Rudolph Giuliani?

American Thinker ^ | February 21, 2007 | Selwyn Duke

[neverdem]

Rudolph Giuliani for president?  Please.  There's more chance I'll simultaneously be made head of NOW and the NAACP and be invited to George Soros' next soiree. 

I know a little something about Giuliani.  Although my politics, faith, appearance, gun case and, well, most everything about me say otherwise, I was raised in New York City.  And one of my last acts before departing the Den of Iniquity for suburbia was to cast a vote for America's Mayor.  Don't hold it against me; he was running against David Dinkins, a man who made Forrest Gump look smart. 

Unlike the piece I wrote about the now listing U.S.S. Mitt Romney, I'm not herein trying to sound the alarm.  Rather, I simply point out that Giuliani is a ship that only floats in New York Harbor.  He is far too liberal to get the Republican nomination.  

I've never witnessed a more laughable game of collective "Let's pretend" than the media's Giuliani coverage.  Even Dick Morris, the erstwhile Clinton propaganda minister who fancies himself the Niccolo Machiavelli of the third millennium, has called Giuliani the man to beat.   

He's more like the man who will be beaten - and by more than one candidate, mind you.

The media love to point out how Giuliani is the poll-leader for the Republican nomination, a fact which means absolutely nothing.  All many people in middle America know about him is that he didn't pull a Ray Nagin on 9/11 - he stoically shepherded his city through that dark hour - and that he rendered a captivating, earthy speech at the 2004 Republican National Convention.  And on his list of credits I'll add that after ferociously battling the mafia as a United States Attorney, he followed suit as mayor and cleaned up NYC, reducing crime and improving quality of life. 

This is all well and good but, unfortunately, Giuliani only looks palatable when viewed through the narrow prism of these few events.  And sometime very soon the average Republican voter will learn something: Liberal NY Republicans are different from liberal NY Democrats.  They have an "R" next to their names.

As mayor, Giuliani never missed a chance to march in the "Gay Pride" parade.  He actively supported "gay rights" and said he was "proud" of his domestic partnership initiative (a step toward anti-marriage).  Most egregiously, he once opined that homosexuality is "good and normal." 

Giuliani also favored government funding for abortion and said that the type of infanticide known as "partial-birth abortion" should not be outlawed in NY.  And while he now says he is "personally opposed to abortion," he also once asserted, "I'd give my daughter the money for it [an abortion]."  I guess he thinks his kids should have the right to choose and receive Big Daddy funding.

Giuliani has also been an advocate of abridging Second Amendment rights and the type of invidious discrimination known as affirmative action.  He has opposed school prayer and tuition tax credits.  He at one time said he endeavors to resurrect the spirit of Rockefeller Republicanism and that he would consider endorsing Bill Clinton, stating "most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine."  Then, he did in fact endorse ultra-liberal NY governor Mario Cuomo in 1994.  Anyway, enough about that.  You get the idea.

My point is that Giuliani's golfer son has more of a chance of winning the Masters (he is a phenomenal player) than father does of capturing the Republican nomination.  Allow me to lend this some perspective.

The hate-America-first crowd likes to say, perhaps when pondering the political prospects of Lady Macbeth and  Barack Obama, that no woman or black person could be elected president.   But now let's talk about something unprecedented that actually is impossible. 

To the best of my knowledge:

- No pro-abortion candidate has ever won the Republican nomination.

- Nobody who has been in bed with the homosexual lobby has ever won the Republican nomination. 

- Nobody who has opposed Second Amendment rights has ever won the Republican nomination. 

And some think a man saddled with all three negatives will do so in 2008?

What I find truly amazing is that this reality escapes Giuliani.  What is this man thinking?  Does he fancy that the average Republican voter is a Times Echo?  Talk about believing your own press clippings.

The only interesting aspect of the Giuliani coverage is why the media would press forward, seemingly oblivious to the man's lack of viability.  The obvious answer is that it's an alluring story, as Giuliani has a marquee name and a scintillating, romantic persona.  It's also possible some in the Media wish to secure a Hillary versus Rudy match-up, thereby ensuring that a liberal will take the oath of office in 2009.  Then there's the fact that press lunkheads live such an insular existence, surrounded by so many fellow travelers, that they start to view themselves as the true center.  They then come to believe they represent a fair cross-section of America.  My guess, though, is that the coverage is probably attributable to all of the above.

Anyway, I don't know what Giuliani's presidential "exploratory committee" told him a while back, but I could have provided the truth at a tenth the cost.  Mr. Mayor, you'd stand a better chance running as an independent; then you might at least be able to make a respectable showing.  But, really, you'd be best off devoting your resources to any PGA Tour ambitions your son may be nursing.  You miss left far too much to be a contender.

[presently no screen name]

What does NOT EXACTLY mean to you. Either it is or it isn't.
All your babble is wishy-washy - nothing of substance.

[Antoninus]

Well I don't know about the base, but THESE guys LOVE him!

I'd reckon that about 50% of Rudy's support is coming from the Mark Foley/Ken Mehlman wing of the GOP.

[Lonesome Rhodes]

What is that supposed to mean?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

What is that supposed to mean?

I thought it was pretty clear...

[Melas]

Unlike some other anti-Rudy FReepers, I've stuck to the facts and not made it personal.

As a Rudy supporter, I'll give you that. You've been more civil that most. I don't know that you've truly risen above the fray, but you've held it in check at sardonic, which is much more than I can say for most.

I'll be honest, even if Rudy started to lose his luster, there is a part of me that would rather vote for Hillary than Duncan Hunter. Not that I have anything against Hunter himself, but I've learned to hate some of his supporters so much that the thought of giving them any satisfaction just completely frosts me. Eternal Visciousness, Fierce Allegiance, Dirtboy and the like have more or less pushed a lot of into that corner.

The only thing that would stop me from pulling the Hillary lever are my children and grandchildren. I love them more than I hate some of the more vile freepers, and I want to leave them a better country.

But there is still the better part of a year left. Who knows how much more I'll learn to hate some of Duncan's supporters. /s

[Democratshavenobrains]

It will hurt Newt. Newt has even less of a chance than Rudy. I'm not a Newt backer. I'm not that crazy. lol

[Fawn]

So you hate gays huh?

[xsmommy]

well that particular street runs both ways. i feel rudy is an extremely flawed candidate and incapable of winning against hillary, but given the insipid boosterism for him on this site, it is going to make it that much harder to pull that lever should it become necessary to vote for him in the general election. there are no unclean hands on either side of this debate, which only goes to prove what a divisive candidate rudy really is.

[flashbunny]

"It's national security, stupid!"

And what does a person who dodged the draft and whose highest held elected office was mayor bring to the table as a 'war president'?

Tough talk? Because anyone can do that.

[VRWCmember]

but given the insipid boosterism for him on this site, it is going to make it that much harder to pull that lever should it become necessary to vote for him in the general election. there are no unclean hands on either side of this debate, which only goes to prove what a divisive candidate rudy really is.

And if he is that divisive just among "conservatives" just wait until you add liberals, moderates, and independents to the mix.

[xsmommy]

once the MSM turns their sights on him, in earnest, instead of artificially inflating him as they are now, the rudy balloon will begin to deflate.

[VRWCmember]

The only thing that saved McCain from a media savaging in 2000 was the fact that W beat him in the primary.

[Luke21]

You're a Rino with your own venom. Most of us here supported President Bush with everything we had back in 04. I know I did.

This was a fairly united party back then, or we wouldn't have won.

For the various wings of the party to unite, we need a new candidate, someone who is not a current offering. Fred Thompson could be the guy.

Giuliani will nor unite the party. It will go down to destruction next year if he is the nominee. I will not vote for him under any circumstances. I'm tired of playing "Rino Ransom."

[dangus]

>> Then you know it refers to when someone is dying on stage, not 10 months before the play begins. As the person is using it, it's ridiculous. The only time it would be apt is right before the primaries or after they start and rudy has an insurmountable lead. <<

Actually, you're kinda wrong about that. Actors and actresses get flop sweat before a show. Once the show starts, they HAVE to be wrapped up in what they are doing. (Stagelights are even arranged to make the audience largely invisible to the audience.) I suppose comedians get flop sweat DURING their performance.

[dvan]

I saw McCaine on C-SPAN last week and he made a lot of sense, contrary to what I have been reading and hearing about him. Can anyone post any background information comparative to other 'Publican candidates? Or is it too soon?

[flashbunny]

"flop sweat -- n. Theater. nervous perspiration caused by fear of failure before an audience. From "Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang, Volume 1, A-G" by J.E. Lighter, Random House, New York, 1994. This earliest citation in this reference is: 1966 Susann "Valley of the Dolls" 292: The applause had been deafening on her entrance, but after ten minutes the air was heavy with "flop sweat.""

[mkjessup]

So you hate gays huh?

I said no such thing, so don't even TRY to put words in my mouth chickie-boo.

The fact is, American society is NOT in favor of same-sex marriage, they are NOT in favor of open homosexuals serving in the military, the majority believe that marriage is intended to be between a man and a woman, nothing more and nothing less, and the 'Log Cabin Republicans' do not represent any mainstream faction within the GOP.

Your boy Rudy is way out of step.

And, it would appear, so are you.

We're done here. Report back to RudyBot Central for further marching orders.

See ya around.

[mkjessup]

I'd reckon that about 50% of Rudy's support is coming from the Mark Foley/Ken Mehlman wing of the GOP

I'd reckon you're right.

Those guys know which side their butter is, ehhh, well whatever.

[Fawn]

First of all. It's 'chickie-POO' not 'chickie Boo.'
and second...I am not a diehard Rudy or anyone fan. Rudy was unfairly trashed and I didn't like it.

[GraceCoolidge]

Should Republicans support someone who chose the Democrat Mario Cuomo over the candidate of their own Party?

That is an interesting point; it is one of the things about Giuliani that bothers me. His support of Mario Cuomo was reprehensible. I also am bothered by his decision to abandon the Senate race in NY. As I recall, he was undergoing treatment for prostate cancer at the time, though I have wondered if that was a justification on his part. His decision to withdraw left the Republicans scrambling and gave Hillary Clinton a much easier victory, though I think she probably would have won anyway. Finally, his judgment on the Bernard Kerik nomination was pretty bad. I really don't see him as the nominee. I think the press is touting him so relentlessly now because they believe he cannot possibly win the White House; in that respect, he is the media's ideal Republican candidate.