Posted on 02/13/2007 10:41:04 AM PST by meg88
I don't often like to write articles that attack the media. I understand that the bottom line is ratings and I'm comfortable with that. I understand that certain stations have biases and I have no problem with that either. However, for some reason in almost every form of media, Rudy Giuliani is misunderstood.
The common quote from anyone is the media is that he is pro choice, anti gun, pro gay and has been divorced twice, so how the hell is he leading the Republican field? Well, there are two reasons.
The simple reason which I don't want to spend too much time on is name recognition. This early in the race before any ads or debates happen, people say they will vote for the person they know. For the Democrats it is Hillary and for the Republicans it is McCain and Giuliani. The media forgets that most Americans don't know who Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, and Mitt Romney are. Even people that follow politics might not know who the hell Tom Vilsack is. So why would they support someone they don't know?
Back in 2003, a man named Howard Dean barely registered in the polls and Joe Lieberman was the frontrunner! So one reason why Rudy is leading is because he is America's mayor. We all know him from the Yankee games too. Plus, heyyyyyyyyy he's Italian, (In my family that is important).
Now for the complex reason why Rudy is leading, Republicans are not all that socially conservative.
The media is baffled that Republicans aren't upset that he got divorced twice. Look at this top ten list:
1. Nevada 2. Oklahoma 3. Arizona 4. Arkansas 5. Wyoming 6. Idaho 7. Tennessee 8. Florida 9. Alabama 10. Washington
What is this a list of? It is a list of the top ten states with the highest divorce rates in 2002. The first nine all voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004. So yes, while Republicans love heterosexual marriage, they understand that Rudy isn't exactly out of the mainstream for getting a divorce.
Another media mistake is to say he is anti-gun. This is lazy reporting. Basically, Rudy looks at gun control the way Howard Dean did as governor of Vermont. Dr. Dean had an A rating from the NRA as governor, so when the left got mad at him, he argued that Vermont didn't need gun control. Rudy's argument is that local municipalities should decide gun laws and you need more gun control in New York City than in Kansas! It is a conservative position to give power to local governments and out of the hands of the federal government which is what Giuliani is arguing for.
Another media mistake is to say Giuliani is pro gay. He's not pro or anti gay. He believes in some gay rights but not the right to get married. Most social conservatives believe this as well. Rudy's position is in line with Dick Cheney and do you hear social conservatives calling Cheney too liberal? Do you hear anyone calling Dick Cheney too liberal? To my knowledge, which is dubious at best, it was liberals that made a big deal over his gay daughter and his support for civil unions.
On the issue of abortion Giuliani is pro choice. So will this kill him? Not really. Giuliani is personally opposed to abortion but thinks that in certain cases that you shouldn't put a woman in jail for having an abortion. This is a mainstream position. Most Republicans are personally anti-abortion, but if their wife is raped or their twelve year old daughter gets pregnant, the position bends.
Back in college, I hung out with the strongly conservative kids during politics classes, only because it was more fun to argue with liberals. Anyway, we had a discussion on what Bush should do to fill the court seat and we were given three mock candidates. We decided to pick the moderately conservative Latino judge. Why? We wanted to win. We wanted our party to show minorities that we were friendly. Our professor then revealed to us that this mock candidate paid for his daughter's abortion, so maybe it would make sense to choose the staunch conservative judge. Nope, we wanted to win. Maybe Republicans and social conservatives do not want to see Hillary in the White House and know that Rudy is the only one that can bring victory.
The media is also failing to report how anti-tax/small-government Republican voters (not politicians) really are. For instance, our town supervisor would not spend 650 dollars to put Christmas lights on Main Street! That supervisor did not want to waste taxpayer money. (Plus, you would think a Republican would want to spend taxpayer money on celebrating Jesus). This is John McCain's largest liability. John McCain voted against Bush tax cuts twice and against the stupid estate tax. As mayor of NYC, Rudy cut taxes. If there is one issue that unites Republicans is that they hate paying taxes. Even liberal Republicans remain with the Party for this very reason.
The Christian Coalition, the super social conservative group is also very anti-tax. Extending the Bush tax cuts in 2010 is on their priority list of legislative agenda according to their website. How cutting taxes has to do with Jesus is beyond me but again, Republicans HATE taxes.
The failure of George Bush is also leading to Rudy's popularity. Republicans are kind of embarrassed right now. They realize that they don't have the brightest guy in the world right now in office. Republicans also realize that Rudy fixed a broken city and could fix George Bush's broken country.
Rudy is also being an individual without attacking social conservatives. Instead of calling Pat Roberson an agent of intolerance like McCain did, Rudy ignores him and says he likes John Roberts which is all they want to hear anyway as the Christian Coalition's priority is to have as many conservative judges as possible.
The media doesn't get it probably because they don't really talk to average Republican voters or aren't ones themselves. The media covers Pat Robertson more than they cover the average Joe Republican. Besides taxes, there is another thing that unties Republicans even more than social issues, it is a strong leader. The reason why Rudy is winning is that he is anti-tax, a strong leader, pro reducing the scope of the federal government and yes, because he is known by almost everyone
Like NYC could have run an election immediately after 911. How like Rudy's opponents to LIE and try and blame him because an election was out of the question. He didn't "seize" power. He was still mayor. You don't get elected one day and become the mayor the next.
There were LAWS concerning fireworks passed by the city Council before Giuliani became Mayor. His job, as mayor, was to see that those laws were enforced. There were also LAWS concerning panhandling, and lots of other things that other mayors didn't bother to enforce or said it was too difficult or too costly to enforce. Mayor Giuliani found a way to enforce these laws. On the domestic front, I am hopeful that a President Giuliani would find a way to enforce the Federal LAWS we have. Certainly these include our immigration laws.
ML/NJ
THE main function of anti-gun demonRAT-created groups like this are PRECISELY to fly under the radar and make it SEEM as if the threat of new gun control laws, as Wiener says, "has receded in urgency", and that "the danger at this time is minimal".
By the way, the only people I've heard of that have the name Wiener, are inner-city, liberal Jews (NOT like our good friends at JPFO) that are as vehemently ANTI-GUN as any people on the f'ing PLANET.
Which is a real surprise, considering that the 6 million Jews that were slaughtered by Hitler in WWII, MIGHT have had a fighting chance to survive IF they had a right to keep and bear arms, which they didn't.
To say that the threat of new gun-control being passed is "NOT a deal-breaker for most conservatives and 2nd Amendment supporters in the 2008 Presidential election" is ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE, and LUDICROUS at that.
I've been shooting and/or hunting since I was 8 years old, including in the Marine Corps (including, competitively) for 13 years, am a Benefactor Member of the NRA, have been a member of several different gun clubs, have a decent collection of all sorts of firearms, and have MANY friends that have the same interests, and NONE of them would even CONSIDER giving a northeastern-corridor, inner-city gun-grabber like RINO-rudy a PASS on running for the highest office in the f'ing land.
You simply don't know what in the hell you're talking about, OR, you have an anti-gun agenda. It's one or the other (or maybe both?).
Rudy did not curtail the BoR while Mayor. Such exaggerations don't help you guys why do you keep throwing them out?
But still your challenge is to come up with an ELECTABLE alternative to Rudy (other than McCain).
Lighten up. It was a joke.
Actually it was underway the morning of 9/11. The primaries of course. They were put off only till the 25th and the runoffs were held in October. A very short time and the general election went on schedule as well in November. http://www.vote.nyc.ny.us/results.html if you have to see for yourself.
Now what was being discussed was when it was time for Rudy to leave office he tried to have his term extended. There was no reason to do so. As a matter of fact the man Rudy had endorsed won that election. Bloomberg took his oath on time as he should have.
I have to say those two references have been used up on the FR as a solid resume for the leader of the Free World. Admit it, Rudy has 0 experience in world affairs. And this is not a good time for "on the job training".
Breathtaking ignorance. Even when abortion was illegal, it was the PROVIDERS who were prosecuted, not their victims.
Wow. Amazing what you can deduce about someone based on just a name. You did get the "Jew" part right, but that's the first time anybody has every intimated that I was "inner-city" or "liberal" or "ANTI-GUN".
But hey, what do I know? After all, my name is "Wiener", and apparently you're an expert on what people with that name are like.
A word of advice: Try and be a little more careful in the future about letting your bigotry peek through. It doesn't go over that well with most rational people.
Rudy's "view" is more complex than you are willing to admit.
He is without doubt the most electable Republican and will generate far more money than any of his alternatives. No one in the party other than the President can raise money like Rudy. He has been doing that for conservative Republicans all over the nation for over a year. THEY will not forget him either.
In the primary, there is no need to 'settle' for someone who is strong on terrorism but weak on the social issues. There are candidates out there who are both.
I respect and admire true Americans that happen to be Jews (or any other religious, ethnic, racial, etc. group), and particularly those that vigorously support our 2nd Amendment, like, as I said in my previous post to you, those Jews that run JPFO (Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership).
I, and they, I'm sure, will NOT give a politician of any import (above the pay grade of dog catcher) a PASS on the pushing of past, present, or future gun control in our country.
If you don't try to generalize about a person based on his Jewish-sounding name, then you won't have to worry about the "bigotry" card. Really, you're much better off just calling people "goofballs". It elevates the level of your discourse considerably.
Oh, please. This is said of at least 90% of the people who run for President, including Ronald Reagan. Who's your favorite, McCain? (Because he plays with imported marbles?) Hillary? (Because she probably has made the most foreign trips on our nickel?)
Ask yourself WWRRS? (Who Would Ronald Reagan Support?) Let that be your guide.
ML/NJ
It's worse than that. There's a movie you should see. I think it's called the McCaine Mutiny.
ML/NJ
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.