Giuliani ducks probing into faith and family

The Politico ^ | 8/19/07 | Jonathan Martin

[wagglebee]

MANCHESTER, N.H. — Rudy Giuliani is testing many traditional political rules in his presidential run, perhaps in no way more than in his effort keep his personal faith and family life out of the race.

On the stump in Iowa recently and in New Hampshire last week, the former New York mayor was asked about Catholicism and his frayed relationship with his children. Both times he said, in effect, that he’d keep his private life private.

“I’ll talk about it appropriately and in a way to preserve as much as I can the privacy of my family and my children, which I think any decent person would,” he told reporters at a stop at a diner here on Friday.

Giuliani urged voters “to concentrate on the public things that I’ve accomplished” before turning fire on the media: “See how much do newspapers really have to probe into these things, or how much of it is being done really for reasons that have nothing to do with measuring public performance.”

The GOP front-runner has been the subject of detailed articles examining his wife, Judith, and his difficult relationship with his two college-age children, Andrew and Caroline.

But it’s not just family matters that Giuliani is wary of delving into. Asked about his religion, Giuliani noted that he has discussed it — but then added that “even parts of that are personal.”

His calculus is obvious. He has been married three times and cheated on his second wife. His children have publicly distanced themselves from him. If and when he attends Mass, he can’t take communion because his second marriage was not annulled. And he contradicts church teaching by backing abortion rights.

Naturally he’d rather talk about the taxes he cut as mayor.

But experts say it will be difficult for a candidate, particularly one running in a party whose base is dominated by cultural traditionalists, to ask voters to separate church and family from state. For many if not most conservatives, matters of faith and family are central to a candidate’s character.

“It is untenable,” GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio said of Giuliani’s current posture. “With a third of the party, you can get away with it. The problem is the other two-thirds are the ones that control the nomination.”

“People want to get a sense what’s in that person’s heart,” said Fabrizio, who is uncommitted in the race. “Doing a good job on crime is all well and good, but if [voters] don’t have a sense as to what your moral compass is, that’s a problem.”

Pointing to a survey he recently did that showed two-thirds of Republicans believe religion “essential to living a good and moral life,” Fabrizio said, “It’s very difficult to see how you communicate what your values are without explaining what they’re based upon.”

Part of Giuliani’s problem is the precedent set by the two most recent presidents.

A Southern Baptist who could summon appropriate Scripture for any occasion, Bill Clinton was at ease in the pew or pulpit of any church and during his presidency regularly walked into his own church with Bible in hand. And though he despised having to do it, Clinton also took to national television during his 1992 campaign to admit, with his wife right next to him, that he had “caused pain" in their marriage.

President Bush has been equally open about his Christianity. Asked during the 2000 primary to name his favorite political philosopher, Bush responded without hesitation: “Christ, because he changed my heart.” He also candidly talked about the role of religion in helping him quit drinking — a decision that sustained his marriage.

Though he’s never been much for discussing his Catholicism — he chafed when asked about his Mass-going practices in a 1998 interview before confessing that he attends only “occasionally” — Giuliani hasn’t always been so hesitant about his family.

In his first run for mayor in 1989, his then-wife, Donna Hanover, narrated a syrupy campaign commercial that sought to soften the tough-guy prosecutor by showing him playing ball with his young son and giving a bottle to his newborn daughter. “And Rudy is such a great dad,” Hanover gushed.

Now, though, such matters are off-limits. “I believe that things about my personal life should be discussed personally and privately,” Giuliani told reporters in Iowa.

“Family off limits?” scoffed Scott Huffmon, a political science professor at South Carolina’s Winthrop University. “Wait till his opponents in South Carolina — where the ghost of Lee Atwater hangs over primary politics and people still remember fliers being placed on their windshields about John McCain’s ‘black child’ — start getting serious!”

But Giuliani rivals, too, have reasons to downplay personal matters this campaign cycle.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has proudly displayed his wife and five sons on the trail but has shied away from discussing his Mormonism in detail, concerned about potential backlash from evangelical voters who don’t consider the church legitimate.

Similarly, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and former Sen. Fred Thompson (Tenn.), who has not officially entered the race, have both had previous marriages and neither is outwardly religious.

“Mayor Giuliani is not much different than the other leading Republican contenders in their discussion of their faith,” said Bill Paxon, a former New York congressman who is advising Giuliani’s campaign. “They are all folks who have faith and have individual positions that they subscribe to, but on the other hand they’re not much interested in making that the bedrock of their presidential campaigns.”

What’s more, Paxon argued, Giuliani’s messy family life and differences with church teachings are nothing that attentive voters don’t already know about.

“None of this is a surprise to most Republican primary voters, and those are the same voters who are consistently rating Rudy Giuliani as the leading Republican contender [in polls]. And he’s getting a lot of that support from many folks who are evangelical Christians.”

But Michael Cromartie, vice president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a Christian scholar who studies the intersection of religion and public life, said Giuliani would have to address the issue directly, ideally weaving candor and humor.

“He’s got to find a speechwriter that can put together the words and say something like, ‘I’m a Catholic. I’m not a very good one, but I’m trying to be,’” Cromartie said. “I just don’t think he can forever avoid it.”

Family matters are a bit different, Cromartie argued, especially when it comes to children. For all their frankness about themselves, both Clinton and Bush guarded their kids from public attention, he observed, and few GOP voters seemed to care that Vice President Cheney’s daughter was a lesbian —despite the best effort of Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) to highlight that fact during a presidential debate in 2004.

Fabrizio thinks that Giuliani’s best bet is to keep doing what he’s doing now — but with a wrinkle.

“He ought to take a lesson out of Clinton playbook in ’96,” offered Fabrizio, who, as pollster for Clinton's opponent, former Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.), recalls that campaign well. “He needs to find issues that are values-tinted.”

By that, he means topics that will appeal to conservative voters without veering onto subjects that Giuliani is seeking to avoid.

So, for example, whereas Clinton had the v-chip that could block children’s access to some television content, Giuliani could hammer home the need to crack down on cyberporn.

Whatever he does, Giuliani’s untraditional bid has already made the Republican contest unique. As Paxon put it after amiably defending his candidate, “This is going to be an unusual cycle.”

[Wombat101]

“Jane Wyman initiated the divorce not him.”

Who initiated it isn’t important. To many Christians, divorce is a sin, no matter who started it.

Apply the standards fairly and equally or drop the argument altogether.

[GraceCoolidge]

You beat me to the post! Jane Wyman divorced Ronald Reagan, and I believe the media of the day widely reported that the divorce was against his wishes. If I recall, he even said as much himself. I don't think the Reagan/Giuliani comparison is an entirely fair one. I don't think a child's estrangement from a parent is going to be perceived as a major negative-- it is too common. I think the source of the estrangement is the problem.

Giuliani's divorces were pretty messy ones, no doubt about it. To some extent, that isn't his fault; I don't think Donna Hanover was any prize. On the other hand, he really didn't use much sense by rushing into his relationship with Judith Nathan and announcing his divorce at a press conference.

I think there is an interesting point to be made that Reagan had some baggage, particularly given the standards of the time. The divorce, the children's actions, the fact that Nancy Reagan was pregnant at their marriage, all of those could have been major negatives. I think perhaps the difference is that with regard to his children, Reagan probably had the sympathy of a lot of parents who were struggling with their kids. Remember the famous (or infamous) Betty Ford interview on that topic? I don't think that voters hold their kids against a candidate.

With regard to the divorce and Nancy's pregnancy, I think the issue is that Reagan himself probably would have acknowledged these as failings or errors on his part (not that a child isn't a wonderful thing, but I am sure he would regret setting a bad example on premarital relations). Giuliani, on the other hand, doesn't seem even to recognize the importance of the moral standards he is flouting. I think it's one thing to acknowledge you have fallen short of your own standards, but another to deny those standards even matter. And yes, I do think the time elapsed has a big effect. Anyone can make a mistake. I don't think you can claim Reagan's mistakes constituted a pattern. Giuliani, on the other hand, has a history of a rather messy personal life.

[wagglebee]

Can you name a socially conservative position that Rooty holds?

“Is this another way of saying that conservatives have “had their feet on the neck” of the GOP for too long?”

I would have thought that was easily discernible to even the dimmest bulb, but it is nice of you to admit it.

Figures. What's your name over at MadmanIvan's WAnkerville anti-FReeper site?

[Wombat101]

“Support for homosexual marriages and rights, abortion, and gun control are hardly views of Classical liberalism. They’re not even libertarian. These are socialist positions.”

*Laughing*

They are issues that will be worked out by the processes of Classical Liberalism, i.e. free and open debate and the consent of the governed. Your opposition to even diuscussing these things (except on your own terms, that is, to ban them because they don’t conform to your vision of what is right) is closer to socialism than anything I can think of at the moment.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

As for REagan and Jane Wyman being the best of friends afterwards, irrelevant.

Completely relevant. It's a question of character. Giuliani is running for President and people want to know details of why his marriage ended. His second divorce was very nasty. If he can't handle his personal life, how can you expect him to handle public life?

I guess so long as your dirty laundry is all aired publicly, no matter how sordid, it makes everything okay?

Fred Thompson is divorced. Soon afterwards, he dated a string of beautiful women. I'm sure Fred is a walking tabloid, right? So ask me why there isn't any outrage from conservatives on this. The answer goes back to character.

I’ll remmber that the next time someone posts a picture of Giuliani in drag. The double standard continues.

If you don't find it creepy that a grown man enjoys dressing in women's clothing (and he has done it more than just for "charity"), you have issues.

[ex-snook]

Those who know Ghoulaini best, hate him. A valuable lesson for the nation. A guy who forsakes his family, can't be trusted with your's.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Who initiated it isn’t important.

Oh, it's very important, indeed. Wyman divorced Reagan because she disagreed with his political ambitions. The two didn't match. That's hardly along the lines of committing adultery or Reagan initiating it for selfish reasons.

To many Christians, divorce is a sin, no matter who started it.

Sorry, you're wrong with this blanket opinion.

Apply the standards fairly and equally or drop the argument altogether.

Dude, there is no double standards. Rudy's divorce and Reagan's divorce are as opposite as temperatures on the North Pole and the Equator.

[wagglebee]

I guess locking criminals up is no longer considered a “socially conservative” position. I must have missed the memo on that one.

NO, it isn't. The fact that many liberals resist a certain position DOES NOT make it a conservative position (this is why the war is not a conservative position either, even though nearly all conservatives support it and many liberals oppose it).

Wagglebee, you still haven’t answered the question; why is one deified and the other villified? What are the specific criteria? You keep trying to change the subject and call your fellow-brain-dead into the thus-far-very one-sided debate, but you haven’t answered the question.

Reagan had character and integrity, Rooty doesn't.

Come out and say it, you’re brand of “conservative” only wants:

A Constitutional Amendment against Abortion
Prayer in the public schools
Flamethrowers and hand grenades for everyone
To shoot the Queers and Mexicans

C’mon, you know you’re dying to say it...

1. Yes, I would love to see an amendment protecting the sanctity of life.
2. Yes, I believe that prayer in public schools should be permitted but not mandatory.
3. You are typical of most anti-Second Amendment types who think that everyone wants to own heavy artillery.
4. I have NEVER advocated harming homosexuals or illegal immigrants in any way. It is crap like this that has Bill O'Reilly calling this a hate site. You are pathetic.

[darkangel82]

ibtz

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

*Laughing*

The Viking Kitties will have the last laugh, though.

They are issues that will be worked out by the processes of Classical Liberalism, i.e. free and open debate and the consent of the governed.

Wrong. Abortion on demand, homosexual rights, and gun control are in direct violation of classical liberalism.

Wikipedia Classical liberalism (also known as traditional liberalism[1] and laissez-faire liberalism[2]) is a doctrine stressing the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, constitutional limitations of government, free markets, and individual freedom

Please show me where the positions held by Rudy fit into this.

Your opposition to even diuscussing these things (except on your own terms, that is, to ban them because they don’t conform to your vision of what is right) is closer to socialism than anything I can think of at the moment.

Abortion, gun control, and homosexual rights are positions that are incompatible to our Constitutional Republic and traditions.

[wagglebee]

WHO is it that you think deserves a zot?

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights, Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. “No, I have not supported that, and I don’t see my position on that changing,” he responded. Source: CNN.com, “Inside Politics” Dec 2, 1999 http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Rudy_Giuliani_Abortion.htm

ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES (November 14, 2006)

RUDY GIULIANI (R), FORMER MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY: I'm pro- choice. I'm pro-gay rights.

KING: Giuliani supports a woman's right to an abortion, and back in 1999, he opposed a federal ban on late-term abortions.

GIULIANI: No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing.

KING: Immigration could be another presidential landmine. Back in 1996, Mayor Giuliani went to federal court to challenge new federal laws requiring the city to inform the federal government about illegal immigrants.

JEFFREY: He took the side of illegal immigrants in New York City against the Republican Congress.

KING: Giuliani opposes same-sex marriage but as mayor, he supported civil unions and extending health and other benefits to gay couples. He also supported the assault weapons ban and other gun control measures opposed by the National Rifle Association.

GIULIANI: I'm in favor of gun control. I'm pro-choice.

Republican Big-Wigs Support Pro-Abortion Event in NY

Pro-abortion Governor George Pataki and New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who also supports unrestricted abortion, are co-chairs of the 2000 Choice Award Presentation to be held on May 30 at the St. Regis Hotel in New York City. The event is sponsored by the Republican Pro-Choice Coalition, a group that is campaigning for the removal of the pro-life plank from the Republican National Platform.


http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200503010743.asp

[johnthebaptistmoore]

Everything is always “under the microscope” for everyone who runs for President, and it comes with the territory. Hiding anything from the general public is automatically going to make many people suspicious of such Presidential candidates.

[Wombat101]

“Sorry, you’re wrong with this blanket opinion.”

My mother has been divorced twice, and was not allowed to remarry in the Catholic Church because divorce is a sin (the same for my uncle with his second wife). My wife was divorced, and had been drummed out of her Baptist congregation, when I met her (this in my first, and so far as I’m conerned ONLY marriage).

Neither is, in my opinion, a person of weak character who cannot be trusted to make decisions that affect my life and that of my family.

It’s not a “blanket opinion” when I’ve seen it first hand and know it exists.

[narses]

While he was the “Republican Mayor” of New York City he appointed more than 60 men and women to the Civil, Criminal, and Family Court benchs. In all of those judicial appointment only two were Republican.

All of his other judical appointments were either registered Liberals or registered Democrats. As the “Republican Mayor” he had appointment power over more than 70 full commissioners in more than 50 City agencies, yet at no time during his administration did REPUBLICANS account for more than 10% of those appointments.

He even appointed Chuck Schumers wife as the City’s Department of Transportation Commissioner.


________________________________________________________________
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9054.html

“And even as we grieve for those who lost their lives, and our hearts and prayers go out to the victims and their loved ones, we may be able to find some sort of meaning in this tragedy by using it as a catalyst to revive national gun control efforts.”
Rudolph Giuliani

At the first Republican debate in May, Giuliani was alone among the GOP candidates in offering a less-than-robust affirmation when asked whether it would be a good day if the Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade ruling.

"It would be OK," Giuliani said. "It would be OK to repeal it."

But, he added: "It would be OK also if a strict constructionist viewed it as precedent" and kept the law intact.

[narses]

“To many Christians, divorce is a sin, no matter who started it.”

So what is your faith, if not Christian? What are your opinions on guns, taxes, gays, abortion and issues of interest to most conservative Christians?

[dcgard]

How do you try to reason that the situation was better if Reagan’s wife initiated the divorce? Usually the person initiating the divorce is not the person that screwed up.

[darkangel82]

see #26

[narses]

My mother has been divorced twice, and was not allowed to remarry in the Catholic Church because divorce is a sin (the same for my uncle with his second wife).

The sin the Church helped your mother avoid was adultery.