Posted on 04/12/2007 9:41:13 AM PDT by areafiftyone
The New York Times blasted presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani on Thursday for telling Alabama reporters that it should be up to the state to decide whether to fly the Confederate flag over its Capitol.
And a political pundit in turn blasted the Times for its "silly” anti-Giuliani piece.
Discussing the flag issue, Giuliani told the reporters: "We have different sensitivities and at different times we’re going to come to different decisions, and I think that is best left to the states.”
The Times went on the attack in an editorial: "Mr. Giuliani cannot truly believe the issues surrounding the Confederate flag are just a matter of local taste. The Civil War, the civil rights movement and the Supreme Court answered that question.”
The editorial went on to castigate Giuliani for "pandering” on abortion and gun control, concluding:
"Mr. Giuliani ought to stop waving in the wind, because that would be the right thing to do. It is also not working. Southern political strategists said he’s too moderate on abortion and pronounced him dead in their states. In Alabama, the local press mocked him for failing to recognize an actual Confederate flag. Americans know a pander when they see one.”
Writing on Time Inc.’s blog Real Clear Politics, Blake Dvorak observed: "In other words, the Times wants Giuliani to stop being a politician campaigning for the presidency. Give up now, Mr. Mayor, says the Times, because conservative America will never vote for you. Is this not odd? How to explain it, momentarily leaving aside the Times’ visceral dislike of anyone to its right?”
Dvorak cites a remark from Roger Simon, chief political columnist at Politico.com: "Rudy has been very clear in front of conservative audiences that his social views are more liberal than theirs. He has not lied about that, as far as I can tell, for a second. And he’s still well ahead. What could those ‘conservatives’ be thinking?”
Dvorak concludes: "As Simon points out, Giuliani’s position in the polls scares the Times, because if he can get through the primaries, he’s got major cross-over appeal in the general election that a down-the-line conservative wouldn’t have. Hence, this silly attack.”
That's another reason why, IMO, Rudy is not fit to be president. I cannot trust him to resist the temptation to use a terrorist attack using guns to call for draconian gun control laws like he did after the 1997 Empire State Building shooting (which he refused to call a terrorist attack, so much for his toughness on Palestinian terrorism).
Exactly. If you go on the NY Times archive they are the ones that have the anti-Rudy stories going all the way back. No wonder the Rudy haters post from the archives over there all the time. LOL! Its a treasure trove for Rudy haters.
That may be, but there are some lines that just can’t be crossed, or there is a point where you have to say “enough is enough: this far and no further.”
I’ll focus on the primaries now and hope Rudy doesn’t get the nomination.
That goes for me too.
But my line in the sand ends with The GOP and begins with the Democrats.
So are his own Mayoral archives.
No matter how ideologically similar Rudy is to liberals, he is hated simply because he was a tax-cutting Republican who brought down crime and supports the war.
True they do use his archives too.
For a House or Senate seat. Their liberalism is diluted by the conservatism of other pubbies in that body.
But the president is one person. Any political flaws will NOT be diluted by other members.
So it is critical to get someone from the center of the GOP. Not the far left.
After all, if it is so critical for the GOP to win the White House, isn't it irresponsible for some to push a guy with such a strong chance of rifting the party because he is so far to the left on so many GOP bread-and-butter issues? IMO pushing Rudy or pushing Ron Paul are both wrongheaded - the two are from the two respective extremes of the party and are not suitable as a result to be the GOP nominee, because neither will be able to hold the party together.
“Mr. Giuliani cannot truly believe the issues surrounding the Confederate flag are just a matter of local taste. The Civil War, the civil rights movement and the Supreme Court answered that question.”
The SCOTUS tells what flags we can fly now???
The fact that Rudy is right on this is irrelevant. His record speaks louder than his words on other issues.
But... better not to saw yourself off with the tree branch. If its Rudy or Hitlery or Barrack HUSSEIN Obama, I know what I will do. I just hope the Repubs come up with a better alternative.
The Jayson Blair Gazette again tries to be “Holier than thou”!
You're the one who posted this article. So don't get after Rudy opponents when you post Slimes articles about Rudy as well.
I agree with you 100%. It's not only irresponsible, it's downright unconservative.
I think what I'm seeing from the Rudy promoters is a desire to boost his image among the conservative wing of the GOP in order to protect the party from a mass exodus come Election Day '08. In that regard I appreciate their message, because Rudy is far better on a good many issues than any Democrat candidate imaginable.
He won't get my primary vote though. Not a chance. I hope to see a Fred Thompson Presidency in '08.
Umm did you forget to post the last part of my post. I said it was a treasure trove for you guys and it is. Its the truth. Most of the post are from the 1990’s archive of the NY Times. Its true about the NY Times they are totally anti-Rudy and have been. Just read their archives. I didn’t blame the Rudy haters. Heck if I had that kind of archiving from years of hate about one politician I would use it too.
And this is really a Newsmax article about the NY Slimes
Bump!
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.