Video: Dennis Miller makes his endorsement for 2008
posted at 9:00 am on January 27, 2007 by Allahpundit
I can think of two reasons why it’ll never happen, with a third a distinct possibility. First, McCain and Giuliani are both egomaniacs. Neither would be willing to fill the bottom of the ticket. Second, they’re both perceived as socially liberal (somewhat unfairly in McCain’s case). The GOP needs at least one social con on the ballot, which is why Romney’s practically guaranteed the VP slot if he wants it.
And third, Rudy might not be running.
Good stuff from DM otherwise, though, especially the bit on Edwards. I should probably cut a few clips of Chuck Norris from the rest of the show; I learned a few new cool facts about him by watching. Cool fact about Chuck Norris: he’s visibly uncomfortable speaking extemporaneously. Cool fact about Chuck Norris: English appears to be his second, or possibly third, language. Those sorts of facts.
I admire his taste in politicians, though. Newt “Graingrich” is a pretty impressive guy.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Chuck looked very “un-chuck” like on H&C. That was painful to watch and I bet his rabid fans are ready to cry…
My favorite Chuck Norris fact….
When the Boogeyman goes to sleep every night, he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.
csdeven on January 27, 2007 at 9:17 AM
Sorry, AP…I duplicated your facts link.
csdeven on January 27, 2007 at 9:21 AM
Chuck was cool. Dennis is actually impressing me some.
By the way, how the hell old is Chuck Norris? My god, I am getting gray in my 40′s and he was kicking Bruce Lee around when I was a kid, and he looks pretty damn good. I’d love to have just half of his martial arts talents and I’d be happy.
eh, anyways, the show was pretty good last night. It would have been cooler to see Michelle and Chuck talk it up, but maybe some other time.
johnnyU on January 27, 2007 at 9:23 AM
Chuck Norris can kill anything in under five seconds, including the English language.
JammieWearingFool on January 27, 2007 at 9:23 AM
I wanted to comment here. CBS must have a policy of not publishing comments on videos shortly after they are put on Youtube. I commented a couple times on this video and have yet to see my comment published. It was well worded yet critical. Why does our “free press” seem to not enable freespeech?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbrH7AdHLkM
James on January 27, 2007 at 9:40 AM
As an official ‘Graingrich’ voter and ‘Secondhand Lion’ I’ll just sit here on the porch and keep my mouth shut.
Sorry Allah, not picking a fight. High school was hardly MIT. I’ll give Chuck this…he didn’t say Clooney.
Peace, love, and um…Jeter suks.
Limerick on January 27, 2007 at 10:07 AM
I need to watch more TV; I can’t believe Chuck was filling in for Hannity. That guy can do anything. As to Dennis’ endorsement, that’s a big ‘no’ to both of them. I suppose Chuck could twist my arm into voting for Giuliani but McCain…sorry Chuck, you can rip off my leg and beat me with the soggy end, but I won’t vote for McCain. Ever.
austinnelly on January 27, 2007 at 10:13 AM
Gingrich/Tancredo in 2008!
armyvet on January 27, 2007 at 10:17 AM
Yah know I think the ticket should be Giuliani and Graingrich. Even though this combo puts the ‘extra’ in extramarital I think that the religiousy would have an easier time swollowing Newt than McCain.
liberrocky on January 27, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Romney/Giuliani I’d buy
Romney/Tancredo I’d buy
but no vote for McCain until he at least apologizes for killing political free speech and the ‘gang of 14′ suicide
Lord Nazh on January 27, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Okay, a warning to anyone who goes to this link. A smirky, perky, fawning Katie Courie slavering over Hillary, and Hillary in the most gosh awful pantsuit yet. I loved her “there wasn’t a national consensus” remark regarding her healthcare fiasco of a white elephant. Typical Clinton blamesomeoneelse-speak.
Back to the topic at hand, I am not making fun of Chuck, only because I think he is a sweetheart and you have to remember he isn’t a young man anymore and is showing it. I thought he was sweet and the fact that he has no problem “coming out” with being a conservative in Hollywood is pretty amazing. Second, Dennis Miller just rocks. I may not always agree with what he says, but I love how he says it. I don’t see the McCain/Guilliani ticket either, exactly because of the egos. I love Newt, but I am thinking maybe too much baggage, but then again, who doesn’t these days.
Glynn on January 27, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Reagan was 69 when he took office. McCain would be 72. Unlike Reagan, McCain is not a healthy older man. This is just one more reason not to vote McCain besides his maverick RINO behavior.
Valiant on January 27, 2007 at 10:30 AM
It’s that gang of 14 that put me over the edge with McCain. He’s an idiot. Trying to play nice with the democrats is like the frog letting the scorpion ride on its back across the stream – they both die.
armyvet on January 27, 2007 at 10:31 AM
I have the sneaking suspicion that becoming the chief Bush apologist was a calculated career move on Miller’s part. After MNF, things were not looking so hot for him. Well good for him, I don’t agree with his positions but there is no denying he is very talented.
honora on January 27, 2007 at 10:33 AM
honora using the old double standard again. Whenever a person makes an argument suporrting a Democrat or Liberal Left position, it’s thoughtful, insightful or bow to it, the natural order of the universe, but to support anything conservative or Republican, it’s “apologist.”
How about making the same career move statement about other media people who have moved from flaccid and decaying careers into politics, ie Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, what’s her name Galaforo – Jean something, Alex Baldwin, Barbra Streisand … hmmm the list goes on and on. People who didn’t go to college, a few who never got their high school diplomas. No one minded that they got rich acting, they needed a means to eat, be clothed and be sheltered, but why are they all suddenly pontificating on things they know nothing about? They just regurgitate without any analysis, as actors do, other peoples’ lines.
naliaka on January 27, 2007 at 11:11 AM
I think Rudy will run. I also have a suspicion that Newt is or will be involved in Rudy’s campaign somehow. Ever since I saw the WSJ op-ed co-written by Giuliani and Gingrich earlier this month, I have been wondering what’s going on there.
aero on January 27, 2007 at 11:22 AM
‘C mon honora, Just ’cause Miller has common sense it doesn’t make him an apologist for Bush. It just means he has common sense and thinks logically.
How about Gingrich/Giuliani (in that order) for ’08. We desparately need someone who can communicate well and articulate a position. We will be at war with Islam for the foreseeable future so let’s go into ’08 understanding that we’ll be choosing a wartime president. Though I believe Giuliani’s social positions make him unpalatable for CINC, I think he would be a kick@ss VP.
Mojave Mark on January 27, 2007 at 11:25 AM
…and if Rudy doesn’t run for some reason, I’ll be praying for Newt to run, cause I sure don’t want to see McCain on the ballot!
aero on January 27, 2007 at 11:25 AM
He called Edwards a “moron”.
Exactly!
SouthernGent on January 27, 2007 at 11:44 AM
Aero, is this just a continuation of our conversation over at Newsbusters.org? ;)
armyvet on January 27, 2007 at 11:46 AM
Voldermort/Romney 08!
Savage on January 27, 2007 at 11:47 AM
I MISSED CHUCK NORRIS FILLING IN FOR HANNITY!!! ARGH!!!
frankj on January 27, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Chuck Norris facts is back!! Yes!! I went there about a month ago and whoever runs the site let the license expire. I was so sad… But hes back and more superhuman than ever!
Theworldisnotenough on January 27, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Chuck Norris looked about as comfortable on H&C as my dad would be if thrown into that same situation… except my dad hasn’t been in the entertainment industry for 35 years starring in dozens of movies, over 90 episodes of his own weekly TV series, and holding his own during multiple TV interviews with everyone from Johnny Carson to Carson Daily.
But other than that–yeah, very similar backgrounds. So I can understand why Chuck (and my dad) would be so nervous and look so unnatural in that situation.
ScottMcC on January 27, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Indeed! Good morning, armyvet! Hope you’re feeling better today.
aero on January 27, 2007 at 12:27 PM
But Chuck didn’t miss you; with a roundhouse kick! Feel solice in that.
If Newt’s on the ticket, I’m happy. Not sure about Mr NAU though. Maybe Romney/Newt or vice versa. I think Guiliani will have be on it somewhere though. Guiliani/Newt seems most likely to me.
lorien1973 on January 27, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Thanks for the well-wishes. Feeling a bit better.
Morning to you too!
armyvet on January 27, 2007 at 12:29 PM
By the way, sorry for repeating myself re: Rudy/Newt (to you and others who also hang out at NB and already had this conversation), but I’m just hoping so hard that Newt will be directly involved in this presidential race that I keep trying to get someone to confirm my suspicions for me. ;-) As you know, I really want Newt to run, but I’ll be happy to see him involved in any way.
aero on January 27, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Not meaning to sound obtuse, but Tancredo is pro-NAU? I was unaware. How’d I miss that? Dang it.
armyvet on January 27, 2007 at 12:35 PM
We could start the rumor if you want…I want him to run too. I really don’t want to see him as VP. That’s a worthless position.
armyvet on January 27, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Draft Newt!
aero on January 27, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Newt is the one for me, and hell, he doesn’t have any more baggage than the Hildebeast. Probably less, but uhmmmm, there is that pesky (R) next to his name so his counts more. Compared to any of the other options at present, Tancredo looks better all the time. Newt/Tancredo, I like the sound of that one. McCain? Gulp, I’d almost vote for Edwards before him! He is NOT a member of the party I endorse, although he clims to be. Rudy, well one could talk about some real baggage there too, although I generally like him fine. But I keep hoping for an actual honest to god Conservative candidate this next go round. :)
dustoffmom on January 27, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Ease up on Chuck, People. Guest host on live television for one hour is NOT the same as staring in movies or television. It’s not even the same as being interviewed. Plus, it’s H&C, one of the most widely watched cable news programs on the tube.
Troy Rasmussen on January 27, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Agreed. There is something less than genuine about a radical Democrat who apparently converts to Republican and then endorses every Democrats’ favorite Republican for President.
Perchant on January 27, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Does anyone know why Chuck Norris was the guest host? That seems an interesting choice. How come MM didn’t get the call?
Enrique on January 27, 2007 at 12:54 PM
He’s not Pro NAU, but he believes in the conspiracy about it (or maybe he doesn’t – its hard to tell). Either way, it’s gonna kill him.
lorien1973 on January 27, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Well, who wouldn’t want Chuck Norris to represent the Non-liberal view?
[Raises hand]
Don’t get me wrong. I loved that every episode of Walker texas ranger involved a badguy being kicked through a plate-glass window.
But when it comes to the quippy-sound-byte-media, Chuck Norris is about as experienced as I am.
and that is most unfortunate.
We’ve found the only venue where a fight between Chuck Norris and Alan Colmes doesn’t end with a victory for Chuck Norris.
(But they should have taped a gag segment with Alan or a suitable faxcimile (STUNT DOUBLE!) going through plate glass.
Jones Zemkophill on January 27, 2007 at 1:07 PM
Thanks lorien. I did a quick search and found that. That could definitely hurt him!
armyvet on January 27, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Alan was on his best behavior with Chucky. ;-)
Mazztek on January 27, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Chuck is rocking a mullet, nice!
Theworldisnotenough on January 27, 2007 at 1:32 PM
If it makes you feel better, Allah, I don’t believe McCain is a liberal. I think he’s a cold, calculating SOB the likes of which is exceeded only by Shrillary.I believe that, as I said, to a lesser extent than Shrillary, everything he does is out of a cynical attempt to increase his appeal to people that wouldn’t vote for him anyway.
That’s my theory, at least. It’s the only reason I can think of why someone who’s nominally conservative would sponser a bill that is so openly contrary to the plain text of the Constitution.
Regardless, I’m with Chuck, I hope Newt runs. Call me a fool if you want, but he’s a lot better than anyone else I’ve seen.
Wolfman on January 27, 2007 at 1:38 PM
Chuck Norris subbed for Hannity? Damn I missed that.
infidel4life on January 27, 2007 at 1:41 PM
James on January 27, 2007 at 9:40 AM
honora, check out James’ link and the width of that bottom, before you bemoan the one of the young Mrs. Bush…
Entelechy on January 27, 2007 at 1:45 PM
You know what Chuck Norris’s first language is, smart guy?
DEATH.
Jim Treacher on January 27, 2007 at 1:54 PM
I tried watching H&C last night. But half way through watching Chuck flounder and present the weakest conservative arguments I’ve ever heard, I switched off the show in embarrased disgust. Shame, because then I missed Miller.
auzerais on January 27, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Hey Jones, Chuck did a TV ad for a steakhouse in Philly. He pulls up, steps out of the car and under him there’s a caption “Chuck Norris, famous Hollywood toughguy”. He says something like “Whenever I’m in Philly, I eat here.” Meanwhile, his car is blocking the door. Another car pulls up behind his and beeps the horn. Chuck says “Hey, I’m doing a commercial here!” The guy in the 2nd car steps out and under him it says “Dave Brown, famous hockey toughguy” Dave (who plays for the Flyers) grabs Chuck’s jacket and pulls it over his head like in a hockey fight and starts poundin’ on him. Pretty funny stuff. Anybody else out there from Philly remember this ad?
Tony737 on January 27, 2007 at 2:19 PM
BOOSH/Natalie Holloway ’08!
Savage on January 27, 2007 at 2:21 PM
I could hold my nose and vote for any of the GOP runners EXCEPT McCain.
I thought Miller had more sense.
LegendHasIt on January 27, 2007 at 2:29 PM
Dennis Miller is a war-time conservative. Even a dyed in the wool liberal as he was knows a modern day Democrat/Liberal can’t and shouldn’t run a war.
Sammy316 on January 27, 2007 at 2:43 PM
Still won’t vote for McCain, don’t care if he was running with Jesus Christ himself.
However Hagel is making him look like less of a RINO.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 27, 2007 at 2:57 PM
Try this one – Gingrich/Tancredo in ’08. Tancredo has the Mid West/partial West while Gingrich could have the South and enough of the big money to carry bigger states.
Tancredo seems to be a true anomoly in that he, again, seems to be genuine – hope I’m not wrong on that. Gingrich has promise if he has learned from his past indiscretions.
Emmett J. on January 27, 2007 at 3:27 PM
What he said!!!
You guys breakin bad on Chuck better watch out for the foot comin through your monitor!
As for 08, Gingrich and anyone but McCain. McCain should be no where near the ticket, and Gingrich would cause the left to go absolute bat$hit providing a great contrast of parties for Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public.
91Veteran on January 27, 2007 at 3:34 PM
This man just needs his ass kicked!
Egfrow on January 27, 2007 at 3:47 PM
Truthfully, I like Chuck better than Hannity.
Emmett J. on January 27, 2007 at 4:13 PM
Don’t say anything about Chuck that you would not say to his face. :)
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 27, 2007 at 4:20 PM
It was nice to see Dennis Miller talk without all those annoying special effects every couple of seconds.
sandberg on January 27, 2007 at 5:42 PM
So, if McCain is the rep candidate for 08 and you refuse to vote for McCain, who do you vote for?
Hillary? Obama? Edwards?
This is the same stuff I heard in 92 when conservatives wanted to “teach Bush Sr a lesson” (for raising taxes) by voting for perot. We got Clinton for 8 years.
csdeven on January 27, 2007 at 5:48 PM
It’s tough to see any hope at all when so many voters willfully support both McCain and Giuliani. Many of those supporters are the same who trash Bush for being a RINO. If you think Bush is not conservative enough … why the hell would you vote for McCain or Giuliani? Hillary might be more right than these two clowns.
But alas, fool me once … shame on me, fool me twice …
It’s almost impossible to take anyone seriously who claims these two are conservative.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 5:49 PM
Just in case anyone doesn’t get the backward “fool me” quote … click here.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 5:56 PM
You can’t be serious.
csdeven on January 27, 2007 at 6:02 PM
Totally serious. What exactly is conservative about either McCain or Giuliani. Both are pro-amnesty. Both are pro-abortion. Both are pro-same sex marriage. Both are liberals pretending to be conservative.
The only reason Giuliani has been adopted by Republicans is due to his overwhelming response after 9/11.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 6:11 PM
Funny Chuck Norris story:
My friends and I used to surf down the street from, what legend had it, was one of his houses and everytime we drove by we’d look for him.
Finally, one day as we drove by he was out in his driveway. We were shocked. My friend pulled into his driveway and rolled down his window as we asked “what are you going to say?” There was a fat, uncomfortable pause as Chuck looked at us and we looked at him.
After what seemed like a snickering eternity, my friend mustered the courage to say “KEEEYAHH!” while making a chopping motion with his hand. Chuck just laughed and shook his head as we backed out, roaring with laughter.
He’s always been an alright guy with me. It was good to see him on Hannity and Clown.
My guess is Miller didn’t mention Gingrich since he hasn’t officially formed “an exploratory committee” or announced he’s running. But Giuliani is as unacceptable as McVain, if not more so. He’s a gun-grabber and amnesty apologist. I’d only vote for him if he were VP for Gingrich.
NTWR on January 27, 2007 at 6:11 PM
Yeah, just a minor little detail like being on the right side of the single most important issue of our time.
sandberg on January 27, 2007 at 6:14 PM
So, if Ted Kennedy were to have supported the war … would that make everything else meaningless? That’s basically your point. You’re going to vote for a liberal like Giuliani because he was for the war? Go for it.
NTWR added another great point above your comment.
I really hope conservatives actually do some research into who they support before it’s time to step into the booth.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Actually, I disagree with you on the “single most important issue of our time” bit too.
I would have to say that immigration would take that prize and both McCain and Giuliani are on the WRONG side of that. Illegal immigration, excessive legal immigration, falling wages, and lack of border security will destroy this country far quicker than suicide bombings ever will.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 6:21 PM
Amen!
RobertCSampson on January 27, 2007 at 6:38 PM
I’m a little disappointed Chuck didn’t change the name of the show to Chuck. If Chuck wants to know what time it is he won’t consult his watch he’lltell us what time it is. He’s right on the money with the G man, but I’m afraid he won’t run. I’m hoping he keeps polling high so that he will almost have to enter the race. I can go with Rudy, but not McCain. I prefer the G man so I’ll have to see come next year at this time…..
ritethinker on January 27, 2007 at 6:53 PM
I absolutely will not vote for McCain due to his stance on illegal immigration. Please, everybody jump on the Gingrich bandwagon and help my home state remove the memory of the last president that we inflicted on this nation!
dawgyear on January 27, 2007 at 6:55 PM
No, but if he were running against an anti-war Republican, I’d plug my nose and vote for him if I had to.
I figured you would. From Asia to Africa to Europe, a world war is brewing, and you think our biggest problem is the Mexicans.
sandberg on January 27, 2007 at 8:05 PM
I’ve been on the Gingrich bandwagon since about 2002. I think the best possible ticket would be Gingrich/Giuliani I nice rounded out ticket, Newt to lead and Rudy to carry a few states like New York. (Though I would really rather see Steele in the Veep spot)
- The Cat
MirCat on January 27, 2007 at 8:23 PM
LOL! Hmmm … now THAT’S an ugly choice to have to make. Let’s just hope we’ll all do our job in the primaries and not have to ever make a choice like that.
Yeah, it seems unbelievable to me too. It’s hard to imagine something being worse than a pending world war, but I believe that’s what we have. I look at it this way. If we don’t do something about border security, if we don’t do something to stop illegal immigration, if we don’t do something to lower the rate of legal immigration, and if we don’t find a way to eliminate the agenda of groups such as La Raza, Mecha, and Mexican mafia/gangs … anything that happens OUTSIDE our border will be completely meaningless.
The truth is, that terrorism is not a major threat to this country unless we allow them through our front door. If we were more cautious about who we let into the country, 9/11 would never have happened.
Here’s a bit of irony. We’re currently having trouble controlling Iraq because we’re unable to tell the difference between our enemy and our friends. We can’t tell the difference between good Iraqi police and bad Iraqi police. We can’t tell the difference between good Iraqi leaders and bad Iraqi leaders. And we can’t tell the difference between good Iraqi civilians and bad Iraqi civilians. BUT … our leaders are actually considering giving refugee status to up to 1 million Iraqis and bringing them into the U.S.
So, we can’t tell the difference over in Iraq, but we’re going to ignore that and bring over 1 million of them to live and roam our streets? To sell us our food via fast food chains and mini-markets? To sit in the classrooms next to our own children?
Yeah. That will work out wonderful.
Can’t we just send over all the liberal to live there instead? Don’t they have all the answers? Let John Kerry move to Iraq and things ought to be beautiful over there in six short months.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 8:38 PM
I like your thinking on that. Sounds good to me. I’d prefer Steele over Rudy though, because I think Steele would bring in more votes than Rudy and he’s a legitimate conservative.
Let’s hope it works out in the primaries. I like Newt too.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 8:42 PM
I’m still waiting for a republician with set of brass balls!! (Can I write balls or will it bleeped out?) Someone who can put us back on the path to what this great country was founded on and not afraid to tell the politically correct police and the “main stream media” to get bent.
ChrisIansNana on January 27, 2007 at 9:42 PM
Giuliani is not a liberal. You need to really understand NYC and Giuliani’s terms to see that he wasn’t.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_1_rudy_giuliani.html
Vincenzo on January 27, 2007 at 10:12 PM
So, other than militarily … how else is Giuliani conservative?
Pro gun control.
Pro amnesty.
Pro abortion.
Pro same sex marriage.
I think that pretty much covers the four most important topics for conservatives.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 10:24 PM
You really can’t appreciate his conservativity(is that a word?) unless you see it applied.
Here’s another nice post…
http://www.ocala.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070122/OPINION/201220328/1030/OPINION01
Unfortunately, Giuliani’s conservative actions don’t get press, becuase it doesn’t serve the liberal media to make Giuliani more attractive to the conservatives in America.
Ask any New Yorker on the street that lived through Giuliani’s reign in NYC, and wether they like him or not, they will tell you he’s no liberal.
Vincenzo on January 27, 2007 at 10:43 PM
Gregor,
I think the spam watch grabbed my last post in response to yours. Please read this article:
http://www.ocala.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070122/OPINION/201220328/1030/OPINION01
Vincenzo on January 27, 2007 at 10:44 PM
The idea of a McCain / Giuliani ticket makes me want to look for a third party, especially McCain. Vincenzo’s comments about how Rudy refused to meet with Sharpton and other black activests reminds me of how Bush refused to meet with the NAACP which made the conservative black vote distance themselves from the GOP. Nope, we need Newt and a new conservative contract with America to turn things around.
The entire tone of the upcoming election needs changed from Iraq to illegal immigration and national security where well over 80% of all voters support drastic changes to our present stuck on stupid agenda (from both parties). The GOP needs to define itself once again as a conservative inclusive party and a Gingrich / Tancredo ticket would please me greatly, but politics being what they are if Rudy could swing NY votes a Gingrich / Giuliani ticket (in that order) wouldn’t upset me too much.
Buzzy on January 27, 2007 at 10:45 PM
Vincenzo, the linky you posted said “His Bush-like immigration proposals are no more liberal than the president’s“.
Forget what I said about Giuliani, it’s a Gingrich / Tancredo dream ticket for me.
Buzzy on January 27, 2007 at 10:49 PM
To me, that sounds like political babble. The fact remains that he stands on the left of every major conservative issue and that is not a misconception. Saying you have to see his politics applied to appreciate it is pretty much the same as saying “trust me and ignore what you see.”
Yeah, that’s what scares me. Are you referring to the same city which elected Hillary to two consecutive terms? The same city which voted for John Kerry for President in 2004? Are you aware that Kerry won New York City by an overwhelming 73.82% to 22.76%? NYC WAS ground zero, right?
You’re asking us to base our opinion of Giuliani’s conservatism by asking NYC voters if they like him?
Maybe he should run for the Democratic nomination.
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 11:13 PM
Newt/Steele that’s a ticket I’d like to see! I might like a Newt/Tancredo, or maybe a Romney (uncertain.)
Themes I want to hear: control our borders, or what is now an “outside” war will be “inside” eventually; pro-life is a basic; fight the war to win (GWOT including Iraq). There are other issues, but these are most pressing/basic.
BTW: MSM coverage on war protests in D.C. even now, but did not hear a word about pro-lifers on Monday.
No MSM bias, right. /sarc
IrishEyes on January 27, 2007 at 11:14 PM
Just why is Hillary more conservative?
We are never going to get a 100% conservative candidate elected in a general election. Conservatives have to speak to the center on certain issues. Immigration etc are those issues that if a hard conservative line is held, we might as well mail the election to the socialist democrats. I believe the challenge of our times is the war on extremists. Both Rudy and McCain are very conservative on that issue. It’d be nice to have Newt, but in the absence of him, ANY conservative who will fight the war on terror is better than ANY liberal.
csdeven on January 27, 2007 at 11:21 PM
When I look at the important issues and the next 4 to 8 years I’m looking at economics, security, and our Constitutional Rights(in no particular order).
While Giuliani perhaps agrees with pro-choice side, is that really going to be a pressing issue form the executive office in the next four years? Probably not. I would, however, need Mayor Giuliani to make a firmer stance on where he stands with stem cells.
He also needs to state his clear stance on immigration. Not a quote from his time as mayor, but his stance from a national standpoint. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that Giuliani will look at it from a secuirty standpoint and say our borders need to be secured.
Another touchy topic is gun control, and once again I’ll be looking to the Mayor to state that while Mayor, it was his job to keep his streets safe, which he did, and did it incredibly well. He will state that from a Federal standpoint though, he honors the right to bear arms. He will say that mayors have the right to add more stringent controls in cities, due to population and crime.
Where I really expect Giuliani to shine though, with middle grounders AND conservatives, is affirmative action and welfare. As mayor of NYC, Giuliani got rid of SO MANY affirmative action laws that actually hindered minorities. He leveled the playing fields, and pushed for equal treatment of all citizens. Giuliani is not afraid to tackle these issues, and this is one of the most pressing social issues I think America faces outside of terrorism. We need a man who is not afraid to say that people don’t get special treatment becuase of the color of their skin or their sexual preference.
Just some thoughts, its getting late…
Vincenzo on January 27, 2007 at 11:43 PM
I would agree that he’s not as left as Hillary, but honestly I don’t think by much. I’ve already pointed out the reasons for that in previous posts above.
So how did Reagan win? How did Bush win by pretending to be 100% conservative? He certainly didn’t campaign toward the middle. I realize Bush is a RINO, but that’s not how he ran. He ran as a Reagan conservative and it wasn’t until after he won that he proceeded to unmask.
I totally disagree. How is that possibly true when 85% of the population wants secure borders and no amnesty?
I think Giuliani talks a good game when it comes to the war, but how exactly do you list McCain as conservative on that issue? He’s blasted Bush consistently for the last four years on war issues. For God’s sake … he doesn’t think there’s ever a reason to torture the enemy! And we’re going to vote for this guy?
I agree with that one as long as they also stand on immigration enforcement. There are three solid candidates. Newt, Tancredo, and Steele. I prefer them in that order.
All are 100% conservative, so why even discuss the fakes?
Gregor on January 27, 2007 at 11:49 PM
You made some good points, Vincenzo, and don’t let the Lack of Appreciation deter you. It’s up to Guiliani to “re-define” himself in a national context. The media loves re-definition, and for a while they will love Rudy enough to give him a platform. If he can make the case for himself as a ‘practical’ conservative and maybe wiggle to the right, he might convince enough people.
Or not
It’s going to be an interesting two years…
Janos Hunyadi on January 28, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Economics: There’s no greater topic impacting economics today than immigration. Illegal immigration is destroying us. Giuliani is for Bush’s comprehensive reform package which is AMNESTY.
Via Wikipedia:
Giuliani has been criticized for embracing illegal immigration. Giuliani continued a policy of preventing city employees from contacting INS about immigration violations. He ordered city attorneys to defend this policy in federal court.[11] Giuliani has also expressed doubt that the federal government can stop illegal immigration.[12] In April 2006, Giuliani went on the record as favoring the US Senate’s comprehensive immigration plan which includes a path to citizenship and a guest worker plan. He rejected the US House approach because he does not think House Resolution 4437 could be enforced.
Security: Again, border security and immigration issues. Overstayed visas, illegals, and no fence. Giuliani is on the wrong side of all three. I would challenge anyone to show me a single quote from Giuliani that indicates he’s going to enforce immigration laws. And I’m referring to the laws PRIOR to the amnesty going into effect.
For Christian conservatives? Hell yes. Good luck winning without it. And by the way … Giuliani is not just pro-choice. He favors partial-birth abortions!
“I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights,” Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. “No, I have not supported that, and I don’t see my position on that changing,” he responded.
Source: CNN.com, “Inside Politics” Dec 2, 1999
A “firmer stance?” He’s already made his stance public. What you’re really asking then, is for him to change his stance to get elected. Maybe lie a little? And then, after the election he can go back to what he really believes?
He’s had many interviews. He’s been on Fox many times. He’s been interviewed by Hannity and O’Reilly. He’s made his stance clear on immigration. He’ll say that the border needs to be secure, but like Bush … it will never happen because his over-all views on immigration is open borders. He has never tried to hide that. His record as mayor is exactly what we need to go on. Not what he says while trying to win the Presidency.
In case anyone isn’t aware, which I doubt … NYC violated the Constitution and made it illegal for residents to own handguns. In 2000, Giuliani actually filed a lawsuit against two dozen gun manufacturers attempting to hold them liable for crimes involving guns!
And you’re going to say that Giuliani is somehow going to tell the American people that he honors the right to bear arms? Really? Seriously?
Come on people! Please!
Gregor on January 28, 2007 at 12:27 AM
Okay, Gregor, because you said “please”:
You don’t get to pick the Best Possible Candidate in politics; you pick someone who can win
If only Rudy can defeat Hillary–if The Choice for President is either Guiliani or Hillary–does Rudy seem better now?
If I had a choice between a yellow ‘rat’ snake and Hillary Clinton, then……………”Rat Snake in 08″ it is
Janos Hunyadi on January 28, 2007 at 12:41 AM
Of course. If it’s between Giuliani and Hillary there’s no doubt I go with Rudy. But I’m just not understanding why it would come to that. I’m lost on why conservatives so pissed off at the RINOs would be campaigning for a candidate who is even further left than those they’re already complaining about.
Why is there even a discussion? Why are we even considering it when we have several true conservatives available?
Gregor on January 28, 2007 at 12:44 AM
Because, my friend, for reasons I do not fully understand, the American people seem willing to elect that MadWoman–and ignore all the sick, evil garbage that she’ll take into power with her. She–and That–must be stopped.
Me myself, I would give anything ( okay, almost anything ) to see Newt sworn in as Prez. But the media combined with some of what Newt has done and said have made that impossible
Me myself, I think Jeb should run and could win, but won’t run….
Janos Hunyadi on January 28, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Take this for what it’s worth:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19019
Vincenzo on January 28, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Grazie, Vincenzo, mille grazie
Guiliani is a decent man and his decency is apparent. With undecided / independent / swing voters ( the names change with the times, but a large chunk of voters know little about issues and often don’t vote ), a decent and capable man, despite his flaws, is a very attractive thing to vote for. Politics is, in the end ( and yes, in politics the end does justify most of the means ) about winning elections SO THAT ONE CAN EXERCISE POWER. Rudy could win; Rudy ( I hope and beliebve ) would govern as at least as much of a conervative as Bush is / was; Rudy would make America better rather than worse
With him, at least I don’t have to support the rat snake…
Janos Hunyadi on January 28, 2007 at 1:02 AM
One thing is pretty certain…
If there isn’t a real conservative in the White House in 2008, the tax cuts go bye – bye in 2010; we’ll be out of Iraq, win or lose — most likely, lose, Vietnam style (it’ll look like defeat, walk like defeat, and smell like defeat, but we’ll call it victory [!]); and we’ll be stuck in the center for 8 – 12 years as we drift slowly leftward.
Frank_D on January 28, 2007 at 2:07 AM
I hope the rest of my fellow conservatives wouldn’t mind a reformation of a “Roman Empire” here in America.
President:Rudy Giuliani
Speak of the House: Nancy Pelosi
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: Peter Pace
Two SCOTUS Justices
I can go on… but my people are starting to make it Italian top heavy in DC.
Vincenzo on January 28, 2007 at 2:34 AM
Every conservative in the nation, whether they identify as Republican, Independent, or other, needs to spread the word that the time for RINO-style compromise must end. People must vote their conscience for a change, instead of accepting a Guiliani or a Romney. Arnold Schwarzenegger is more conservative than either, and he’s barely a Republican even in name. Guiliani was a great prosecutor, and he was a terrific mayor. But national policy, no thanks. Attorney General is his spot.
Rudy is on the wrong side of the 2nd, 10th, and 14th amendments just for starters. He would amount to more of the same regarding illegal immigration, and he admits not being an economics type, so it would be determined by who he hires as advisers where that issue goes. Embryonic medical research, gun control, abortion, GLBT privileges…
Gingrich is clearly capable and respects the Constitution. But if he runs will we see the “Gingrich who stole Christmas” headlines again? He was the target of a thousand declarations of “mean-spirited” in 1994, and I don’t see the attacks lessening. I’d vote for him. I’d vote for anyone who places the rule of law above any other agenda, and who has a passion for the sovereignty of this nation. So far the only one who talks like that is Tancredo.
Freelancer on January 28, 2007 at 4:06 AM
Steele / Gingrich.
Coronagold on January 28, 2007 at 11:01 AM
Bush Sr. raised taxes and pulled out of Iraq too soon. Except for the Bj’s, I don’t see how a second 4 years of him would have produced Nirvana. If you want to piss your vote away and vote for McCain, go right ahead. Except for being male, and having an R next to his name, I doubt Mr Amnesty, Mr Kyoto, Mr Terrorists must have their civil rights, is going to be much different than Hillary in how he wrecks this country. McCain-Feingold ring a bell? This guy doesn’t like free speech, especially if its critical of him, he says you’re a racist if you’re in favor of border control; WTF is the difference between him and Hillary? Nothing significant. I accept that our system is broken and we are stuck with feckless weasels on both sides. I accept that a majority of the American populace is willfully ignorant and unserious and that my vote is cancelled several hundred times over. Bearing that in mind, I accept that whoever we elect in 08 from the front runners is going to leave this country unrecognizable from when I was a child. I’m not going to vote for someone who is going to do that just because he has an R next to his name. In my mind, McCain is the greater evil, because he cloaks his true colors behind red meat rhetoric. But look at his actions and positions he supports; he is no better than Hillary. So, I’ll sit this one out, and we’ll get the government we deserve. No matter who wins.
austinnelly on January 28, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Stop it, Jammie. Squirted half a beer out my nose over that one.
BacaDog on January 28, 2007 at 12:06 PM
McCain will NOT be the Republican candidate. He would have better luck running for the Democratic nomination.
Gregor on January 28, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »