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.
What is unfair about those statements? What is untrue? We've seen his cross-dressing pictures. We know he said he would pay for his own daughter to have an abortion. We know he wants to control guns by his own previous statements.
But we still vote.
Post #377 supports your theory they are nastier. But yet they stay around and nothing happens to them. I am still betting some of these nasty people are Democrats.
If I were you, I would tone it down a bit. You've already been marked with a bullseye. We try to watch our language around here and much as possible.
Giulani isn't my Jesus. I don't think he asked to be.
I might vote for him and I might not. I don't have to decide for about a year.
Would I feel more comfortable with him as President than Obama or the Hildebeast?
The alleged Freepers who say they will vote Hillary over Rudy should be banned for either being a troll or too stupid to post/
My apologies. What exactly does "marked with a bullseye" mean?
Divide and conquer as they say. They want to keep us as stirred up and disorganized as possible. You can bet on it!
I have to say, (As much as I hate the thought) it's working.
Now I'm thinking of Eddie Murphy's impersonation of Teddy Pendergrass "YOU GOT YOU GOT YOU GOT WHAT I NEED!!!!"
But then, you know all of this................
Well, that's because they have had lots of time to practice over at DU.
" No. You don't know if it's a complete summary of what Rudy thinks about "freedom"."
Yeah, I do.
"Rudy may have listed many things when describing what freedom is about."
THat works for dope smokers, BSers, and those that otherwise don't have a clue.
"The number one unalienable right is life and safety. The number one unalienable right for government to protect is life and safety."
No. It's Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Safety is not a right, and no one has any justificaiton to say that there fellows that choose to keep and bear arms are a threat to their life, or health.
Re: Rudy:Over the last century, millions of people from all over the world have come to New York City. They didn’t come here to be taken care of and to be dependent on city government. They came here for the freedom to take care of themselves.
spunkets: That's a pretty misleading quote, since Rudy thinks govm't is there to not only keep people safe, but "to determine what you do, and how you do it.
" What? Your logic is circular. I give you a Rudy quote that shows a fuller context of what Rudy might think freedom means and you revert back to the first single quote with no surrounding context to say that the quote is misleading."
Nothing circular about it. What Rudy says, indicates what he thinks. It's evidence you know. That eveidence applies to an analysis of anything else he says. freedom to take care of themselves? Come on, who wants that? Most of the voters vote according to what they can get in return for their vote. In this instance, he's talking about city services, or perks. I know that, because I felt it in my bones, when I read it. It has nothing to do with what hethinks freedom is. Here, he's simply using it as a buzzword.
We haven't had seven years to get organized like some of them have been doing for seven years but I think we are doing pretty for having one hand tied behind our back in fighting the battle. We cannot hit abuse even on a nasty post like I just saw but they hit it on us all the time. We are walking a fine line and they know it. I am convinced a lot of these people are Democrats or Indy's and out to make trouble. That they are doing a good job of right now.
When I read that old thread Mr. Mojo put up it all makes sense -- we went through this even after Pres Bush had the nomination.
I had forgotten how revolting some of these posts were and it hit me like a ton of bricks.
Turning FR into a DU clone, which is what you are doing, with your vulgar posts, is NOT helping you, nor your side.
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.