' tax burden by nearly 20%. By the end of Giuliani's term in office, New Yorkers enjoyed their lowest tax burden in three decades, along with the creation of approximately 425,000 new private sector jobs… When Rudy Giuliani took office, 59% of New Yorkers said they would leave the city the next day if they could, according to a CNN/Time poll. Drawing upon the "Broken Windows" theory of policing, the City cracked down on quality of life crimes such as aggressive panhandling, graffiti, and drug dealing, transforming places like Times Square into safe destinations for theatergoers and sightseers. The City launched an aggressive initiative against drunk drivers, and implemented a ban on sex shops within 500 feet of residential neighborhoods, churches, and schools. In addition, Mayor Giuliani acquired 2,038 acres of new parkland – the most in more than 50 years."
The former mayor also has a solid record on protecting children and increasing security in a city that once rivaled other big cities in rapes and murders. "Under Rudy Giuliani's leadership as Mayor of the nation's largest city, murders were cut from 1,946 in 1993 to 649 in 2001, while overall crime – including rapes, assaults, burglary and auto-thefts – fell by an average of 57%. According to the FBI, New York was transformed from the crime capital of the country into the Safest Large City in America, while becoming the global model for excellence in law enforcement. Rudy Giuliani believes that "Public safety is a fundamental civil right…when you reduce crime, you restore people's freedom."
Acting on his belief that "One of the most important responsibilities of government is to protect children from harm," Mayor Giuliani worked to create the city's first independent child welfare agency, reducing the foster care population by promoting a record number of adoptions, and doubling child support collections by cracking down on deadbeat dads, and implementing a program called HealthStat, which identified unenrolled children eligible for health insurance."
Giuliani obviously will be strong on domestic law and order issues as well as quality of life issue but the big question will be whether or not he has the gumption to fight Islamic terrorism worldwide. If his speeches are to believed and his actions concerning an anti-Semitic Saudi and a very large check are any indication then I believe Giuliani will be the kind of terror warrior many of us thought Bush would become.
The world has become too small to be so caught up in social policy voting. No matter who you vote in, either very liberal or very conservative, the fact of the matter is that abortion will never be prohibited in our lifetime but the likelihood of Iran or China starting a nuclear war is and the smart people of this country should be thinking about what kind of leader they want to be in charge when that does happen. When your most basic needs are being threatened and your livelihood is under attack from foreign invaders, who do you think is going to protect you and fight the enemy, Giuliani or Hillary Clinton? At the end of the day, social votes aside, Giuliani has got what every American needs – the ability to lead and manage this nation while fighting the enemy abroad.
Have you seen what Giuliani Partners, LLC has done? They have accepted money to do jobs and failed to perform, but they sure kept the money. Ask Bernie Kerik about it. Oh, you can't -- he is hiding out in South America. Gee, I wonder why?
Thanks for reading my post with an open mind. :-)
No, I think I am going to continue to say that. It seems to be the only thing the Rudyphiles can come up with when they lose the arguments. I want it known that I will not vote for Rudy under ANY circumstances, even if it comes down to Hillary as the only other candidate.
You called me a liar. Name one lie.
Is English not your mother tongue? And no, I asking this seriously, because "poo pooed" is a common American and English way of saying what I did.
So, we'll just have to agree to disagree (unless Gingrich or Huckabee is the eventual nominee ;-)
I completely agree with you; however, Newt is NOT going to run!
Enjoy little boy.
House
Senate
Oval Office
Three wrongs don't make a Right.
Newt has many more and more serious PERSONAL ( three wives, diddling his then government secretary, in his government office, on government time, DURING THE SAME TIME HE WAS EXCORIATING SLICK WILLIE OVER MONICA, is but one )and political baggage problems than Rudy has. And he is not going to run!
So don't run Rudy. Run someone who offers a difference from a liberal Democrat, not a liberal Republican. What is the difference?
Heck, that's what happened to me! I had NOT picked a preferred candidate at all. Now, I have.
Not at all.
AMEN
His ties to Cunningham are still under DOJ investigation.
I agree Gingrich has serious personal issues. I am hoping that he will address them to some satisfaction during the campaign. But maybe not.
Just curious...Do you make a habit of supporting politicians based not upon your principles but rather based upon the actions of anonymous posters on an internet forum?
The pro-Rudy group here doesn't get it. Their constant thread spamming, personal attacks on other posters, etc, is driving hundreds of people to side against Rudy!
LOL! You are delusional.
Goodness, he "abused the Constitution", by following and upholding the well established laws of N.Y.C. and N.Y, state?
A "nanny state"? You have NO idea what a NANNY STATIST is, until you look into the words and deeds of such REAL "nanny staters as Bloomberg and Huckabee!
Babble on, by all means; just remember that talking about things you know NOTHING about, tends to make you look like a look, Congrats on doing just that beautifully!
Anything in his past is fair game if it's portrayed honestly and has relevance to how he would perform as President.
I'm not up to speed on his marital life, but the fact that he's been divorced doesn't seem relevant to me. It's not always the fault of the man, and even if it is, I don't see the relevance. I'd rather see someone divorce than to have a sham marriage like the Clintons where they both sleep around, and not with each other.
His position on the issues is far more nuanced than the spam spreadsheet posted on every Rudy thread at least once.
Yes, he wore a dress once as a gag. I once smeared shoe polish on my face and hands, wore gold jewelry and a cowboy hat, at a Halloween party to be a pimp.
So shoot me. I was 25 years old.
Would it be an unfair attack on me to claim that I'm a racist because of what I did back then? I did it because I thought it was funny and because I thought it would be shocking to the other guests. And it was. Mission accomplished.
I wouldn't do it again today, but it's not fair to crucify me for doing it back then.
The question we should be focusing on is who will do what when they become President. Past performance is a factor to consider, but the recent past, and their promises are the overwhelming factors to consider.
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.