Giuliani's Pre-9/11 Record Should Erase Rightest Doubts

Hunan Events ^ | 3/16/07 | Deroy Murdock

[areafiftyone]

The same Beltway experts who declared Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.) the GOP frontrunner, even as he under-polled fellow presidential contender Rudolph W. Giuliani, now parrot equally dodgy concepts. When Republicans meet “the real Rudy,” they will abandon New York’s former mayor like cattle fleeing a burning barn. Then, the wobbly Washington wisdom continues, Giuliani’s three marriages, and his less-than-solidly right-wing views on gays, guns, and gametes will torpedo his buoyant presidential hopes.

These seers now detect unhappiness with the GOP aspirants. They cite a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in which 26% of Republican primary voters were dissatisfied with Giuliani, McCain, and former Massachusetts governor Willard Mitt Romney, among others. However, 56% called these choices satisfactory. This mirrors the 57%of conservative Republicans who preferred Giuliani, versus 31% for McCain. More broadly, Republicans backed Giuliani 38% to McCain’s 24, former House speaker Newt Gingrich’s 10, Romney’s 8, and 2% each for Kansas Senator Sam Brownback and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.

But what if voters like Giuliani better upon understanding his pre-9-11 performance? Educating Republicans on his complete mayoral record -- and soon -- may be Giuliani’s best bet for extinguishing lingering grumbling about his candidacy.

I recently visited Baltimore, Charlotte, Richmond, Salem, Oregon; Seattle, and Johnstown, Pennsylvania, mainly to deliver speeches sponsored by Young America’s Foundation. I conversed with conservative activists, College Republican leaders, university professors, and think-tank scholars, among others.

These Americans vividly remember Giuliani emerging from the ashes of September 11, like a latter-day Churchill rising from the rubble of the London Blitz. However, these involved and informed citizens knew startlingly little about Giuliani’s other mayoral achievements:

• Through robust policing, Giuliani drove overall crime down 56.1%, while chopping homicides 66.6%, from 1,946 in 1993 to 649 in 2001.

• Following national trends, abortions on Giuliani’s watch dropped 16.9%, while taxpayer-funded Medicaid abortions plunged 23%.

• Gotham’s foster-care population fell 38% as Giuliani helped loving families adopt 17,804 boys and girls.

• By fighting fraud and finding work for legitimate beneficiaries, Giuliani cut welfare rolls 58%, starting two years before federal welfare reform. Giuliani renamed welfare offices “Job Centers.”

• Giuliani privatized 23,625 previously confiscated, city-owned dwellings, 78% of supply, benefiting family and individual homeowners and tenants.

• Giuliani dumped Gotham’s 20% set-aside and 10% overbid bonus for minority and female contractors. “The whole idea of quotas to me perpetuates discrimination,” he explained. He initiated this on his 24th day in office, far exceeding any colorblindness legislation Congress even debated during the 12-year “Republican Revolution.”

• Giuliani’s $10 million Charter School Improvement Fund helped 3,286 pupils in 17 new charter schools, up from $0 and zero campuses in 1997. He ended tenure for school principals, so slackers could be sacked. He also stopped social promotion; students needed to complete grade-level work to matriculate.

• Ex-pornography mecca Times Square now welcomes families, tourists, and locals for fully clothed musicals like “The Lion King” and “Mary Poppins.”

Beyond these socially conservative victories, Giuliani governed as a Reaganesque supply-sider:

• Giuliani scrapped three taxes and slashed 20 others, lowering Gotham’s tax burden by 17% and saving individual and business taxpayers $9.8 billion.

• While inflation averaged 3.9%, Giuliani’s average spending grew 2.9% annually. If the departed GOP Congress were that fiscally disciplined, the next federal budget would be $2.275 trillion -- $625 billion cheaper than proposed.

• While hiring 12% more cops and 12.8% more teachers, Giuliani sliced other positions 17.2%. Overall, municipal headcount fell 3.1%.

Rudy got this done thanks largely to a management style that he described Wednesday at a $2 million Manhattan fundraiser: “I’m impatient and single-minded about my goals.”

Giuliani’s legacy has earned the endorsements of such screaming liberals as President Bush’s former solicitor general, Ted Olson, Sen. David Vitter (R.-La.), and Rep. Pete Sessions (R.-Tex.) -- both proud owners of 100% ratings from the National Right to Life Committee.

Before Giuliani’s enemies caricature him as a divorce-driven, abortion-peddling, gun-grabbing transvestite, he should familiarize Republicans with his mayoral accomplishments. From Westwood to Washington’s echo chamber, Rudy Giuliani and his supporters should specify how he rescued America’s largest left-wing city through Reaganite social and economic reforms.

---

Mr. Murdock, a New York-based commentator to HUMAN EVENTS, is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.

[Retired COB]

If the Republicans nominate anyone other than Rudy, we WILL have a Dem president. Heil Fuhrer Hillary. Apparently some conservatives are happy with that.

I'm not willing to vote for one liberal to avoid another.

The election of Rudy would spell the beginning of the end of the Republican Party. At least with Hillary they won't be able to blame the liberal accomplishments on the Republicans. Also, the Republicans in Congress won't feel pressured to support the liberal policies of a Democrat president as they would the liberal policies of a Republican president like Rudy.

[showme_the_Glory]

,i>I think the country is a cultural cesspool of decadence, consumed by secular consumerism.

So let's all get behind a confessed social liberal to further the cause against secularism. Nice try.

[Retired COB]

You might ask Senators Rick Santorum and Alan Keyes if you don't believe me.

You've got a bad argument here. To beat Santorum the Dems had to run a candidate who was nominally pro-life. If they would have run a typical pro-abortion Dem, they would have lost.

I believe Keyes thrust himself into an unsalvageable race when he tried to replace a scandalized candidate at the last minute. He also carried a "Carpetbagger" image because he had to move from Maryland to Illinois in order to run. Abortion was not a large factor in this one either.

[LtdGovt]

You've got a bad argument here. To beat Santorum the Dems had to run a candidate who was nominally pro-life. If they would have run a typical pro-abortion Dem, they would have lost.

You really believe that? Santorum lost by 20 points. A Democrat's being pro-choice wouldn't have lost him 11 points, certainly not if he was more appealing than the lackluster empty suit Bob Casey.

[massadvj]

I think you've hit upon the essence of our disgreement. I have been through a lot of political battles over the years and believe you must deal with the environment as you find it. You, on the other hand, seem to believe that the right candidate can turn a cesspool into a reservoir.

In a democracy, politicians are a reflection of the desires of the people, not the other way around. The majority of Americans live in a cesspool and like it there.

If you wish to change the culture, you cannot do it by changing politics. If you want to change politics, you can do it by changing the culture. This is why the socialists continue to succeed whereas the conservatives continue to slide into a socialist quagmire, even when the conservatives control politics.

Passing laws is only marginally effective in changing behaviors. Therefore, we should have only a few laws and enforce them vigorously. Laws do not stop illegal drug trafficiing and illegal immigration, and they would not stop abortion either. Only changing the culture can do that.

For this reason, I think someone like JimRob or Limbaugh do much more to advance conservatism than any conservative politician you could name. But I stray from my main point that in a societal cesspool, people are not going to embrace social conservatism. Roto Rudy is the best we can do, I am afraid.

[Retired COB]

A Democrat's being pro-choice wouldn't have lost him 11 points, certainly not if he was more appealing than the lackluster empty suit Bob Casey.

I'd not be surprised to find out that a lot of the old Democrat machine voters thought they were voting for his dad. Also if we'd have had some support from the RNC Senatorial folks (Libby Dole) for him instead of spending all of that money on Lincoln Chafee things may have turned out differently.

[LtdGovt]

Neither Chafee nor Santorum got too much RNC/RSCC money, simply because they didn't have much of a chance. And you may continue to delude yourself by thinking that Santorum would have won against a pro-choice Democrat, but that simply isn't true. Anyone could have beaten Santorum, but it was easier for Casey (because of his name) than for anyone else.

[showme_the_Glory]

In a democracy, politicians are a reflection of the desires of the people

Only till the get elected. Then they historically turn left and bow to the almighty media. My firm belief is if we get a roto Rudy we're already getting a liberal. Any further left and we've got Kerry, or Pelosi. Your cesspool mentality only degrades the possibility of good people to succeed. Lowering your expectations to the lowest common denominator is the kind of vision liberal supporters are used to.

[FreeInWV]

Of course it doesn't hurt when wealthy gay activists like Tim Gill donate millions to target prominent conservative candidates.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1782951/posts

'Gill alleges his favorite villain was Rick Santorum who compared “homosexual sex to man on a dog;” it took 20 million to defeat Senator Santorum.'

[massadvj]

I have absolutely no qualms with your reasoning. But having been through 2006 with Santorum, and seeing that John Kerry, an unapologetic socialist traitor, came within a few electoral votes of winning the presidency against a then-popular incumbent in war-time, I conclude that a social conservative cannot win this time around. I'd like to see your evidence to the contrary, because every national poll I have seen says my political calculations are correct.

I will change my mind if a true conservative emerges who can beat the Dim nominee. At this point, I don't see it happening.

[LtdGovt]

How much did Gill donate to the Casey campaign?

[LtdGovt]

How much did Gill donate to the Casey campaign?

[FreeInWV]

He donated to thousands of pro-gay candidates in both national & state races. He quietly targeted conservatives with his fortune.

The real question is, how much has he donated to JulieAnnie?

[massadvj]

Rudy is first and foremost an able administrator. He could not have become mayor of NYC as a pro-life conservative. But New York City was much better off as a result of his capable handling of things, in spite of his social liberalism. If he can do the same for America, I'd say that is a reasonable trade-off, especially since I believe no pro-life conservative can win the presidency.

Also, given the choice between a professed conservative who rules as a liberal, versus a professed liberal who rules as a conservative, I'll take the latter. There is a lot in Rudy's record to suggest that as a leader he would be more conservative on most things than GWB has been.

[showme_the_Glory]

Rudy is first and foremost an able administrator.

I have several that work for me that are good but they would not make a POTUS.

He could not have become mayor of NYC as a pro-life conservative.

You mean he could not be Mayor of the cesspool if he was a conservative, pro-life or not.

But New York City was much better off as a result of his capable handling of things, in spite of his social liberalism.

Liberal New Yorkers think so anyway.

If he can do the same for America, I'd say that is a reasonable trade-off, especially since I believe no pro-life conservative can win the presidency.

I'm betting he can't do the same, and to suggest that someone who allows babies to be murdered is a trade-off for anything is absolutely cruel and insane.

[Alberta's Child]

Turns out it wasn't you after all. LOL.

Check out Post #228 on the thread I linked below, as well as the other in the chain of posts from Jim Freedom. It was similar to the exercise I went through here on this thread . . .

Click Here

[LtdGovt]

Answer the question. How much did Gill give to Bob Casey. You were claiming that he contributed to Santorum's defeat, now back it up.

[LtdGovt]

Way too much emphasis on irrelevant issues like abortion and gay rights. In my opinion.

[showme_the_Glory]

irrelevant issues like abortion

Lucky for you your parents didn't ascribe to your position.

[LtdGovt]

Lucky for you your parents didn't ascribe to your position.

I wouldn't care if they did. What would have been the difference?