« Bush: It'll be months not weeks before we know if 'surge' has worked | Main | Iraq war poll: London isn't Britain »



Also interesting to note is the Firefighters' Union opposition to Rudy. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if his decision to base the command control centre in the World Trade Centre after the 1993 bombing is called into question instead of underground in Brooklyn where it is now.


Rudy is a class act with an almost unbelievable record of achievement and statesmanship. In the coming election, he won't need to motivate the conservative base - he can leave that to Hillary.


Aristeides, call Guiliani what you will, but he is anything but a class act. I think the British will be a little bit less star-struck once they find out how he treated his wives and children, let alone his political enemies (and allies, for that matter).


I don't think people in either country get that hung up about these issues, JH. Bill Clinton is considered even more of class act over here and, no, we haven't been spared the details! Equally, Reagan had issues with his children but that did not stop him being a great man. I suppose I think that people are more tolerant, which, in turn, I believe is because a lot of people have close experience of such issues in their own lives, no matter what their politics. As for the political side of what you say, here we LOVE politicians who give it to their enemies and their allies. Ask Maggie's or Blair's what they think of them!


So far many conservatives, even Christian Evangelicals, know about his shortcomings and accept him. The other republican candidates have issues too. What people see and like in Rudy is someone basically genuine. He's not a politician's politician, and he doesn't feel he's owed. If he's the frontrunner a year from now and the only or best chance to beat the democrat, I hope republicans en masse get behind him instead of 'voting their conscience'


Aristeides, I don't deny that Guiliani might make a great president, but I am saying he's the opposite of a class act. And half of the conservative movement here cannot depend on him to do right by us since he holds so many views associated with Democrats. This gives us pause.

Steevo, perhaps you're right. But if social conservatives swallow their reservations and vote for Guiliani, it will be an endorsement of viewpoints which many of us find more than unacceptable, we find them an abomination. In addition, if Guiliani wins, never again will any Republican pay attention to us, knowing that he can win without us. That means the end of the Big Tent.


Steevo... agreed. The main point is to get the base of the party behind *whoever* wins the primaries, and that looks like it might well be Giuliani.

If he DOES win, what has to be imparted to the Party in general is that the social issues are things that the President doesn't have much to do with, outside appointing constructionist judges... something Rudy DOES do, and did in NYC.


Yes agreed mamapajamas.

JF it will not be an endorsement of his viewpoints (more accurately put, some of his viewpoints). It will be an endorsement of the better man with respect to the opposition, period. The argument of conscience, in truth if logically deduced, would eliminate just about everyone at least for me. I had issues with Reagan, Bush Sr. and Jr. yet I voted for all of them (granted, abortion wasn't a problem). Please keep in mind the opposite perspective here: if one doesn't vote or vote's for a candidate who's chances are unrealistic, he/she is allowing a vote for the opponent. You may not be going through with a direct act, of which I can appreciate, but consequences amounting to inaction also bear a responsibility: a price will be paid, with greater darkness.

Your second reason is a possibility I think to a certain extent. The election will be close and the country evenly divided. If some elected republicans are too stupid and take it for granted they may well find out in a few years the consequences. Social conservatives will not keep silent. It will be made known Rudy got the votes because there simply was no other choice as the democrat would be much, much worse. I would hope that would be understood not only to republicans elected to office, but those social conservatives who cast their vote.


Sure, the social conservatives have a veto on the right getting into power, just not the left. That is their problem.

Saying that, I would be perfectly happy with a social conservative nominee, I just happen to think this time round that Rudy is the best candidate. It is your call though, not mine!


Steevo, I agree that absolute ideological purity is impossible. But how about meeting us halfway? Guiliani just sticks his thumb in our eyes. I understand that it's a political reality that abortion is here to stay. But Guiliani opposed the ban on partial birth abortions, which is a monstrous procedure. And he opposed parental notification. In other words, there are things he could be doing to at least show he cares, but instead he brags about how socially liberal he is, and then makes ridiculous claims about how he will appoint constructionist judges.

With that in mind, you have glossed over one other possibility: refraining from voting for Guiliani as President in protest, and turning our attention to elections in Congress, to use the legislature as an opposing force.

We'll see how things play out, and who ends up being the Democratic nominee. That should make the decision much more clear.


Well I think you're attributing something personal to his character; he's not thumbing his nose, he's not that kind of a guy. I suspect since he has great concern stopping crime and defending our country, conservative or constructionist judges will take precedence over liberal. That's my opinion. And as far as who the Democratic nominee is, with the choice we have does it really matter? I think its a given they will be Leftist and we know what that means.

You have a right to your conscience, I just wish we had the time to exercise it without fear.

Ron Paul supporter

Guiliani is another big government authoritarian who supports the failed war in Iraq and the fascist Patriot Act. McCain is worse and Romney is just as bad.

The GOP needs an anti-war conservative who will restore civil liberties, slash the size of the federal government, balance the budget and cut taxes.

Thankfully, such a candidate has just declared that he is running for President - Rep Ron Paul of Texas. His website is here.

Ron Paul for President in 2008!!


Don't kid yourself. Ron Paul is a coward and could never lead the United States. He has no pull whatsoever with two thirds of the conservative movement (national security conservatives and social conservatives).

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad


  • Tracker