Yes, Rudy Giuliani Is a Conservative

City Journal ^ | Winter 2007 | Steven Malanga

[RegulatorCountry]

Mr. Giuliani clearly does not need my permission to don his finery.

[aligncare]

You mean you would have voted (or if I understand you correctly), did vote for Dinkins when Rudy ran against him for mayor the first time? Please tell me I'm wrong. Rudy lost that first challenge to Dinkins, but of course, beat him on his second run.

[aligncare]

...boy, ya wear one Rockettes costume, and they never let you forget it.

[Clemenza]

Was too young to vote in 89 and 93. Was living in Chicago in November '97. I would have voted for George Marlin instead of Mayor Linguine.

Remember, the same folks who vote for Schumer and every other Dem in NYC voted for Rudy. In other words, not my kind of people. I know that the small Republican minority in NYC voted for Rudy, but you can fit them in a discarded phone booth buried under Fresh Kills, sad to say. :-(

On the mainland, Rudy would be a Democrat. In NY, he is considered a right winger. Says alot about the sorry state of New York politics. The last true conservative elected to major office was Jim Buckley in 1970, and that is because the Liberal/GOP candidate Percy and the Dem candidate (who's name I can't recall) split the liberal majority vote.

[massadvj]

I find it remarkable that he has even been gaining support among Christian conservatives. Who'da thunk it?

After the disastrous defeat of conservatism in 2006, people are being forced to choose between ideological purity and relevance. Some will sacrifice their relevance to be ideologically pure. Most will not. In the end, without relevance, ideological purity means very little. You can sit around and complain a lot, but without the capability to effectuate change, what does it matter?

We have tasted power, squandered it, and want it back. In the end, we will coalesce around the candidate who stands the best chance of getting it back. At this moment, that man appears to be Rudy Giuliani. And I do not see a social conservative candidate who will be more attractive to swing voters. Neither do the social conservatives. Which is why they are so vitriolic in their attacks on Giuliani.

[snodog]

When did the definition of Conservative change to include one who supports abortion, gay unions, and gun grabbing? If people want to say they feel he would be tough on terror, I can live with that, but to say he's a conservative is just BS.

I should have found your post first.

When did the conservative movement become the stomping ground of intolerant evangelicals.

Even the famed bastion of Reagan conservatism, the one I do not have to name, says he is pro choice, his choice happens to be life. So be it, that is the beauty of our society, and government, but do not tell me I am not conservative because we disagree, on an issue. That is narrow mindeness, and we all can see how that has turned out.

Your conservatism is not my conservatism, and I will not sit back and let the "moral conservatism" run rough shod over a movement that started out with a simple statement, "less government is better government."

[aligncare]

...Mayor Linguine...

Tsk, tsk. Let's not engage in ethnic slurs...it's not becoming to a nice young kindhearted fellow, like you.

[aligncare]

Not to worry. Who ever solidifies his lead 5 months from now will be the Republican nominee. I presume that will be Rudy Giuliani. This next year should be quite a ride.

[JohnnyP]

Did you hear his spokesman on Bill Benett's show this morning? William Simon suddenly had "phone problems" when asked about amnesty for illegals. Bill told him to call back while they went to break. Simon came back on but gave wimpy answers, like Rudy's for a "technical" fence, etc.

The emails came pouring in, calling foul. Bill said something like "nothing more for me to say, the interview stands on its own". He said Simon was unprepared to answer tough questions, and it's clear he thought the guy was lying.

[snodog]

Is the 2nd Amendment clear enough? It says "Congress shall pass no law...." Giuliani's position is that it does not prohibit states and counties from passing laws. Just another ambiguity to ponder.

And as stated, he is correct. A state may pass a law at any time for anything it wants, and will become the law of that state until it is challanged in federal court, ie the United States Supreme Court and either allowed as permissable under the Constitution, or disallowed, or ruled unconstitutional, under our Federal system of governance.

That was my semi- long answer, my short terse answer would be, The second Admenment is part of the Federal Constitution dumbass he was refering to States rights!Who's the conservative now? You or Rudy? Get a clue.

[Don W]

Pardon my cynicism, but the last Republican trifecta was a bit of a wash.

The Republicans are NOT anywhere near as "Conservative" as HARRY TRUMAN! FDR opposed less statist ideals!

If JFK were alive and viable today, he'd be rejected as a "far-right reactionary".

Rudy WAS a GREAT mayor. He's not even a blip on the screen of SERIOUS candidates. BTW, we still haven't seen one from the I-D ten T party yet.

Perhaps this IS the beginning of a new conservatism, built on the bones of RR?

[Hetty_Fauxvert]

mark for later reading

[Man50D]

How would you assess George W Bush, the conservative? And his impact on core conservative issues like immigration, government spending, education department, tariffs and so on?

George Bush is hardly a Conservative. His stance against illegal immigration is a farce. He supports giving amnesty to illegal immigrants through a guest worker program at a time when terrorists could easily slip into this country posing as illegal immigrants all to foster the formation of the North American Union with Mexico. He ridicules the Minutemen, who want to defend our borders against illegals, by referring to the Minutemen as vigilantes.

He behaves more like a socialist when it comes to government spending. Socialist Bill Clinton's average spending for Human Resource (education, training, employment, social services, health, Medicare, income security, Social Security, veterans services)was 61.26% during his Presidency (1993-2000). George Bush's average spending for HR during his Presidency through 2004 was65.53%.

Facts from the Office Of Management and Budget:
The average increase in total US spending during Clinton's term was 3.28% year over year. In HR, the largest portion in the US budget, the year over year increase in outlays averaged 4.71%.
The average increase in total US spending during Bush's term through 2004 was 5.67% year over year. In the HR category, Bush spent for HR 7.26% year over year increases.

If you think a large portion of Bush's overall budget is due to an increase of expenditures for the military, think again. Human Resource spending (socialism) consumed 66.2% of all government spending in the 2004 budget. This is compared to just 17.5% for the Department of Defense. Compare that 17.5% figure to the Defense spending in 1993 at a much higher 20.7% rate.

President Bush's behavior clearly shows is he as much a socialist as any in the Democrat party. He is the leader of the Republican party and therefore has considerable influence on his party. Consequently the party is increasingly reflecting his socialist values and similar values to those in the Democrat party. That does not bode well for Conservatives. The only recourse for Conservatives it to form their own party.

[TommyDale]

You might want to read the following post by Jim Robinson:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1794037/posts?page=1123#1123

I've already stated that FR will probably become even more conservative than it already is, through attrition if nothing else. Besides continuing to champion the defense of America, FR just might become the "Conservative Conscience of the Republican Party," ie, we may become a real thorn in the side of moderate/liberal Republicanism. Someone has to try defend the party from completely tossing out traditional American conservatism. Might as well be us.


How many times must I say FR is a conservative site? We do not support abortionism, homosexualism, feminisim, environmentalism, gun control, liberalism, socialism, etc, etc, etc. When I say I suspect we will become even more conservative than we already are, possibly via attrition if nothing else, what do you think I'm referring to? When FR starts pushing hard and I mean hard against abortion, gay marriage, homosexual education forced on our school children, pandering to illegal aliens, gun control, McCaine-Feingold type usurpation, global warming, etc, etc, even if supported or advanced by the GOP, then I fully suspect certain types of moderate/liberal Republican supporters are probably going to be a little uncomfortable here. We will be fighting for traditional American conservatism no matter who we have to fight against and I'm afraid that's going to piss off some folks.


And I'll borrow a slogan used by the NFRA that I realy like:

"We are the 'Republican' Wing of the Republcan Party!"

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Thanks for the information about the William Simon interview on Bennett's radio show.

I usually hear part of the show but I missed that.

"Simon was unprepared to answer tough questions." That sounds a lot like Tony Snow on the Laura Ingraham show. Snow gets pretty testy.

I just missed Ingraham's interview with Neil Cavuto Friday. Apparently Ms Ingraham's differences over China caused "phone problems" with Cavuto's phone -- it suddenly went, Click!

I threw my TV away ten years ago so I really don't know who Cavuto is. Apparently he's a "free trader" Sinophile, Red or not.

[presently no screen name]

Besides media, he won't take a whipping from the Pelosi's, Kennedys, McCains, et al, who hate for the sake of hate.

He is truly the dems and media's worst nightmare. He won't fight the war under 'THEIR' terms. He is a kicka$$ kinda guy - Arafat would agree if he could, so the prince and the mafia to name of few. When he says "Don't tread your garbage here"- he means it and not w/a slap on the wrist. It is NOT business, as usual, with him.

And he won't have the social ills of society under his domain,i.e., abortion, gay unions will be state issues.

[antisocial]

"Tough times call for Tough Men. And Rudy is the ONLY ONE running who fits that bill."

Yeah, dodging the draft really makes you tough./s

[pjd]

Having him as President would not bode well for Conservatives.

But having Hitlery for president and a Democrat congress will?

[presently no screen name]

n Havana. Or New York

Your hatred for NY blinds you.

He took a fallen down city from the brink and turned it around - A city that had been a haven for the lib 'victim' mentality and, thus a fiscal failure.

If doing the right thing - and not backing down to the libs is wrong is your eyes - I can see where you get your view of Rudy from. I dare say you belong with the group that wouldn't take on that task and, yet, hate him for his accomplishments.

Hatred blinds you from giving credit where credit is due.

[presently no screen name]

dodging the draft

How did he 'dodge' it? Run to Canada?