Posted on 04/17/2007 11:21:44 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Rudy Giuliani: Lifelong Liberal
By: George J. Marlin
April 16, 2007 06:33 PM EST
Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani has been barnstorming the nation, claiming the Ronald Reagan mantle. Recent opinion polls suggest his campaign is striking a chord with the GOP's rank and file but indicate most Republicans don't really know where Mr. Giuliani stands on key issues.
Those who do know are glossing over some very striking philosophical flaws -- at least from a truly conservative perspective. Rudy not only supports abortion but also has advocated for partial-birth abortion and government funding of abortion. He favors gun control, gay rights, domestic partnerships and bias-crime laws. And that's just a short list.
As a conservative activist who has observed Giuliani for many years (and who ran against him in the 1993 mayoral election), I can say categorically that he is not now, nor has he ever been, a conservative. In my judgment, his record leaves no doubt that he's a lifelong liberal.
In college, Rudy attacked senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, as an "incompetent, confused and sometimes idiotic man," and he urged Republicans to "find men who will adequately address themselves to the problems of discrimination, of poverty, of education, of public housing and the many more problems that Sen. Goldwater and company throw aside in the name of small laissez-faire government."
Former New York governor Mario Cuomo, a liberal icon, put it this way: "(Giuliani's) basically very pragmatic. And he's progressive. He is not a Neanderthal, a primitive conservative. But look, he's a clever human being. He can shave and draw fine distinctions when he needs to."
Giuliani's first wife, Regina, agreed. She told Giuliani biographer Wayne Barrett that when she and Rudy separated in 1980, she "still considered him to be a liberal Democrat." She also observed that "(Rudy) generally won't do things unless he believes them, ... but he's not a saint, and he will do things that serve his interests."
Rudy first switched from Democrat to Independent, and then to Republican, not because he embraced the tenets of conservatism but in order to move up the U.S. Justice Department ladder.
"He only became a Republican after he began to get all these (Justice Department) jobs," Rudy's mother, Helen Giuliani, told Barrett. "He's definitely not a conservative Republican. He thinks he is, but he isn't. He still feels very sorry for the poor."
As a candidate for mayor of New York, Giuliani distanced himself from Ronald Reagan and the GOP. During his first mayoral bid, in 1989, The New York Times pointed out that he "noted frequently that he was supported by the liberal wing of the Republican Party and maintained that he never embraced Mr. Reagan's broad conservative agenda." And when conservatives attacked him during that 1993 mayoral campaign, Giuliani said, "Their fear of me is that I'm going to be a beachhead for the establishment of a more progressive form of Republicanism."
On another occasion he told a television host, "I do not look to see what the catechism of conservatism says about how to solve a problem."
And we mustn't forget that when Giuliani endorsed governor Cuomo for reelection to a fourth term in 1994, he did so, he said, because Republican George Pataki had "a very right-wing voting record" and because Pataki proposed an "irresponsible" 25 percent state income tax cut.
Giuliani also seriously considered endorsing Bill Clinton in 1996 and instead backed Republican nominee Bob Dole with very little fanfare.
"Most of Clinton's policies," he said at the time, "are very similar to mine."
Some Republicans and conservatives are now claiming that Rudy has changed and really become more conservative, and they cite as an example his abandonment of his former vehement opposition to school vouchers. But when Rudy Crew, former New York City Public Schools chancellor, asked Giuliani about this policy shift, the mayor said, "Don't worry about it. It's just a political thing, a campaign thing. I'm not going to do anything. Don't take it seriously." This particular rightward shift was simply a ploy to enhance Giuliani's 2000 U.S. Senate candidacy.
Contrary to what we've been hearing and reading, Rudy Giuliani is today what he has always been: a liberal. Conservatives should take stories of his Damascus Road-like conversion with a grain of salt. Rudy, like Hillary, is campaigning for the presidency in order to implement lifelong leftist beliefs.
George J. Marlin's latest book is "Squandered Opportunities: New York's Pataki Years" (St. Augustine's Press, 2006). In 1993, he was the Conservative Party candidate for mayor of New York City.
Liberal Republicans like JulieAnnie are much MORE DANGEROUS than liberal democrats,,,,
because liberal Republicans BLUR THE DISTINCTION between liberalism and conservatism,,,,
MAKING LIBERALISM MUCH MORE ACCEPTABLE!!!
At least he FINALLY referred to something religious!!!!....lol
He made his statement the day AFTER she had died, I am unable to find any statement he made while she was being killed. That is not showing support as far as I'm concerned.
As far as everything else goes, it's mainly one time statements or decisions he's made. He hasn't suggested makeing any of this a part of his platform.
Let me suggest this unnamed hypothetical candidate to you:
- The candidate believes in the "right" to abortion, including partial birth abortion.
- The candidate believes in the "right" of homosexuals to have a legal union that resembles marriage.
- The candidate believes in the "right" of illegal aliens to illegally enter and remain in our country.
- The candidate believes government has the "right" to modify the Second Amendment of the Constitution at will to curtail the right to keep and bear arms.
If this was the ONLY information you had, would your conclusion be that this unnamed hypothetical candidate was a conservative Republican or a liberal Democrat?
Here’s an interesting fact, none of the polls show Rudy winning New York. When was the last time that either party nominated a candidate that they didn’t believe could win his home state?
liberal, pro-abortion, GUN GRABBING, pro-amnesty, big govt pro-litigation NY lawyer, and GAY RIGHTS CRUSADER,,,,who believes in using our TAX MONEY for public funding of abortions--(the fact that his personal life is a TRAIN WRECK is another big plus down South). /s
I am sick and tired of references implying that only democrats love the poor......the difference as I see it is that the dems give hand outs while the republicans give them a hand up.
That’s a very good point. Giuliani would probably lose to an “unnamed Democrat” in New York, which ought to tell you just how much his appeal elsewhere in the U.S. is inflated by name recognition.
Shhhh.... Didn’t you get the memo from the Rudy Rooters that repeating facts about their beloved liberal on a conservative website is “spamming” and/or “smearing”?
Remember, he was in NYC in 9/11, so he gets a pass on everything. (Is it just me or does Rudy bring up 9/11 in the same fashion that John sKerry brought up Vietnam?)
And as evidenced by his 30%+ DROP in recent polls, as soon as voters start finding out what he stands for, they start looking for CONSERVATIVES to vote for.
He promised to be faithful to his wives in public, too.
“I cannot tell you anything about the other states you mention, but I can guarantee you that Rudy will NEVER carry PA unless there is NO Democrat opposing him on the ballot.”
How can you guarantee this when every poll has him ahead of Hillary in PA? Besides, you are discounting a major factor—the Italian-American vote which is heavily pro-Rudy and which is concentrated in many key states like PA. So far Rudy’s ahead in PA, NJ, CT, RI, FL, MI and is doing amazingly well in CA. And he’s tied in OH with Hillary. Ethnic loyalty is the real reason Rudy is doing well in most of these states—besides his popularity across the country generally since 9/11—and it has nothing to do with organization. This is not going to change. NJ, for instance, is not going to vote for Hillary if Rudy’s on the ballot—not in a state so heavily populated with Italian-Americans. The same is probably true of PA. A Thompson or a Romney couldn’t possibly attract this huge voting bloc the way Rudy can. The same is true of battleground states like FL and OH, both with very large Italian populations. Not only this, but this vote alone represents 10% of the entire electorate—comparable to the black vote—and is concentrated primarily in blue and purple states. And while it’s not a monolithic vote by any means, it’s still a very very significant factor. Added to this would be Rudy’s overall appeal to voters in general because of his truly outstanding leadership qualities which are best known on the east coast and which appeal to many Independents and a significant number of Democrats.
If you’re going to give Rudy “credit” for this silly ethnic loyalty in the Northeast, then I would suggest you slash 30 points off his poll numbers in every state south of the Mason-Dixon line where a lot of people simply won’t vote for an Italian-American liberal from New York City.
No way in hell does a Republican candidate win in New Jersey. Heck, the GOP couldn't even defeat a flaming homosexual whose main claim to fame was that he picked up anonymous gay partners in rest areas all over the state.
Its common knowledge in the media that he is a gun banner and the media will keep hammering him with questions about it.
Sooner or later he will cram his foot in his mouth and reveal that he is still a gun grabber.
Where would they have been if all conservatives thought as you do, refused to vote for Specter, and ended up with a Democrat in charge of the Judiciary Committee? A similar situation faces us right now with Rudy. We need to accept the imperfect in order to achieve the good.
Me thinks there’s a lot of FRAUD going on in New Joisey and PA.
Congratulations. This post just made the "Good Quotes From Other Freepers" section of my FR homepage.
...Hiring and going into business with mobsters like Kerik.
PA, he can win. Bush was close to Kerry in ‘04 in PA. It was closer there than the margin in OH. Other states like CA, I am not so sure. It would take a hell of a campaign to win the far left states.
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.