Rudy’s a No-Go

National Review ^ | 2/6/2007 | Terence P. Jeffrey

[jdm]

In all fairness, no one knows who Hillary will face, let alone if she'll win the nomination.

[etlib]

I don't understand - does that quote mean - If I tolerate graffiti then I may tolerate murder?

It means that when you tolerate minor crimes you are enabling acceptance of more major crimes. So in some sense the answer is "yes." By tolerating graffiti you are in some small way tolerating an environment which tolerates murder.

[Post-Neolithic]

"That doesn't put the PBA issue to rest."

Agreed, which is why I posted his obvious support for PBA, no matter what Politi-Speak he uses.

[Amalie]

(which he believes is the job of each state to decide).

This is by far the most important statement on this thread. We have complained for years about judicial fiat. Here is someone who could well put several good nominees up who will be strict constructionists, and who wants power to go back to the states on these critical decisions. As conservatives, this should be a far more important statement than any single issue; I would be glad to see Roe vs Wade turned back over to the states, where it may likely exist in some places but will become anathema in others.

As importantly, I could see Rudy taking a HUGE vote success margin that would give him the Congressional negotiating room that President Bush has never enjoyed. He is the one visible candidate who could split the DEM vote because of his stand on certain issues...

By the way, IMO, those of you who think Hillary's self-destruction would end the DEMs hopes for the White House are mistaken; the DEM base would be very energized by the fact that she was 'taken out' by the vast right wing, and will put whoever inherits her mantle into power in her place. Rudy significantly diffuses that factor.

[TitansAFC]

Right,

Were you John Kerry's campaign adviser?

I'm sure he came out publicly against the ban - because he really believed in the cause or was on the fence.

Lots of people do that - oppose a sitting President's attempt to define marriage as between one man and one woman - while still holding the staunch belief that marriage should only be between a man and woman.

It's kind of like supporting the War on Terror by publicly opposing the Patriot Act while personally supporting police and federal agents in their pursuit of terrorists. Or like supporting the War in Iraq by opposing any affirmation of troop support, but personally holding the deep belief that you support the troops.

Heck, Hitlery looks better and better if we can apply the Giuliani Rule universally!

[Past Your Eyes]

I'm not on the Rudy bandwagon at this point and may never be. My wife informed me recently that she would never vote for Rudy or Newt because they are both cheaters. I posted that on here and was roundly chastised for wanting to lose the next election.

Point being that the primary is the time to sort out this kind of stuff. The disgruntled ones who sit out general elections because the nominee doesn't rise up to their high standard are the ones who lose elections to the REAL bad guys, like Hillary. Is that what you want to happen, should Rudy happen to get the nomination?

[dmw]

"We'll see. Better brace yourself."

I got my seat belts on...do you? ;)

[WillT]

My thoughts on Rudy improved after hearing him talk about Alito, Roberts and Scalia on the Supreme Court. That will make him a more palatable candidate to social conservatives. Basically, he said he would pick judges like them - "strict constructionists."

[hellbender]

Yes, but NYC is not it's own state, so it has zero electoral votes, and they would go Demonrat if it were a state. So Rudy has no track record except running in a place which is about as representative of America as is San Francisco.

He got the national spotlight right after 9/11. Otherwise no one would even consider him. He sounds hawkish about terrorism, but that's probably also designed to play well in NY, which is heavily Jewish. Why that makes him a deserving Pres. candidate for the party once led to triumph by Ronald Reagan beats me.

[WillT]

If you don't think Rudy is a hawk on terrorism you need to get your eyes and ears tested. He's been tough on this issue since Day One. Where have you been?

[markch]

Hopefully it won't come to that. Not much of a choice, in my opinion. But I can say without a doubt that I'd NEVER vote for Hillary for anything.

[hellbender]

Good grief. Politicians will say anything to get elected, unless they have real bedrock principles, like Reagan or Goldwater. You should look instead at Rudy's track record, which is very liberal, not what even a middle-of-the-road Rupublican would support.

[zbigreddogz]

It means that if people sense that a place is lawless, they will act lawless.

It's called the 'broken window' theory. It basically says, if some kid walks by an old factory with busted out windows, he's likely to throw a rock to break another window. If it's clean, and it's windows are in tact, he isn't likely to throw a rock at the window.

Rudy took this theory to heart, and as Mayor of NY, made a big point of arresting 'squeegy men', men who would 'wash' your window (usually making it dirtier) when you were stopped at a stoplight, demand money, and kick your car and spit at you if you didn't pay. He had them cited for jaywalking, and it turns out, most of them already had warrents out for their arrest for other things. People speculated that there were hundreds of these guys in NYC at one point, because they seemed to be everywhere. Ends up it was less then 100 guys.

Anyhow, his actions solved the problem literally overnight. It took less then 2 months. This was seen by many people as the start of the transformation NY has undergone since.

[TitansAFC]

---"Then the 'socons' will leave the GOP and the Republican Party will fade into permanent insignificance.
Uhh, actually, it's the 'socons' that would fade into permanent insignificance. And I say that as someone who's 100% pro-life and at least leans to the right on most other social issues."---

Actually, I think it would depend on the region. The SoCons would likely fade into insignificance on the NE/SW coasts, whereas the Rockefeller types would be ousted in the South and Midwest. What we'd have is two parties - a pretty darned right party, and a moderate party. The DNC would remain united, and thus rule for many elections.

They would, essentially, marginalize each other regionally - to the dismay of both sides. This is why it is important to have a candidate who unites both sides, and Rudy cannot do that.

[Peach]

I don't know the answer to that. A lot of them seem just plain angry. Period. And have for years.

[zbigreddogz]

So Rudy has no track record except running in a place which is about as representative of America as is San Francisco.

If a Republican got elected Mayor of San Francisco, reduced crime by 2/3rds, cut taxes 23 times, and kept the city together in it's time of greatest crisis, I'd be VERY interested in having him run for President.

[Peach]

LOL. That's funny because Robertson himself admits that he's ultra conservative. I think he used a different term trying to be hip, but I've forgotten what it was.

[hellbender]

You mean he's been rhetorically "tough?" Talks a good game? That means nothing, if this guy can't even oppose partial birth abortion, and if he opposes an armed citizenry. The guy is a typical urban liberal. Let the Demons nominate a phony from NY. Republicans shouldn't be stupid enough to do the same.

[normy]

Yes! I will vote for Rudy because I believe he will prosecute the war properly and will be fiscally responsible.

Rudy will win because most of the country thinks like Rudy on the big issues. Rudy is a mans man.

[zbigreddogz]

Thank you for admitting that the two statements were not inconsistent.