Posted on 03/11/2007 10:46:27 AM PDT by jazusamo
Sunday, March 11, 2007
I 'll confess, like many conservatives, I'm charmed by Rudy Giuliani. "America's mayor" is not my kind of Republican presidential candidate. He's pro gay rights and not pro-life; he has an exceedingly messy, and public, private life that poses moral as well as political problems.
But, then again, Americans don't elect presidents on paper. There is the Rudy the U.S. attorney who decimated the Mafia. There is the Rudy who turned New York City around with tax cuts, welfare reform, tough-on-crime action and zero tolerance for politically correct cant. There's Rudy 9/11, the mensch of Manhattan and, in the process, America. And there is Rudy the presidential candidate, stressing common ground with GOP traditionalists -- strict constructionist judges from John Roberts to Antonin Scalia, democratic instead of judicial fixes to controversial issues -- and treating them with a respect they didn't get from past intraparty foes. And putting up big numbers in the polls.
My own openness to Rudy surprises me. Many other social conservatives probably know the feeling.
I suggest we all take a cold shower.
There's a long way to go until the first primary. Today's polls showing Giuliani over John McCain reflect name recognition more than anything else, and Giuliani's name ID is chiefly about 9/11. Between now and the first primary, Rudy 9/10 will get as much attention as Rudy 9/11. For some voters, this will be a reminder. For many more, it will be new information. Not all of it will be pretty.
He will have to answer pointed questions about his new and old positions. He'll have to square past statements with more recent pronouncements. How does his current opposition to activist judges jibe with his past belief that Roe v. Wade is "good constitutional law"? Is his recent embrace of a ban on partial-birth abortion inconsistent with his past opposition? What about his past support for McCain-Feingold's assault on free speech in campaigns?
Giuliani may have answers to all these questions, and many more to come. Terrific. But it's far too early to throw in with Rudy. It's critical to hear from other announced candidates with less name ID (Mitt Romney) or conservatives with equal name ID who may get in (Newt Gingrich, Fred Thompson).
Are social conservatives ready to shortchange stands they've championed for decades because of Giuliani's 9/11 performance or poll numbers? Or a few promising words or winks? What makes social conservative leaders so sure he will live up to his part of any deal after he's won the nomination or White House? Or that the party's pro-life, traditional-values base will stick with an abortion-rights, gay-rights standard bearer? Are post-2006 social conservatives so keen on winning that they'll sign on with a candidate who opposes them on key cultural issues? What would a Giuliani candidacy do the GOP's largely successful "brand"?
These are not loaded questions. They're questions I wrestle with these days. I want a president who is committed to fighting radical Islam and can articulate why we're doing all we can under the Constitution to crush this enemy. Rudy's clearly one among many GOP candidates who fill the bill. But he comes with many unanswered questions.
Answer these questions in Giuliani's favor, and questions about his personal history remain. Yes, it's his private life. But he himself put his private life on gaudy public display as mayor. We'll see reruns of the tawdry soap opera that was the simultaneous end of his marriage to Donna Hanover and his about-town affair with Judith Nathan as surely as we'll see his comforting and inspiring 9/11 footage.
It's odd. Many conservatives who properly dismiss the electric, conservatively correct Gingrich because of his two divorces and "marital issues" are open to a Giuliani equally burdened by libido and ego. Forget the moral questions here. Somehow I doubt Democrats will give Rudy 9/10 a pass on this if the GOP picks him.
Was 9/11 so psychologically searing -- and Rudy's healing role so central -- that some social conservatives are no longer thinking clearly. Or is the trauma of Election Day 2006 to blame? Or today's polls?
How else to explain their premature openness to a GOP presidential candidate whose social liberalism and liberal social life that would have once made such a candidacy unthinkable.
David Reinhard, associate editor, can be reached at 503-221-8152 or davidreinhard@news.oregonian.com.
The only ones in the polls with any name recognition are Giuliani, McCain and Gingrich. All three have zipper control problems and temper control problems. Newt and McCain are yesterday's news. It is no wonder Giuliani is rolling over them. We need real primaries and real decisions by real primary voters, not a pre-annoiting by biased press and pollsters.
Giuliani Leads Three Democrats in Florida
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1799208/posts
In poll after poll, Rudy is the only one consistently beating all leading Dem candidates.
This far out there's still plenty of time. Heck, even Newt says he's not going to make up his mind till this fall (but he's still running as fast as the rest). Hopefully in a few weeks PRE-primary fatigue will set in and this nonsense will quiet own and some other candidates will emerge.
The only poll that counts is the one on Election Day.
You're a voice of calm in the storm, Chief, and I agree.
Thanks.
In poll after poll, Rudy is the only one consistently beating all leading Dem candidates, until you tell them what Rudy stands for:
Kill Babies
Gay Marriage
Ban Firearms
Amnesty for Illegals
Big Government
Fascistism
I am sure you already know this, but here is the list of what Rudy stands for an accomplished (excellent summary with links, by areafiftyone):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1790765/posts?page=56#56
Additional reading material:
Politics And Moralizing In Presidential Primaries
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1790774/posts
For Republican candidates, the toughest litmus tests are not about any actual policy alternatives, foreign or domestic, but about "social issues." What most social issues have in common is that they are none of the federal government's business, let alone the president's.
The federal government will never pass a law banning or permitting abortion, so a presidential candidate's opinion on that subject has no practical relevance.
The federal government will never pass a law banning or prohibiting states and religious organizations from defining marriage, and presidents cannot enact constitutional amendments, so gay marriage is not a federal issue, either.
Licensing of handguns is mainly a local issue, and no candidate is about to push for ending the federal ban on machine guns and assault rifles.
...polls show that a substantial majority of Republican voters approve of Giuliani's positions on all social issues, so the demand for ideological purity in these cases seems to require that candidates capitulate to a minority of the minority party. That does not sound like a recipe for success.
In the general election, however, the winner will emphasize concrete ideas about those issues a president can actually affect and be properly optimistic about the wondrous U.S. economy.
thanks, bfl
Early polls aren't a done deal.
Remember Muskie and Howard Dean.
No.
Yes and I also remember flashbunny's
One more thing... HR1022, the Assault Weapons Ban bill introduced by Caty McCarty. The gun guys know Rudy will sign it as fast as Hillary. They are NOT going to vote for him by around a 2 to 1 margine. That's about 7 million votes out of the Republican base just like GHWB in 1992...
Don't believe me? Go ask them: http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?t=304773
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.