Posted on 04/17/2007 6:25:48 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Rudy Giuliani would make a superb president. he combines Reaganesque vision with extraordinary attention to detail. He is strong on national security and also has the principles and policies to strengthen the economy. He is a tax cutter and a foe of the federal income tax's complexity.
He is a fervent free trader, much needed, as global protectionist pressures are rising. He has also demonstrated an antipathy toward unnecessary regulation. If Sarbanes-Oxley hasn't been amended by the time Giuliani takes office, he will push hard to remove its counterproductive elements.
While I disagree with him in certain areas--I am pro-life, and he is pro-choice--he has made it abundantly clear that he would appoint John Roberts/Samuel Alito-type judges to the federal bench.
Giuliani cut or eliminated 23 taxes. The top rate for the city income tax, for instance, was knocked down by 21%. The overall tax burden for a New York City resident went down a remarkable 17%.
During Giuliani's tenure the Big Apple's economy blossomed: 423,000 new jobs were created. More people were moving into the city than leaving it. That he achieved so much going against a generations-old spend-tax-welfare political ethos is astonishing.
(Excerpt) Read more at members.forbes.com ...
Do you have a source for this information, please?
"Bracewell & Giuliani, the firm based in Houston that Mr. Giuliani joined as a name partner two years ago, handles lobbying in the Texas capital for the Citgo Petroleum Corporation of Houston."
“Mayor Giuliani believes Hugo Chávez is not a friend of the United States and his influence continues to grow because of our increasing reliance on foreign sources of oil,” the statement said. “As the mayor has consistently stated, the development of alternative fuels is a priority that demands a solution in order."
Sheesh, he’s been a partner in this law firm for just two years and has never been involved in any lobbying.....This is pure bunk!!
Nice try but Rudy has made public statements about Hugo Chavez NOT being a friend of the US!!
"“Mayor Giuliani believes Hugo Chávez is not a friend of the United States and his influence continues to grow because of our increasing reliance on foreign sources of oil,” the statement said. “As the mayor has consistently stated, the development of alternative fuels is a priority that demands a solution in order "
The ONLY one that counts in this election!! I totally agree. There will be a minimum of two judicial seats in the Supreme Court to fill during the next 8 years. We can’t leave that to the Dems.
We can't leave that to Liberals (Hillary, Obama, Rudy, etc.).
They were mealy mouthed, compared to what he’s said to Arafat and bin Talal. They are standard-issue and lack passion, something drafted up by a PR team and not from Rudy’s heart. Even Nancy and Hillary condemn Hugo so anyone can do that. He needs to go after Hugo with passion, with Rudy passion. Otherwise I don’t believe him.
Wow. You really haven’t been reading the news. I’ll try to find you a link later when i have time. It was a big story.
Liberals are scared to death of Rudy, as are some of the far right wingers here. He has vowed to nominate judges like Scalia and Alito. Giuliani is the only candidate who can actually WIN this election by pulling in votes from the Independents and Moderate Dems. Without those votes, we don't have a chance in hell of winning. The majority of the population are FOR equal rights for tax paying gay citizens (AND I AM NOT SPEAKING OF GAY MARRIAGE BUT CIVIL UNIONS!) The majority of the population is NOT for partial birth abortion and THANK GOD THAT IS NOW BANNED BY THE SCOTUS) but they don't want Roe overturned. Most Americans are moderates. If we keep pushing social issues that no one wants, we will become a permanent minority party and have to take a back seat to the Democrats from now on. I don't want that to happen and will do everything I can to see that it does not!
You've been told a lie.
The majority of the population is NOT for partial birth abortion and THANK GOD THAT IS NOW BANNED BY THE SCOTUS...
Not so. They said a law banning it was not unconstitutional. Rudy opposes that law, and would repeal it (making today's decision moot at least on the Federal level).
It IS so. Just this morning the SCOTUS ruled on this issue and it is not ILLEGAL IN THE USA. Thank God.
Sounds good to me. I'm just setting the record straight.
This is such great news! Most people in this country agree with this decision but still do not want to see Roe overturned. It would not have been possible without the 2 conservative judges you mentioned.
Rudy: A little more to the left, Stevo.
Steve; That better, Rud?
Rudy: No, up, up, up, up...toward the left....
Steve: Okay, Rud.
Rudy: Aaaah! There! Great! You’ve got the job, Stevo!
Steve: My turn. Down a bit, Rud.
Rudy: That better, Stevo?
Steve: A little to the right now, Rud.
Rudy: Okay, Stevo.
Stever: A little bit more...Aaaaah! That’s it. I’ll take
that job, Rud!
Rudy does not believe the law is unconstitutional, thus SCOTUS was right.
BUT
Rudy would not sign a ban on partial birth abortion, and would no doubt repeal the law at the heart of this case, because he believes women should have a right to PBA.
Also, Rudy believes the term "strict constructionist" can someone who upholds Roe.
It is NOT so. The Supreme Court did not ban partial birth abortion. They said Congress has the power to ban it.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), who in the past has supported a woman’s right to a form of late-term abortion, Wednesday joined in the chorus of Republican presidential candidates hailing the Supreme Court decision upholding the ban of the procedure.
“The Supreme Court reached the correct conclusion in upholding the congressional ban on partial birth abortion,” Giuliani said in a statement on the 5–4 decision. “I agree with it.”
When Giuliani ran for Senate in 2000, he said he would not vote to restrict a woman’s right to undergo the procedure.
Now, with social conservatives believed to be a major factor in the GOP primary, Giuliani joined the other top-tier Republicans in applauding the court’s ruling.
“Today, our nation’s highest court reaffirmed the value of life in America by upholding a ban on a practice that offends basic human decency,” former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said. “This decision represents a step forward in protecting the weakest and most innocent among us.”
Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) hailed the decision as “a victory for those who cherish the sanctity of life and integrity of the judiciary.” The senator added that the ruling also “speaks to the importance of nominating and confirming strict-constructionist judges who interpret the law as it is written, and do not usurp the authority of Congress and state legislatures.”
Democratic candidates condemned the decision.
“I strongly disagree with today’s Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women,” Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) said. “As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman’s medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient.”
Former North Carolina senator and Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards also said he strongly disagrees with the “hard right turn” by the Supreme Court, adding that the move serves as a “stark reminder of why Democrats cannot afford to lose the 2008 election.”
“Too much is at stake — starting with, as the Court made all too clear today, a woman’s right to choose,” Edwards said.
I’ve seen that. It doesn’t say what you think it says.
You need to understand the news.
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.