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.
There is a lot of bad road between Feb '07 and November '08.
It ain't over 'till it's over.
But for those who really prefer to vote against the murder of babies, neither is an acceptable choice.
For those of us who believe in our right to own 'ugly' guns, neither is an acceptable choice.
For those of us who believe that our borders need to be secured, again, neither is an acceptable choice.
I won't bother to use up the bandwith to retrace the myriad reasons why I believe that nominating Rudy is the best way to guarantee a Democrat in the White House, but those certainly are in the top 5 among a number of folks, myself included.
On the issues, I will vote my concience, not the party line. I am a conservative who has voted Republican because the Party generally has fielded candidates who are more closely aligned with my views on the issues. When there is no difference, when both candidates are in juxtaposition with my viewpoint, I will vote for neither as both are unsuitable. At least when I meet my maker I will not have voted to continue the incredible slaughter of innocents which has been perpetrated since Roe.
It does seem to me, though, that whomever is nominated by the Republicans, if running against Hillary, will have a substantial following of anti-Hillary votes, so why not nominate a conservative?
If part of the base will not vote for a liberal Republican candidate, why not nominate someone palatable to the conservatives?
The lesson of 2006 is there for those who will see it. The conservatives defeated were heavily targeted by the Dems and abandoned by the Republicans: they got beat (Santorum, et al). The remainder were 'moderates' beaten by blue dog dems who ran to the right of them on the issues.
"That is about the level of discourse I have come to expect from the Rudy haters and "Real conservatives" who are increasingly delusional."
Then get used to it. It's the truth, RINO.
Sounds like you follow a cheating RINO.
Why are Giuliani supporters only interested in pitting him against Hillary? Come on, most Republicans will vote for a stray dog with rabies (with an R after its name) rather than vote for Hillary.
And I don't agree that he would be a strong candidate for the general election. His liberal views would doom him in many states that have to be red.
I will gladly support Hunter in the primaries, and Rudy in the general election. I DO NOT WANT HILLARY AS PRESIDENT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
"We can go for a real candidate that we don't need to hold our nose to vote for."
Are you sure? I notice you've mentioned no names...
I am a Christian and as an evangelical, I'd rather see a Christian in the Oval Office because I believe that that solid rock is the one to stand on -- it's the best possible base. That having been said...I would rather vote for a man who opposes abortion, Morman or not, and who stands for family values than someone who PROFESSES to be a Christian and leans towards liberalism. I keep reading that conservatives are putting too much importance on the issue of abortion. Hey...to those being aborted (excuse me, murdered, ripped limb from limb, having their brains sucked out), it's an aboslutely IMPERATIVE issue. Since when did legalalized murder become a secondary issue?
Romney has my vote if he gets the nomination.
Your guess is incorrect.
(2) Rudy's the logical choice to lead the war on terror. I'm not sure where this delusion originated - perhaps a CNN interview. The man has no military experience. He has no foreign policy experience. He's never even held statewide office. He's the least logical choice to lead the WOT out there, and on par with Bill Clinton.
***************
Excellent points.
Whatever you want to call it. You just keep telling yourself you're RIGHT as in correct.
Are you really a Republican ?
Go Rudy.
Thank you! That's what I got out of the research as well -- hope they believe you more than me but somehow I doubt if anyone will let go of this issue since they are still on other issues that have been proven wrong.
Latest they posted is that Rudy endorsed Clinton which is a lie! They have now gone from spin to outright lies which tells me that Rudy is gaining more momentum.
Try to imagine a candidate who would be acceptable to the average anti-Rudy poster here getting elected to a national office in this country.
Just try.
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.
THIS is shear idiocy, period - end - stop.
As an upside, Rudy's nomination might finally destroy the GOP.
Makes sense to me.
Pretty bad if you need to use hitlery to sell rudy.
Gosh, that sounds like....now.
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.