What I posted is relevent. The combination of liberalism mixed with authoritarianism is a deadly one-two punch. At the federal level it would be disastrous to the Republic.
>>>>>I am not supporting Guilani for President ....
Good for you.
>>>>> ... but one ought, IMO. to accept that he was an effective mayor ....
That depends on how you define effective. Giuliani ran on reducing crime and yes, making the city run more effectively. He did not reduce city services, however, and he failed to reduce spending. Spending went up 64% relative to the rate of inflation. City income tax cuts were modest and did no more then roll back the tax increases put in place by Mayor Dinkins a few years earlier. Businesses were given tax breaks and that was good. The city council realized the best way to get companies to locate/relocate inside the city limits was to reduce the tax burden.
Truth is, NYC was a high taxed socialist hell hole when I lived there. When Giuliani left office NYC was still a high taxed socialist hell hole.
The Giuliani friendly Manhattan Institute think tank, offered its evaluation of the the Mayor's years in power. They said:
"Even with the tax cuts of the last several years, New York remains by far the most heavily taxed big city in the country."
Case closed.
You concede he was an effective mayor. Maybe it was only in comparison with Dinkins, but the change in the city was for the better. I agree that NYC is a socialist state, but as the example of Europe tells us. even a “conservative” government can only make a dent in the welfare state. Blame the voters not Rudy. He’s only a politician. What do you expect?