Posted on 07/30/2005 5:55:36 AM PDT by Uncledave
With Gipper's game plan, Rudy can win it all
July 30, 2005
BY THOMAS ROESER Advertisement
As I write this I know my fellow social conservatives will get mad: There is no one in either political party who would be a more exciting candidate for president than Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York City. I'll tell you his story -- the good and the bad -- and I'll tell you how he can solve his problems with you. And me. Incidentally, as you read, keep in mind the contrast with Mayor Daley.
The good and bad about Rudy is contained in a book, The Prince of the City [Encounter: 2005] by Fred Siegel, a hard-bitten teacher at Cooper Union University. The good: Rudy came into office in 1994 a Republican in a Big Apple that was rotten to the core, steeped with bosses, bagmen and racial arsonists, a hostile "combination of liberal consensus and helplessness [that] made serious policy debate seem irrelevant," and quickly brought in a band of brother prosecutors from the U.S. attorney's office. They gave up millions in private law firm salaries for the fun of working and drinking (after hours) with Rudy. Most never left his side until his two terms ran out in 2001.
Giuliani was an eerily compulsive hands-on manager. If you want to understand him, said an associate, remember that as a Yankee fan he's the guy who keeps score and writes down how each out and each run took place. Just as when he read The Godfather he diagrammed how the mob worked, for relaxation he would sketch on a pad how every department worked. He would explain to the public clearly what he wanted to do: cut the size of government, cut taxes to attract jobs "so people can work," consolidate or cut out city departments, introduce competition to delivery of services and work with the governor [Democrat Mario Cuomo] "to get our fair share of revenue."
He insisted on tough police standards, once jumping out of his limo in Times Square to chase a guy he saw grab a woman's purse. He was heedless of civil libertarians. It seemed like he wanted to offend all interest groups and took the heat, forgetting the polls. Crime in 1995 saw 163,428 fewer felonies, with murder dropping 16 percent in 1996. He trumpeted that work is the best social welfare policy, pushing welfare reform, announcing that 23 percent of the welfare recipients in Jersey City were also receiving New York City benefits. He balanced his budget, fought with Al Sharpton against what he called "racial racketeering," and grinned as he took heat from minority communities.
The bad? Giuliani was ego-driven. He got jealous of his police commissioner, who was getting more favorable press than he, fired him and hired another (who was just as tough). Giuliani's personal life fell into tatters: his first marriage annulled, his second wife was a TV anchor who drove him nuts. He spatted with her, kept public company with a divorcee, came down with prostate cancer, married again. His political career was pronounced over. Then came 9/11.
That tragedy redeemed him. When the first plane hit the north tower, Guiliani ran from the Pinnacle Hotel where he was at a breakfast, shouting over his cell phone that command headquarters should move from 7 World Trade Center to Barclay Street a block away. Good thinking: Just as they evacuated, the plane hit the south tower. The debris was so heavy his command center was inundated. With his cell phone deadened, Giuliani's staff thought he was dead as well, but a janitor found him dazed and led him out through a little-known passage in the basement.
Television captured the man at that moment, stumbling down the street in the smoke, his handkerchief to his mouth, directing his city through uncharted territory, ordering all bridges and tunnels shut down. Courage is the most important virtue, said Churchill: It guarantees all others. As Bush retires, he should be supplanted by a man of this valor.
Social conservatives will oppose Giuliani for his pro-abortion views. It's up to Giuliani to help himself with them, and here's how. As governor of California, Ronald Reagan signed the most permissive abortion law in the country. Rudy, can you hear me? If you want this thing -- this presidency -- you gotta change and mean it. Your marriages we can do nothing about. But your social views have to change. They'll say you're an opportunist, but you have heard that before. You can change. And mean it. We're waiting.
That said, you piss on the pro-lifers, you lose the South and Midwest. Period.
The only two things dumber are fiscal irresponsibility and gun grabbing.
Who the hell are they going to vote for? If they want to gain political power they need to wait until the war against the Dims is won. At this point they can either hold off on their agenda or lead hillary right into the white house.
You've said "religious right" about a gazillion times. Specifically - what the hell do you consider "religious right"?
Signed a gun ban. No deals.
You can not win without them.
The religious right is the vocal minority within the Republican party that insists that Republican candidates adhere to their moral and cultural norm (religious litmus tests). Namely that they are protestant (mostly white) and willing to enact legislation that supports their religious agenda. The religious agenda is pro-life, demands special treatment for protestant Christian religious doctrine, and is often at odds with racial and gender equality. Their presence in the Republican ranks has often been the ammunition Democrats have used against Republicans when leveling charges of Racism and bigotry at our Party.
Now realistic or not fear of the religious right keeps many of the traditionally conservative groups like catholics and Blacks out of the republican party. A return to allowing the Religious right to dominate the agenda of the Republican party will destroy the inroads republicans have made with catholics, Blacks and other groups who share our beliefs but are put off by what they see as an extremely bigoted portion of the Republican party. Now if the Religious right would moderate their rhetoric so that these new groups would feel more comfortable we may be able to really start the dismantling of the Democratic party.
Now there are going to be crazed responses about how the religious right is not bigoted nor are they interested in rolling back the rights of women or blacks but that is going to fall on deaf ears. This is not a war about truth the war with Democrats is about perception and the way the religious right is perceived hurts the party. Lets hide that particular light under a bundle until such time the Republicans frame the debate in America. We still have a long way to go before we can do that.
Mike,
I do. I sent a couple replys.
But its a waste pf time and your getting worked up for nothing. The guy is out of his mind. By following his logic, we're supposed to surrender our principles now in order to have them in the future?!?
In one post he said in effect that in order to preserve religion and our values we have to elect people who don't believe in either. i.e.: "Moderates'.
I thinks it comes from the Neville Chamberlain School of Political Science. Or this wacko is a nephew of Vidkun Quisling, or is French.
Where will they go? If they left the Republican party tommorrow we would get the Black vote, the Jewish vote, and the Catholic vote that would more than make up for their absence.
Your values are not the values of everyone in the Republican party and i am so glad that many in this party disagree with you.
I think its more French than anything else. Alienate EVERYONE and then ask for their help.
I'm not worked up, but I DO try to combat stupidity when I see it.
And no I am not replying to him when he replies to me. Don't feed the trolls ya know....
That'll put the fear in Hildebeast ...
Please keep me out of your thoughts and posts entirely.
When will the religious people here learn that Free Republic is for all Republicans not just those that demand religion be part of our government. The day Free Republic does what you want and zot all the freepers that are non-religious there goes the Free Republic as a force in the party. The editors seem to know that we (the non-religious) freepers will vote for the Party regardless of the candidate when your people threaten to stay home every time you don't get what you want. That makes us better Republicans even if we aren't fanatical Christians.
The big issue is pro-life. I'm Catholic. If the party goes pro-choice, the Catholics(outside the Northeast) bolt - gaurantee it. That is the number one reason why the Catholics who are Republican are in the party.
As for racial equality and gender equality, most of the "Religious Right" I know don't care that much one way or the other on racial issues. The biggest problem I see with our party on racial issues are in the mushy moderate crowd out in Central Oakland County with their anti-Detroit(black) policies. The Evangelicals are the ones I see more than any others trying to get the black vote, and are those most open to blacks in our party - and the significant black vote here is why Michigan went democrat at the top of the ticket in the last three elections - 00, 02, and 04.
On gender issues, I rarely hear anything one way or another about them anymore outside of the life issue. Just isn't an issue.
The party will not go pro-choice, I'm not even pro-choice. I merely listed the agenda of the religious right I agree on that one point but not out of religious reasons.
The rest is a matter of preception as much as a matter of reality as I said in my post.
They'd stay home or some would go democrat to teach the GOP a lesson.
If they left the Republican party tommorrow we would get the Black vote, the Jewish vote, and the Catholic vote
The Catholic Vote? Not a chance.
The Jewish Vote? Maybe.
The Black Vote - Not until the GOP is no longer associated as the "party of the rich".
2) He's not afraid to tackle the bad guys
3) He's an effective manager
4) He's fiscally responsible
5) He's not a socialist
6) He's demonstrably tough on crime
If that's not a huge gulf between Guillani and Daley, I don't know what is.
I have a few questions for you.
1. What is this religious litmus test?
2. What do the Conservative Christians win if they shut up and take it?
3. What will the Republicans win if the Christian conservatives close their wallets and stay home?
Do you know where the strongest traditional families are to be found? Not in Rudy Giuliani's New York City or any other socially liberal community. Children in such places tend to be either single-parent welfare children or boutique children, one or maybe two for show but not so many that it would cramp the liefestyle of the parents. There may be more money for educating children in such places, but that's largely because there are relatively few children to educate with available funds.
You'll find the strongest and largest families in more socially conservative areas, and that means places where faith in God is not denigrated or marginalized but lived and central to social life.
In the final analysis, without the dynamism of social conservatives and their focus on families to sustain society, society dies.
Complain about us, denigrate us, try to drive us away. You only destroy yourself in the long run. You need us far more than we need you.
Didn't I tell you to buzz off you bigoted hateful fool?
Oh that's right, you have the comprehension skills of a 6 year old.
"When will the religious people here learn that Free Republic is for all Republicans not just those that demand religion be part of our government."
Based on your hateful rhetoric that compares christians to the taliban, you're definitely a leftist. Your intellectual ineptness proves that. Only a leftist wouldnt know the history of our founding fathers and religion and it's impact on our constitution. Have you even read it, idiot?
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.