Posted on 02/23/2007 7:05:51 PM PST by FairOpinion
I've never voted for Rudy Giuliani in my life. But I'm thinking hard about it now.
In both cases, I surprise myself.
The rest of America may know Rudy as "America's Mayor" for his ceremonial performance post-9/11, but for New Yorkers who lived through the Dinkins years, Rudy Giuliani is more than a guy who stands tall when the skyscrapers fall. By the late '90s, people were beginning to say that New York City was ungovernable: Remember the court-driven interest group spending, the disorder, the bums taking over the parks and the playgrounds and the street corners, spiraling welfare costs, the crime, the small business disaster, the high taxes, rent control, the South Bronx? New York was a disaster area, a poster child for what liberalism hath wrought.
The glittering cosmopolitan New York City we now live in, the one seemingly every college student in America dreams about moving to, is largely Rudy's gift, forged in the face of intense, daily, nasty invective from those who at the time insisted that to demand order and civility in a large city was to be a fascist.
Even Rudy's 9/11 performance tends to be misdescribed. It was not that he "stood tall" or didn't emotionally collapse. George Bush came to New York City and made graceful speeches about how we will rebuild the hole in the ground that still remains. What stood out for us in that dark time was not that the mayor of New York insisted we would triumph over this adversity, but that he didn't try to spin us about how unimaginably bad this sort of adversity was. He didn't try to soft-pedal the uncertainty, the chaos, the suffering the city was going through, and that gave us the confidence to believe that reality, terrible as it was, could in fact be faced.
I never voted for Rudy when I lived in New York City for one simple reason: abortion. I don't look for purity in politicians, just for some small pro-life reason to vote for a guy: Medicaid funding, parental notification, partial birth abortion. Throw me the slightest lifeline, otherwise I assume he just doesn't want the vote of people like me. Rudy never did. So I never gave him my vote. And of course it doesn't help now to recall the way Rudy treated his second wife, nor do I particularly want to imagine the third Mrs. Giuliani as Laura Bush's successor.
So I could have sworn, even a few months ago, that I'd never vote for Rudy Giuliani, in spite of my deep respect for his considerable achievements as mayor. So why would I even think of changing my mind? Two things: national security, and Hillary Clinton's Supreme Court appointments.
When I ask myself, who of all the candidates in both parties do I most trust to keep me and my children safe? The answer is instantaneous, deeper than the level any particular policy debate can go: Rudy Giuliani. And when I look ahead on social issues like gay marriage, the greatest threat I see is that the Supreme Court with two or more appointments from Hillary Clinton, will decide that our Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, created a national constitutional right to whatever social liberals have decided is the latest civil rights battle. It's hard to see a state that George Bush won in which Rudy Giuliani will not beat Hillary Clinton. And he will put a whole slew of new blue states into play: Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, to name just three. (The latest Quinnipiac poll shows Giuliani in a dead heat with Clinton in Connecticut.) Which puts people like me, who care very deeply about marriage and life issues, in the position of thinking hard about Rudy.
Did you know Reagan spent half his life as a Democrat?
The horrors! (/sarc)
Pre-ci-se-ly!
Right. Back when there was still such a thing as a conservative Democrat. If only we Republicans could be as successful at finishing off our liberal wing...then we wouldn't be having to waste our time dealing with people like you and Giuliani. We could instead be united and preparing for the next election cycle like the Dems are doing right now.
People who claim to be "the base" never were and never will be. They are the perpetual malcontent who either never vote or always find something wrong with the Republican candidate and vote third party.
Their claims and threats are just to bolster their own egos, trying to make people believe they are relevant.
REAL conservatives are smart enough and understand that the most important thing is to defeat the Democrats.
In CA, 92% of the Republicans voted for Arnold and 5% voted for socialist Angelides. Some Republicans! -- you say.
Wait until I get to the statistics about the "conservatives":
80% of Conservatives voted for Arnold
16% of Conservatives voted for Angelides !!!
Of course anyone actually voting for a leftist socialist Dem is NO conservative, despite their claim.
These are the same "conservatives" who bash Rudy and when the chips are down,not only will they stay home or vote third party, but actually dutufully will turn out and cast a vote FOR Hillary. And they are lecturing us! It would be funny, if the consequences weren't so serious.
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_1106MBS.pdf
"What state will Rudy lose that Bush won? "
Ohio could be a goner, for one. It's too early to predict. One thing I am confident of - Rudy is not our strongest candidate for the real race.
"This issue about divorces mattering might stick against some candidates. Not Hillary."
You presume. You are forgetting the 2004 Senate race in Arkansas. Senator Blanche Lincoln.
Rudy has a good chance of carrying CA, the same way Arnold won -- getting the independent votes. And if he does that, the Dem candidate is finished.
I wouldn't want the perverts around my kids... Bigot? Fine. I could care less...
Yes, found it via townhall.com.
Pretty funny. I have a bush-halo pic too, so I take it as a sign. :-)
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=target_romney&ns=DeanBarnett&dt=02/24/2007&page=2
Marking your post #365 as one of the most pristine examples of RINO hack hubris I've ever laid eyes on. Congratulations on your creation!
Looks rough? Talks rough? Come on... He is a small man who kisses the national media's rear end.
If you want to actually win the war, polite conversation with Tim Russert ain't gonna cut it...
So the morally upright wont vote for a family man with grandkids and successful business man over someone who goes to this church???
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/rush/070221
... but they'll vote for the guy who has all this going for him:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1775450/posts?page=9#9
The flipflop question has to be answered but is addressed here:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=target_romney&ns=DeanBarnett&dt=02/24/2007&page=2
"Romney is a bit too blow-dried too. Rudy looks and talks rough "
Aw jeez. It's about time we get someone who can *articulate* cogently leading the GOP. Newt or Rmoney are tops; Huckabee has been praised too. I dont see how McCain or Rudy do well there.
The fancy Madison Avenue designer label isn't convincing enough for most thinking individuals... Myself, I am tired of being sold a pile of dung as mousse cake pate...
Embryonic Stem Cell Research Financier Joins Pro-Gay Fundraiser To Host Mitt Romney San Diego Event
Arnold won, but the GOP was / is decimated in California in the lege.
Is that what we can expect in Congress too? How does that help us? A moderate Prez and liberal Congress = liberal laws passed!!!
At least if the Democrats own the whole kit a kaboodle, they can be held responsible for their mistakes and be promptly kicked out next election.
The Massachusetts GOP was left in its worst shape ever after Romney's four years as well:
Romney's dismal record as the Republican leader in Massachusetts
Romney pledged to build the Massachusetts Republican Party, but in fact he did almost nothing. During his tenure there were two elections for the entire Legislature (2004 and 2006). In each election the Republicans lost seats. Republicans now hold the fewest seats in the Legislature since the Civil War.
During the four years of Romney's tenure, the number of registered Republicans in Massachusetts fell by 31,000. During that same period, the Massachusetts Democratic Party gained 30,000. - Boston Globe 11/2/2006
In the 2006 elections, most offices were not even challenged by Republican candidates. In the November general election for the six statewide Massachusetts constitutional offices there were more Green-Rainbow Party candidates on the ballot than Republicans!
The party's slide has been so precipitous that Republicans yesterday did not contest 130 of 200 legislative seats, fielded a challenger in only three of 10 congressional districts, and put up fewer candidates for statewide office (three) than the Green-Rainbow Party (four). - Boston Globe, 11/8/2006
In 2006, while Romney was chairman of the National Republican Governors Association - a group dedicated to electing more Republican governors - his own hand-picked Republican successor as governor lost badly to the Democrat, despite the fact that Republicans have held the governorship in Massachusetts since 1990. Romney largely ignored the Massachusetts elections and spent most of the time during the campaign out of state building his presidential campaign. He came back and publicly campaigned for the Republican candidate the day before the general election!
"Locally, this is a rebuke to Mitt Romney and checking out within six months after being elected and having accomplished almost nothing," said [Jim] Rappaport [former chairman of the state Republican Party]. - Boston Globe, 11/8/2006
"Romney arrived on the scene with great promise, but is leaving the Republican Party here in shambles. Not only are the Republicans yielding the governor's office for the first time in 16 years, but registered Republicans have fallen by 31,000 since Romney took office, and their legislative presence is at historic lows. But it worked out fine for him: He is now chasing the prize he really covets, the presidency." - Boston Globe 11/8/2006
"The Massachusetts Republican Party died last Tuesday. The cause of death: failed leadership. The party is survived by a few leftover legislators and a handful of county officials and grassroots activists who have been ignored for years. Services will be public and a mass exodus of taxpayers will follow. In lieu of flowers, send messages to New Hampshire Republican voters warning them about a certain presidential candidate named Romney." - Boston Herald, 11/12/2006
Neither. Ever.
If Giuliani or Romney is the Republican nominee, I will work as hard against them as I do against Democrats. I fight for a set of principles, the principles that this site stands for, and they outweigh any party considerations.
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.