The Republican party, as any other, will endorse whatever wins them elections and is overall good for business – relative morality and siutational ethics, you know.

Emmett J. on February 6, 2007 at 9:45 PM

And a good Rx for survival. Or go the way of the Green Party and wallow in futile purity.

Assuming he favors a vigourous prosecution of the war against islamic fascism, then I would probably be with him on that issue, and it’s issue #1. However, the border is issue 1A, because it is directly tied to national security – something Bush has missed by a mile, something McVain misses by a mile, and something I suspect Rudy misses by a mile.

That being said, we’ll have to wait if his national security polices are what I would assume them to be.

thirteen28 on February 6, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Agree (this is getting scary). IMO opinion, and again, I like Rudy, a lot of people are getting all starry eyed and confusing Rudy’s stand-up performance post 9/11 with somehow being tough on terrorism.

I believe it illustrated a supererior leadership style and a great understanding of how to get stuff done (which is a rare skill!!); but national security bona fides? Hardly. Think of it this way: had the WTC gone down by way of a couple of meteors, 99% of Rudy’s actions would have been exactly the same as they were.

Mass wishful thinking.

Ummm…How can Giuliani be officially endorsed by the GOP (should he become the presumptive nominee) when the Republican Party platform specifically does not endorse abortion?

Since Rudy is pro-chioce…

JetBoy on February 5, 2007 at 11:22 PM

The Republican party, as any other, will endorse whatever wins them elections and is overall good for business – relative morality and siutational ethics, you know.

He raises an essential question for conservatives (one that I, frankly, think pro-life conservatives tend to dodge, and which by its blaring omission in discussions about abortion tends to discredit or weaken pro-life arguments, unfortunately) which is: do we plan to put women in jail for having abortions? If not, what other punishment for this kind of murder would be appropriate? I read a whole lot, but I just don’t see conservatives talking about this, even though, it would seem to be the center of the issue. No?

Anyway, I bet al-Qaeda is thinking right now that Rudy is their worst nightmare.

I like Rudy myself, but let me ask: what national security bona fides?

honora on February 6, 2007 at 1:39 PM

Assuming he favors a vigourous prosecution of the war against islamic fascism, then I would probably be with him on that issue, and it’s issue #1. However, the border is issue 1A, because it is directly tied to national security – something Bush has missed by a mile, something McVain misses by a mile, and something I suspect Rudy misses by a mile.

That being said, we’ll have to wait if his national security polices are what I would assume them to be.

This is precisely the problem that Bush had with the Miers nomination. He wants to appeal to conservatives but he does not have a clear idea about what conservatives find appealing or, more importantly, why. Similar remarks could be made about his views on gun control and imigration.

- How many could overlook Mr. McCain’s rightie transgressions and still vote for him – 25%
- How many could overlook Mr. Giuliani’s (honora listed them all) – 75%

Not good news for Mr. McCain.

Rudy’s weakness on the border undermine his national security bona fides.

thirteen28 on February 6, 2007 at 11:45 AM

I like Rudy myself, but let me ask: what national security bona fides?

No doublespeak on the Left. Oh, no, none, whatever!

Entelechy on February 6, 2007 at 1:22 PM

“Politicians” would include left, right and center. Chill.

Which is doublespeak for amnesty of course. Politicians, oy.

honora on February 6, 2007 at 10:02 AM

No doublespeak on the Left. Oh, no, none, whatever!

He really ticked me off when he said he didn’t think women should go to jail for abortion. Who has EVER said they should??? Certaintly no pro-lifer that I know of.

Bottom line….I can’t imagine Rudy getting through the primaries. Arguing about how social conservatives should just give up their passionate beliefs here isn’t going to change that, just like asking some of you to give up being mad at McCain for the McCain Feingold stuff.

It comes down to this. No matter who gets the nomination, Rudy or McCain (if it is one of them).. the other side of the Republican party is going to have to bite the bullet and vote for someone they are not fond of. That’s it.

- The Cat

Hannity asked about immigration and “amnesty”. Rudy says no, no, no, he does not favor “amnesty”, he favors “earned citizenship” and “regularizing”. Which is doublespeak for amnesty of course. Politicians, oy.

honora on February 6, 2007 at 10:02 AM

For a rare change, I completely agree with you.

Oh, and for those doing the math:

High Tech Fence = no fence + no enforcement

Rudy’s weakness on the border undermine his national security bona fides.

A. Rudy is pro-choice (to an extent), pro-gun control (in big city urban war zones), and pro gay civil unions – not gay marriage.

or…

B. Rudy is a tough, sharp born leader who will be a strong warrior against the Islamofascist threat. I live in the NYC area and he turned that decaying slum into Disneyland.

If all you care about is A, than you cannot see the big picture. The war is the only thing that matters now. Our survival is on the line. Rudy can lead us to Victory. Hillary will lead us to Ruin.

Besides we can at least count on McCain not bad mouthing you, before he kisses arse to you two faced BS ala Bob Jones….

Ed Koch would say something like, “Here are 12 things I believe. If you agree with me on 9 of them, vote for me. If you agree with me on all 12, get help.” I have to agree here. We’re all looking for the next Reagan. We need to give up that fruitless pursuit! Ronald Reagan was one of a kind, and anyone who tries to be like Reagan is going to fail… because Reagan was being himself.

I do not agree with Guiliani on absolutely everything he says. Then again, do we agree with our current president in such a way?!? I appreciate that I can know exactly where he stands; he was leveling with us. In the end, surely intellectual and personal honesty will win the day over quibbles with one or two issues that he wouldn’t have the power to change anyway. I agree outright with probably 80% of what he said, and he framed that other 20% in a way that I can respect if not join in agreement. Such honesty, integrity, real understanding of his own beliefs on the issues, and his candor in sharing them would make Rudy a far better leader and statesman than anyone we’ve had since Reagan.

Put this man next to Hillary, and such qualities will speak volumes. Rudy has got to be Hillary’s worst nightmare. He has the brains and the, uh, cajones necessary to be our next leader, and he has proven experience of results from leading 8 million people for 8 years to show that he is not an empty suit. I’m not saying I’m definitely voting for Rudy; I will wait to see the list of all the candidates and where they all stand. Having said that, he is the only announced Republican or anything else who makes me excited for our future, and, for me not to vote for him, somebody even more incredible will have to come along.

He and Mitt are both coming across as RINOS to gun owners/enthusiasts and folks are talking about NOT holding their noses and voting for an anti-gun Republican in the general election just because they are Republicans. Just another part of the conservative base left out in the cold again……they do it at their peril.

In case anybody needs to be reminded, the REPUBLICANS gained control of Congress in 1994 because of gun owners who got very pissed when the Brady bill and the Assault weapon “ban” were passed in 1994. Clinton himself acknowledged it.

The 4 or 5 million NRA owners, the 750,000 or so GOA members (some of whom overlap) and the 90 million gun owners that they represent ENDED 44 years of Democratic Party control of congress.

Unless Rudy come right out and says that he WILL NOT SIGN any gun control legislation that crosses his desk, he will NOT get the support of gun owners, and therefore, probably NOT the nomination.

Somebody get to Rudy and tell him this….

right2bright

I know what you’re saying & thats why Ive voted in the last few elections but no more.

Something is happening in this country thats different than before. I actually heard people in my doctor’s office Friday talking about how our government is turning against its own people & they are waiting for another civil war. These werent right/left wing nuts either, these are professional people. I had a neighbor in November who moved outside the Dallas/Ft Worth Metro so he could be in a “safer place once the shooting starts”. This guy is just some computer programmer who doesnt even pay that much attention to politics.

Things are different now. There are some core issues I will no longer compromise on. Our country’s sovereignty is one of them. No waffling will be tolerated, ever.

Can anyone name a supreme court justice that the present or former POTUS has had confirmed that has had a drastic affect on our personal lives?

Can anyone name a foriegn policy decision a present or former POTUS has implemented that has had a drastic affect on our lives?

Abortion rights were given to women by activist judges. The AWB was passed through the votes of 535 locally elected congress persons. The same sex marriage issue will fought in local politics and if that fails, the gays will try to get it passed through activst judges.

Think about it people. If if comes down to a RINO whose is electable and a third party candidtae who is not, if you choose to make a “statement” with your vote, we’ll be living with Hillary Clinton for the next 8 years and everyone of your social issues WILL COME UNDER ATTACK and you’ll be hating life. If you win the battle and “teach the conservatives a lesson” by rejecting their nomination, you’ll lose the war You’ll be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The AWB was passed under Clinton. Clinton nominate Ginsburg, Breyer, and a host of liberal judges to the lower courts.

Foriegn policy and court appointments are the real power that the president has that affects our lives.