Giuliani for President - Leadership Inspires Early Endorsement.

National Review ^ | 2/15/07 | Andrew C. McCarthy

[areafiftyone]

It is the greatness of the United States that daunting challenges inevitably summon to the fore leaders with the steel to rise to the occasion and the grasp to raise us up with them. Leaders whose confidence and command cut through the noise and the naysayers. Leaders who stir us not only to the urgency of action but to the achievability of victory through America’s exceptional gifts.

Rudy Giuliani is such a leader. In our perilous times, his is the unique combination of vision, guts, and perseverance that we need in the Oval Office. That’s why I hope we have the good sense to make him the next president of the United States.

The 2008 election is still 21 months away, and one recoils from the prospect of so long a contest. Still, last week’s announcement that Mayor Giuliani is seeking the presidency was welcome. Our government is adrift. Vigor and course correction will have to come from outside — from a presidential campaign’s demand that we open our eyes and choose sides.

Though our nation is profoundly threatened, never before has our security been so cavalierly politicized. The new Democrat-controlled Congress does not merely oppose fighting a war it would be disastrous to lose. Without the courage of its stated conviction that America’s mission in Iraq must end, it lacks the gumption to match its anti-war rhetoric with meaningful action. As Rome burns, our heroes are Neros, fiddling with oxymoronic “non-binding resolutions.”

No, Congress doesn’t dare de-fund the mission. So this craven display of “resolve” accomplishes only three things: It tells our troops in harm’s way that the people’s representatives think their sacrifice is pointless; it informs the Iraqis being pressed to make hard choices that Americans may not be around to back those choices; and it reveals to our firmly committed enemies that we neither understand the stakes nor have the stomach to fight for them.

Meanwhile, the once-shining clarity of the Bush Doctrine has dimmed. The great calling of our age, President Bush declared while smoke billowed from 9/11’s wreckage, was to defeat jihadists and quell the rogues who might abet them. He couldn’t have been more right. Five weary years later, though, the administration seems at times to be running on empty. The answer to our great calling has tapered to stabilizing Baghdad — while we abide Russia and China’s enabling of Iran, promote Fatah terrorists in their standoff with Hamas terrorists, and indulge Kim Jong-il’s remaking of the same dozen-year old promises whose flouting has graduated North Korea from extortionist to nuclear extortionist.

It’s hard to blame the president. He’s got to fight for every inch now. He is trying to move forward by meeting his critics halfway — decency they meet with bile. But he is in this fix because his administration has failed to rally the American people to the cause, to make them own it, rather than delegate it to 150,000 of our best and bravest while the rest of us go shopping. The Left has gleefully filled that void. With the help of its media allies, it daily saps the national will to stay on guard and take the fight to those determined to kill us.

I don’t think a President Giuliani would let them get away with it.

As a young prosecutor in the 1980s, I was privileged to work for him when he was the United States Attorney in New York City. By the sheer force of his intellect, his energy and his ability to inspire, he accomplished things that others before him had dared not try — like vanquishing the long entrenched mafia, which has been an epigone ever since his onslaught.

But Giuliani’s greatest asset may have been his unique understanding that success in any great endeavor hinges on the capacity to explain, relentlessly, what you are doing and why. With that, the public can understand and support you, the bad actors are under no illusions about your commitment, and those on the fence are apt to think better about choosing the wrong side. It is a Reaganesque gift.

Mayor Giuliani grasps the global nature of the jihadist challenge. He has demonstrated in spades — especially by his leadership in a New York City ravaged by the enemy on 9/11 — that he has the fortitude and constancy that will be required for victory. But just as much, he gets both the advantages and the obligations of the bully pulpit. He will make the case, cogently and compellingly, day in and day out: Why we are fighting and why it is vital to win.

This was on display last Monday in New York, when he told Sean Hannity that, as Iraq-centric as we’ve become, the war is still about a lot more than the Battle of Baghdad — whether we choose to see it or not:

[H]ere's the reality of it: We're at war. And we're at war because they're at war with us…. [W]hen you listen to these debates in Congress, and you listen to the politicians debating, you sort of get the impression that they think we're in control of whether we're at war or not. It doesn't matter what we think. They're at war with us. They want to come here and kill us. And they did on September 11, and they did a long time before September 11. Way back in 1993, they came to this city and killed people.

So we've got to put Iraq in the context of a much broader picture than just Iraq. And getting Iraq correctly, in other words, getting stability there is real important. And I support what the president asked for support to do [in surging combat troops] and what General Petraeus has asked for support to do, not because there's any guarantee it's going to work. There's never any guarantee at war. But if we can come out with a correct solution or a better solution in Iraq, it's going to make the whole War on Terror go better. We got to get beyond it. We've got to get beyond Iraq….

Right in the aftermath of [an attack like 9/11], there's tremendous unity. We understand that we have to be on offense against terrorists, that we have to make it bipartisan, that it isn't about being a Democrat or a Republican. It's about being an American. Now you get further away, and that lesson isn't as vivid. And all wars have that happen. This is a difficult thing to do, but we've got to start getting beyond Iraq.

We've got to be thinking about Iran. We have to think about Syria. We have to be thinking about Pakistan and Afghanistan and making sure that the transition in Afghanistan goes correctly. We have to be ready for the fact that, whatever happens in Iraq, success or failure — success will help us in the War on Terror. Failure will hurt us. But the war is still going to go on. They're still going to want to come here and kill us.

Some conservatives worry about Giuliani’s positions on certain social issues, especially abortion. But his positions have not signaled conventional liberalism. He has governed as a limited-government conservative — a species Republicans would do well to rediscover. More to the point, he doesn’t pine for the courts to impose that which the public rejects. To the contrary, he vows to appoint justices who will stick to the individual rights we already have rather than invent new ones as they go along. Who will adjudicate rather than legislate. Who will be our umpires, not our rulers. No president can do more than that to promote conservative outcomes. Conservatism is where the public is. We win a fair fight, a democratic fight, and he is committed to giving us that.

No fight, however, matters as much as the one for our survival. No one will fight that fight better or smarter or more zealously than Rudy Giuliani. That’s why we need him.

— Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).

[paudio]

Wow... this is a very nice list. Thanks!

[zarf]

But [Bush] is in this fix because his administration has failed to rally the American people to the cause, to make them own it, rather than delegate it to 150,000 of our best and bravest while the rest of us go shopping. The Left has gleefully filled that void. With the help of its media allies, it daily saps the national will to stay on guard and take the fight to those determined to kill us.

[areafiftyone]

You are welcome. Not many people are aware of what Rudy did while he was mayor. They only focus on one thing 9/11 and while he did that with strength and leadership, he did so many other things that are just as important.

[meg88]

AWESOME!!

[taxed2death]

"Again, on the issue of defending America I can vote for Giuliani. Is he my first choice? No. Would I vote for him over McCain no doubt, over Romney, yes. But most importantly to protect my family and my country I would vote for him over Hillary or Barrak Hussein Obama. I don't see how any conservative could do otherwise."

They all have the same position on open borders / amnesty. Rudy was mayor of the largest sanctrurary city in the US. So why is it "conservatives" should side with someone who will destroy the conservative party, forever?

I must have missed that one.

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

No fight, however, matters as much as the one for our survival.

Disarming Americans and the wholesale slaughter of entire generations is the prefect prescription for survival. So is capitulating to the "capitalism causes global warming" crowd.

[paudio]

I hope this list will be used against the other list, you know, the one that often appears here.

[Hydroshock]

On President Bill Clinton: Shortly before his last-minute endorsement of Bob Dole in the 1996 presidential election, Giuliani told the Post's Jack Newfield that "most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine." -Rudy! An Investigative Biography of Rudolph Giuliani, Wayne Barrett.


The Real Rudy Giuliani:

From Human Events:

Rudy's Strong Pro-Abortion Stance

As these comments from a 1989 conversation with Phil Donahue show, Rudy Giuliani is staunchly in favor of abortion:

"I've said that I'll uphold a woman's right of choice, that I will fund abortion so that a poor woman is not deprived of a right that others can exercise, and that I would oppose going back to a day in which abortions were illegal.

I do that in spite of my own personal reservations. I have a daughter now; if a close relative or a daughter were pregnant, I would give my personal advice, my religious and moral views ...

Donahue: Which would be to continue the pregnancy.

Giuliani: Which would be that I would help her with taking care of the baby. But if the ultimate choice of the woman - my daughter or any other woman - would be that in this particular circumstance [if she had] to have an abortion, I'd support that. I'd give my daughter the money for it."

Worse yet, Giuliani even supports partial birth abortion:

"I'm pro-choice. I'm pro-gay rights,Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. "No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing," he responded." -- CNN.com, "Inside Politics" Dec 2, 1999

It's bad enough that Rudy is so adamantly pro-abortion, but consider what that could mean when it comes time to select Supreme Court Justices. Does the description of Giuliani that you've just read make you think he's going to select an originalist like Clarence Thomas, who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade -- or does it make you think he would prefer justices like Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy who'd leave Roe v. Wade in place?

Rudy's abortion stance is bad news for conservatives who are pro-life or who are concerned about getting originalist judges on the Supreme Court.

An Anti-Second Amendment Candidate

In the last couple of election cycles, 2nd Amendment issues have moved to the back burner mainly because even Democratic candidates have learned that being tagged with the "gun grabber" label is political poison.

Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani is a proponent of gun control who supported the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapon Ban.

Do Republicans really want to abandon their strong 2nd Amendment stance by selecting a pro-gun control nominee?

Soft on Gay Marriage

Other than tax cuts, the biggest domestic issue of the 2004 election was President Bush's support of a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani has taken a "Kerryesque" position on gay marriage.

Although Rudy, like John Kerry, has said that marriage should remain between a man and a woman, he also supports civil unions, "marched in gay-pride parades" ...dressed up in drag on national television for a skit on Saturday Night Live (and moved in with a) wealthy gay couple" after his divorce. He also very vocally opposed running on a gay marriage amendment:

His thoughts on the gay-marriage amendment? "I don't think you should run a campaign on this issue," he told the Daily News earlier this month. "I think it would be a mistake for anybody to run a campaign on it -- the Democrats, the president, or anybody else."

Here's more from the New York Daily News:

"Rudy Giuliani came out yesterday against President Bush's call for a ban on gay marriage.

The former mayor, who Vice President Cheney joked the other night is after his job, vigorously defended the President on his post-9/11 leadership but made clear he disagrees with Bush's proposal to rewrite the Constitution to outlaw gays and lesbians from tying the knot.

"I don't think it's ripe for decision at this point," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"I certainly wouldn't support [a ban] at this time," added Giuliani..."

Although Rudy may grudgingly say he doesn't support gay marriage (and it would be political suicide for him to do otherwise), where he really stands on the issue is an open question.

Pro-Illegal Immigration

As Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics has pointed out, Rudy is an adherent of the same approach to illegal immigration that John McCain, Ted Kennedy, George Bush, and Harry Reid have championed:

"While McCain has taken heat for his support of comprehensive immigration reform, Rudy is every bit as pro-immigration as McCain - if not more so. On the O'Reilly Factor last week Giuliani argued for a "practical approach" to immigration and cited his efforts as Mayor of New York City to "regularize" illegal immigrants by providing them with access to city services like public education to "make their lives reasonable." Giuliani did say that "a tremendous amount of money should be put into the physical security" needed to stop the flow of illegal immigrants coming across the border, but his overall position on immigration is essentially indistinguishable from McCain's."

That's bad enough. But, as Michelle Malkin has revealed, under Giuliani, New York was an illegal alien sanctuary and "America's Mayor" actually sued the federal government in an effort to keep New York City employees from having to cooperate with the INS:

"When Congress enacted immigration reform laws that forbade local governments from barring employees from cooperating with the INS, Mayor Rudy Giuliani filed suit against the feds in 1997. He was rebuffed by two lower courts, which ruled that the sanctuary order amounted to special treatment for illegal aliens and were nothing more than an unlawful effort to flaunt federal enforcement efforts against illegal aliens. In January 2000, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal, but Giuliani vowed to ignore the law."

If you agree with the way that Nancy Pelosi and Company deal with illegal immigration, then you'll find the way that Rudy Giuliani tackles the issue to be right down your alley.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE OF RUDY GIULIANI'S LEFT-WING POLITICAL POSITIONS

[joeystoy]

I am a pro-life New Yorker who wasn't convinced about Rudy in 1989 or 1993.

He won me over quickly. THE PROOF IS IN THE PERFORMANCE.

He turned around New York City by governing as a limited-government conservative; a city that liberal politicians had told us for decades was ungovernable and and unmanageable.

I don't agree with all his positions and I certainly don't approve of his personal choices. But this is survival.

I wrote a blog today about the worldwide fascist network. Rudy understands this concept better than any politician in America. When Chris Matthews asks, smirkingly: "Was Saddam responsible for 9-11?" he's trying to win a silly debate point. When Rudy speaks about the war against the Jihadists he is trying to convince all who will listen that this is a worldwide struggle against a wide variety of ignorant and brutal savages.

Read my blog at: http://give-n-go.blogspot.com

[babaloo]

Truer words were never spoken.

[areafiftyone]

Great Post. I'll check out your blog. Thank you.

[Condor51]

Rudy, You're A Mutt

Go Get Your Shine Box

[Westbrook]

I don't know what Rudy DID in New York.

I only know what he INTENDS TO DO to me.

He does not recognize our 2nd Amendment rights.

Neither do Hitlery and Osama-Obama.

He is for murdering infants as they are being born.

So are Hitlery and Osama-Obama.

I cannot, in good conscience, give my support to a candidate like that.

I just can't.

If it means we end up with president Hitlery, so be it.

Maybe that will bring things to a head.

Maybe that's what's needed to put a stop to this.

.

[areafiftyone]

LOL! It will. I will post it when necessary and from the look of things it will be necessary every time. So will a BIG SUPPLY OF POPCORN! LOL!

[areafiftyone]

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I'm not trying to convince you to vote for Rudy - I'm just stating the facts. But I respect your opinion.

[azhenfud]

He was the Mayor of one of America's largest cities, suddenly thrust into a nightmarish situation few could have imagined. Unwelcome limelight cast upon him from an event not wished upon anyone. Thousands suddenly displaced. Lives torn apart. Untold property damage from which the city could never fully recuperate. Permanently scarred and an event forever indelibly written upon the annals of America's history. Frantic calls for help, seemingly unending.

Yet, he stood in the trenches - looked danger in the eye and met the challenge as well as his frail human form would allow him.



















His name is Ray Nagin....

GOTCHA! LOL!!!

[PhilCollins]

I agree that Rep. Paul would be a better president than Rudy. Paul has more experience and is more conservative. The last nine presidents have been a U.S. senator, U.S. rep., or governor, but Rudy's only elected office is mayor.

[CrawDaddyCA]

Good one!

[Westbrook]

Thank you, and I respect yours.

While I might prefer Rudy as president over Hitlery or Osama-Obama, I could not vote for him with a clear conscience.

.

[azhenfud]

"Regardless of how low in the polls or whiny people get they stick to their guns!"

If Rudy has any say 'bout it, they won't have any guns to stick by....;-)