Laura Ingraham's not fooled by Rudy Giuliani

As a lifelong New Yorker and a contemporary of former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, I am amazed that Rudy is still fooling so many people in the rest of the country.

Rudy may have been the best conservatives could hope for as a Mayor of liberal New York City, but he's not a true conservative, a moral exemplar or even faithful to his faith.

Rudy once said, "Most of [Bill] Clinton's policies are similar to most of mine."

When running for mayor, Mr. Giuliani pledged to "rekindle the Rockefeller/Javits/Lefkowitz tradition" of the Republican Party and "produce the kind of change New York City saw with Fiorella LaGuardia and with John Lindsay."

Rudy supported liberal Democrat Governor Mario Cuomo for re-election against his successful conservative Republican challenger, George Pataki.

"I believe the anti-immigration movement in America is one of our most serious public problems. 'And Washington is only making the problem worse. I am speaking out and filing this action because I believe that a threat to immigration can be a threat to the future of our country. Just as they did in years past, immigrants today revitalize and reinvigorate the culture and economy of our cities and states.

"The suit filed today is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging two federal statutory provisions that encroach on the power of the City of New York to determine policies to ensure public health and safety and regulate its workforce. These provisions prohibit the City from continuing its well-considered policy, embodied in Executive Order 124...."

Executive Order 124 bars City employees from disclosing to federal immigration authorities the immigration status of aliens who come to their attention, unless required to do so by law, and more specifically barring the New York City Police Department from reporting the immigration status of victims of crime.

Rudy (who dressed as a woman while Mayor of New York City) would have been very comfortable as Mayor of San Francisco!

Rudy, June 24, 1997: "'... we welcome all of New York City to celebrate the history of our gay and lesbian communities, a history as rich in diversity as the City itself. Advocates for the lesbian and gay community have worked to heighten awareness and understanding throughout the City. Since its founding in 1992, the Coalition of Lesbian and Gay City Employees has become an important part of that diverse history, providing an intelligent voice and a strong support system for the men and women whose achievements help to make the City what it is today."

Pro-lifers need to keep Rudy from transforming the Republican Party into another pro-abortion party.

Rudy's Opening Remarks to the N.A.R.A.L. Champions of Choice Lunch, April 5, 2001:

"This event shows that people of different political parties and different political thinking can unite in support of choice. In doing so, we are upholding a distinguished tradition that began in our city starting with the work of Margaret Sanger and the movement for reproductive freedom that began in the early decades of the 20th century.

"As a Republican who supports a woman's right to choose, it is particularly an honor to be here....I believe being in favor of choice is consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party."

Rudy does not really make himself a conservative by calling himself one. Or having gone to Catholic school with the head of The Catholic League. Or having serving in the United States Department of Justice with a founder of The Federalist Society. Or having officiating at the marriage of Fox News' Roger Ailes. Or by siding with America against terrorists.

In New York, in addition to the major parties (Republican and Democrat), there are two important minor parties (Conservative and Liberal).

A candidate may have more than one nomination, so Rudy ran as a Republican and a Liberal, not a Republican and a Conservative.

Rudy does not make himself a conservative by calling himself one. Or make himself acceptable to pro-lifers by claiming to hate abortion while having supporting it as a permissible choice since he first ran for public office.

Nor does Rudy make himself acceptable to gun owners by ignoring his anti-gun history and hoping gun owners won't learn about it.

Don't expect presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani to repeat his mistake of being interviewed by Laura Ingraham again before Republicans nominate their presidential candidate and probably not for a long time thereafter, if ever.

Last May, Laura deftly put Rudy on the spot, by publicly asking Rudy what he thought made abortion "hateful"? (Rudy's been trying VERY hard to make his position on abortion tolerable in order to win the Republican presidential nomination.)

Rudy never really answered that devastating question, By the time the interview was over, Rudy's chance of winning the Republican presidential nomination should have been dead. (The Republican Party has a pro-choice wing, so it's not surprising that Rudy is first in the polls since all the other Republican presidential hopefuls are pro-life), but Rudy can win ONLY if division among social conservatives allows him to do so.)

Why had Rudy and his wife No. 2 contributed to Planned Parenthood when he thought abortion was so hateful, Laura asked.

Great question! (How many organizations that focus on activity that you consider hateful receive voluntary contributions from YOU?)

Rudy said he gave because Planned Parenthood provided information that would help a pregnant woman choose!

For America's sake, any presidential candidate who thinks like that better lose.

The homepage of Laura's website modestly noted that Laura played a role in making sure Rudy's abortion stance was "unmask[ed]."

Laura understands that the Republican Party is the pro-life party and it would be "insane" for it to nominate Rudy.

"Conservative radio talker Laura Ingraham is warning 2,000 Christian conservatives gathered for the Values Voters summit in Washington not to abandon their values in hopes of winning year's election. She took aim at a couple of enemies. Her targets? Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton."

"You guys have heard from the GOP field...You know pretty much where they stand."

"I am here to tell you that there is not going to be any magic dust spread on the field to make it any different... I don't think there is going to be any new candidate riding on a white steed to be the next Ronald Wilson Reagan."

"It is essential... that you not fall into the trap of burying your head in the sand... and saying none of these people measure up. That, my friends, is what the elite in both parties want."

"The freight train is heading down the tracks... and I'm not just talking about Hillary. Right now, before Thanksgiving, this is your chance to stand up... No one is going to listen to you after this weekend... They are listening to you now because you have influence.

"It's a tough message to hear, but I've been around this town since 1987, right after I started working in the Reagan administration. For me, it's absolutely insane for this party not to nominate someone who can bring together those three groups, the groups that President Reagan was able to bring together, social conservatives, foreign policy hawks and fiscal conservatives.

"You've got a political couple in the Clintons who spend every waking hour thinking about how to get back in that White House. Do not underestimate how difficult it is going to be to defeat them."

Implicit hope: Values voters will rally behind the monogamous Mormon, Mitt Romney, instead of being seduced by the siren song of the fundamentally flawed Rudy Giuliani that only he can stop Hillary.

Snide, sexist comments reviling social conservative, foreign policy hawk and fiscal conservative Laura are badges of honor reflecting her importance and positive influence.

"Bill": "Wow...There is no end to the conservative talkshow hosts preaching their dribble. I could only hope Snydley Whiplash 'ties' [Laura Ingraham] to those tracks."

An anonymous poster heard Laura's message about what is going on and what needs to be done:

"I don't know how many of you were listening, but talk-show host Laura Ingraham sent a message to us on the right this past Friday that I believe Conservatives of every stripe need to take to heart. She said that we need to find a Candidate that will satisfy Social Conservatives, Fiscal Conservatives and National Security Conservatives if we want a real shot at winning the Presidency.

"But mainly, it seemed to me that she was talking to us Social Conservatives who are splitting our support among all the candidates except the one who is supposedly leading in the polls. She reminded us that we need a coalition of voters in order to have a chance of winning first the Republican Presidential nomination and then the actual Presidency with a Conservative candidate.

"She admonished us for waiting to hear from the perfect candidate since obviously there is no such animal. She reminded us that we weren't going to get everything we want in one candidate.

"Then she went on to admonish the actual candidates themselves for not going on the offensive against the one liberal candidate who is leading in the polls and yes she named names talking about Rudy Giuliani being the one liberal on our side of the aisle. She suggested that whichever of the Conservative candidates speaks out first with forcefulness and dares to call Rudy on the carpet for his liberal views would have a much better chance of gaining the support of those Conservatives who are still in limbo. She told them that they would need to fight for what they believe.

"Here's an excerpt of what she said to the best of my transcribing abilities. In the first part, she is addressing the Republican candidates.

If you are going to stop Giuliani, if you want to stop Giuliani, maybe you don't but if you do, then you've got to come at him with everything you have and that means you've got [to] call him a liberal on the border, a liberal on spending, a liberal on immigration, a liberal on life, a liberal on marriage, a liberal on all these issues that frankly brought the Republican party together in 1980 . . .

If you are claiming to carry the conservative mantle, then you have got to on every front be hitting Giuliani and it's got to be hard enough that the media starts to pay attention to it, because the elites are lining up behind Giuliani one after the other . . .

The hand-wringing on the sidelines is really getting old . .oh well, Romney's not perfect . . . oh well, Thompson's not energetic enough . . . oh Huckleberry is this or that, . . . [if] you don't decide soon who you are going to support, or support Giuliani if you think he's your best shot too but you are going to be irrelevant, do people not get this, that they are going to never have their phone calls returned . . .

"I could not agree more with her. I do believe that if we don't start getting it in gear, that we are going to be left out in the cold for decades to come."

“I do agree that we need to come together on a conservative candidate soon.”

Thank you for being astute enough to read between the lines as to what was my real question.

You are right....definitely on target.

Delegate selection begins in January and Super Tuesday is on 5 February. That month of selection will have over half of all delegates up for grabs: about 1300 of 2400.

In other words, one candidate could actually sew this thing up by February 5. It is interesting that many of the states up for grabs are blue or purple states.

It is also interesting that in most states all delegates go to the winner...even if he wins with only 30% or less of that state’s primary votes.

Rudy could wrap this up as early as 5 February if there isn’t agreement among conservatives very soon.

I’m very willing to compromise and go with Thompson.

Rudy and Hillary are both statist socialists, but Hillary has a slightly stronger track record. Rudy must be using smoke and mirrors on the polling. I suspect that he is at the top of his glass ceiling at 20%, as actual Republican candidates drop out of the race, their former supporters will skew against Rudy by 5:1, imho.

Rudy was great for NYC when he came in because he was a Law & Order candidate and we needed someone to enforce the law and restore some order. He did that. then it went to his head a little. and then a lot.

we don't need a law & order president. That's a local issue, not a national one.

He constantly claims his conservative principles YET constantly puts up the GO Guliani banner.

And, don't forget all the fund raisers he has participated in for Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Hannity's actions don't match his stated positions. I'm still trying to figure out exactly why.

if Rudy gets through the primaries as the candidate, I'm voting for him.

Then, you will have done your part in moving the Republican party to the left and reducing the influence of conservatism in the nation.

As bad as Rudy may be perceived to be, he’s orders of magnitude better than the Hildabeast.

It isn't a matter of perception. His record conclusively proves he is liberal. And, his personal life reveals he has no more character than Bill Clinton.

And, no, a liberal Republican does far more harm for far longer than an liberal Democrat whose election to office would help conservatives sweep into power.

But, the country is going to continue to move leftward unless conservatives put conservatives in a position of power and stopping voting for liberals.

And, no, a liberal Republican does far more harm for far longer than an liberal Democrat whose election to office would help conservatives sweep into power.

That may be true if we were dealing with an ordinary 'liberal'. But make no mistake - Hildabeast is no 'liberal': she's an out-and-out Stalinist who would stop at nothing to retain power at all costs.

My guess is that the first thing she would do on 1/20/09 would be to re-establish the Fairness Doctrine by executive order: that will silence her most effective critics.

Next up: an illegal alien amnesty that would make GWB's 'comprehensive' plan look conservative and ensure a new solid 'Rat voting bloc. Combine that with gerrymandered congressional districts and institutionalized election fraud, and you get the fast track to Soviet America. At that point, an armed insurrection will be the only way a conservative would ever have power again. Guaranteed.

Why would you think that Rudy wouldn’t do the same on Illegal Immigration given his past record?

He made NYC a sanctuary city!

You don’t get any more wrong on one issue than that!

And yet he is that wrong on Abortion, 2nd amendment rights, the gay agenda, Global Warming, etc.

It is pure nonsense to think that Rudy is a better choice than Hillary.

He is the only candidate guaranteed with his baggage, past record, and position on the issues to hand the Presidency to Clinton and destroy the Republican Party for decades to come or maybe forever!

Hannity is afraid of Hillary getting elected. But we haven’t even started the primaries yet. I might be inclined to understand his schilling for Rudy if he was the only candidate left standing. But with only Brownback dropping out, and so many really good candidates still remaining, he needs to cool it if he is really a conservative.

He keeps saying how Rudy dropped the abortion rate in NYC when mayor, and increased adoption. I wish someone would ask him what particular policy did Rudy implement that lowered abortions, and increased adoptions?

So?

He strongly reinforced the sanctuary city concept by his open and blatant defiance of Federal Immigration Law.

That is a meaningless statistic given his actions, choices and position on the issue.

Me too! I’ll hold my nose and vote for him. ANYONE is preferable to Hitlery

I disagree. In my mind, this is the short view. More RINO's in the congress or the white house only weaken the GOP and long term are bad for the country. I would rather have 4 years of Hillary than a future of people that will turn the GOP into a national wing of the Schwarzenegger gop

But make no mistake - Hildabeast is no 'liberal':

You're right, she's the anti-Christ and has 666 imprinted on the top of her hair under her hair...

She's also the kind of medicine the GOP and country need to turn it back to conservatism.

A Giuliani guarantees the GOP moves to the left. He guarantees no conservative in the White House until 2016. He likely guarantees Republicans remain in the minority in Congress for a decade. And, liberal Republicans always have an easier time getting liberal legislation passed.

Giuliani does far more long-term damage to conservatism. It may be 20 years before the conservative movement could recover from his Presidency.

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.