Video: Rudy on non-binding resolutions

posted at 11:27 pm on February 14, 2007 by Ian


Presidential candidate Mayor Rudy Giuliani was on Larry King Live earlier this evening and had this to say about non-binding resolutions:

GIULIANI: I mean, you can look at the practical and common sense conclusion on that anyway you want. But there’s something more important than that. We have a right of free speech in this country and we elect people to make decisions. Here’s what I would prefer to see them do, though, if you ask me what’s my view on that. The nonbinding resolution thing gets me more than are you for it or against it. I have tremendous respect for the people who feel that we either made a mistake going to war, who voted against the war, who now have come to the conclusion, changed their minds, they have every right to that, that it’s wrong, you should, in a dynamic situation, keep questioning. What I don’t like is the idea of a nonbinding resolution.

KING: Because?

GIULIANI: Because there’s no decision.

KING: But it’s a statement.

GIULIANI: Yes, but that’s what you do. That’s what Tim Russert does and that’s what Rush Limbaugh does. That’s what you guys do, you make comments. We pay them to make decisions, not just to make comments. We pay them to decide. The United States Congress does declarations, the war…

KING: So if you feel that way, withhold funds and that’s the way you feel?

GIULIANI: The ones I think have a better understanding of what their responsibility is and are willing to take a risk are the ones who are saying we’ve got to hold back the funds, we’ve got to vote against the war or we’re for the war. And maybe it’s because I ran a government and I tend to be a decisive person. I like decisions. And I think one of the things wrong with Washington is they don’t want to make tough decisions anymore. Nonbinding resolution about Iraq, no decision on immigration, no decision on Social Security reform, no decision on what to do about energy independence, no decision. You know why that happens? Because it’s unpopular.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Truer words were never spoken.

As I wrote about Dennis Miller, what Dennis did WAS a “Binding Resolution”.

If you don’t like it, stand up, say “I don’t like it and I’m going to fight it till my last breath”.

All they’re doing is holding up a sign that says “Get our Troops out of Iraq” as if they’re at a football game

Decide ladies and gentlemen of the Congress & Senate

HarryStar on February 14, 2007 at 11:31 PM

Oh…Now IF he was against illegal immigration undocumented workers guest worker program working towards citizenship AMNESTY, he’d have my vote too!

HarryStar on February 14, 2007 at 11:39 PM

The democrats:

From:
One man with courage makes a majority.

To:
A bunch of men with no courage makes a non-binding resolution.

lorien1973 on February 14, 2007 at 11:40 PM

make not makes. Egad.

lorien1973 on February 14, 2007 at 11:40 PM

I like Rudy. If he’s the choice I’ll vote for him. However, I wish he’d answered that question a little better. I would have liked for him to have been firmer on “non-binding resolutions” altogether. It’s like the politician in him was coming out to not offend. At this point in time, I want something firmer from a potential POTUS. His opinion on non-binding resolutions isn’t enough. I want to know what he, as POTUS, would do to drive issues to resolution.

thedecider on February 14, 2007 at 11:54 PM

Would have been better if he’d stated the obvious, that anyone supporting a nonbinding resolution is tantamount to a traitor. Yeah, I said it. What does a nonbinding resolution do? It emboldens the enemy, and that’s it. I’m not calling them traitors, I’m saying what they are doing is tantamount, because the end result is the same. The left and media has been aiding the enemy since a few months in and this is nothing new, just the recent full court press. They love power and hate the President above anything else, and not one of them gives to sh**s about what happens to any of us, so long as they can win an election. The Democrats in this country are a disgrace.

RightWinged on February 14, 2007 at 11:55 PM

Oh, and in the words of Sharon Stone: “You naughty, nasty little Germans”

I know that doesn’t have anything to do with this, but I’ve been dying to say it.

RightWinged on February 14, 2007 at 11:56 PM

The Democrats are like back-seat drivers. Comes a fork in the road, the back-seat driver doesn’t have to make a decision, but the driver had darn well better. Then if he went right, the back-seat driver can say, “You should have gone left.” This non-binding resolution is just back-seat driving, and that’s as plain as the nose on your face.

Once Jack Dempsey showed up for a photo-op on a Depression era job-site in coveralls. He was holding a jack-hammer, but had shiny street shoes on–he got crucified for wearing those street shoes. In those times no one would have dared put something forward like this wimpy non-binding resolution. But around ten years later, they also won WWII. I hope when these chickensh*t Democrats finish selling us down the river, and the emboldened Islamofascists start with the suicide bombings once a week over here, that there are still a few people left with the starch to go after them.

smellthecoffee on February 15, 2007 at 12:11 AM

Whaddya mean he can’t root for the Yankees? If you can’t stand up for your side a President, what good are you?

Iblis on February 15, 2007 at 12:14 AM

GIULIANI: Because there’s no decision.
KING: But it’s a statement.
GIULIANI: Yes, but that’s what you do. That’s what Tim Russert does and that’s what Rush Limbaugh does. That’s what you guys do, you make comments. We pay them to make decisions, not just to make comments. We pay them to decide. The United States Congress does declarations, the war…
KING: So if you feel that way, withhold funds and that’s the way you feel?

It’s called doing what the people elected you to do, Lar. The Dems obviously just want to make Bush look as stupid as possible – that’s their only goal. Where are the investigations, the hearings, the “binding resolutions”, and everything else the leftists have been crying about the last few years??

Rick on February 15, 2007 at 12:17 AM

I’ve been thinking much the same thing, apparently the Democrats support the war in Iraq because they refuse to do anything about it. They hold the purse strings, they can shut it down. They want to act like they’re against it, talk like they’re against it and apparently a NON binding resolution is able to fool the independant thought impaired far left who believes everything Hillary and Obama dribble out for them.

Buzzy on February 15, 2007 at 12:25 AM

Buzzy on February 15, 2007 at 12:25 AM

Good observations Buzzy. The dems are hoping to win the White House in ’08, and therefore, do not want to define a strategy before then. Until then, we can expect them to be all waffles, and no substance.

thedecider on February 15, 2007 at 12:32 AM

Yeah, whatever.

He can take his silly Global Warming bullshit and run on that. Now that the Dems have figured out that they don’t like Hillary, Obama is not just an empty suit, but a stupid empty suit, and Edwards has all the judgement of a cowboy in a whorehouse on payday…well, maybe they’ll nominate Rudy.

Jaibones on February 15, 2007 at 12:32 AM

Dang Rudy is starting to grow on me.

Theworldisnotenough on February 15, 2007 at 12:39 AM

I know Rudy is a tough sell to alot of you, but please read this over a few times. This is what I’ve been saying about Rudy for weeks here. He’s a man of action. A man of decision. A man of his beliefs.

Now I know he’s not a complete Conservative. But dog gonnit, he’s a true leader that would make us proud to be Americans.

Vincenzo on February 15, 2007 at 12:44 AM

Vincenzo on February 15, 2007 at 12:44 AM

Good point, Vincenzo. Barring a Newt comeback, I’m seeing a Rudy nomination as well. So far, I’m not impressed by the other potential candidates.

thedecider on February 15, 2007 at 12:48 AM

Rudy is the candidate that we need to nominate.

Otherwise Clinton/Barack for the next 8 years.

Make no mistake, Rudy is the best candidate and he will take New York away from Hillary. No Democrat can win the White House without New York. Period.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 15, 2007 at 12:49 AM

Rudy is a smart, likeable guy. He has a refreshing ability to put things in a perspective people can understand without coming across mean-spirited. I’m more conservative than he is, but I would feel a whole lot safer with him in charge than a lot of the other candidates.

Texas Mike on February 15, 2007 at 1:00 AM

The dems are hoping to win the White House in ‘08, and therefore, do not want to define a strategy before then.
thedecider on February 15, 2007 at 12:32 AM

It worked in ’06, unfortunately.

forged rite on February 15, 2007 at 1:16 AM

Rudy’s stock is rising. He gets it.

techno_barbarian on February 15, 2007 at 1:17 AM

I like decisions. And I think one of the things wrong with Washington is they don’t want to make tough decisions anymore.

Except for President George W. Bush.

BTW….

Oh, and in the words of Sharon Stone: “You naughty, nasty little Germans”

I know that doesn’t have anything to do with this, but I’ve been dying to say it.

RightWinged on February 14, 2007 at 11:56 PM

You crack me up, thanks…..

PinkyBigglesworth on February 15, 2007 at 1:20 AM

Brilliant! This is why I love this leader. He nailed it. He says “I’m going to fu*k this chicken and you hold the legs”. He makes a decision based on the facts and reality at hand an deals with the benefits or consequences. He’s my choice for 2008.

x95b10 on February 15, 2007 at 1:49 AM

x95b10 on February 15, 2007 at 1:49 AM

Don’t think I have ever heard him say that. Not sure even how it relates to how you described him making decisions based on the facts . . .

Otherwise though, I don’t see any other stronger candidates.

iNeXuS on February 15, 2007 at 4:23 AM

This is only half the answer that is needed to the question, but Rudy is just enough of a politician to avoid telling the WHOLE truth.

He is absolutely correct that a non-binding resolution is a non-decision made by people paid to make decisions. But without dialing into the WHY, you don’t have a picture, you have a silhouette.

Congress is full of such cowards, they will avoid any decision that carries a political risk. They want to be able to take credit that they were right, whether we do well or badly, and they want to make the President look wrong whether we do well or badly.

Congressman: I’m against our military actions in Iraq.
Citizen: You already voted to give the President full authority to conduct it how he sees fit.
Congressman: But that was all based on lies.
Citizen: Then act upon your conscience, and defund it.
Congressman: But that will make me look like I don’t support our military.
Citizen: Do you have a conviction about your opinion or not?
Congressman: Of course I do.
Citizen: Then why are you not acting upon your convictions?
Congressman: I am, that’s what the non-binding resolution is, a statement of our convictions that the President is wrong.
Citizen: If you are convinced he’s wrong, stop him, it’s your obligation of office, your authority of checks on power of the executive branch.
Congressman: I CAN’T DO THAT! WHAT IF WE WIN? WHAT IF I’M WRONG?!

Rudy is right, that a non-binding resolution has no real value. But he’s not so much different of a politician as to actually explain why they do such useless things, instead of simply painting the cowards as political Larry Kings. Ask Newt about it. Ask Rick Santorum about it. Ask Michael Steele about it. Ask Tom Tancredo about it. Ask Duncan Hunter about it. Ask John Culberson about it. You’ll get a more complete answer, I guarantee it.

Freelancer on February 15, 2007 at 5:44 AM

That’s it, now it is war. Calling democrats decision making the same as Rush’s commentary. Rudy has crossed the line.
Everytime a liberal makes a non-binding res. we call him a “ditto head”.

right2bright on February 15, 2007 at 7:52 AM

Rudy is more of a Libertarian than a Republican.

That’s why he’s my candidate and you can’t have him.

Nah-Nah.

“I got money and guns. Who the hell cares what they put in their salad in San Francisco??”

Ringmaster on February 15, 2007 at 8:01 AM

What is a non-binding resolution anyways? It’s nothing more than a press release issued to the President.

“We, the members of Congress, have resolved to say that we oppose this issue. We, the members of Congress, do not wish to change this issue for then we would not have anything to oppose. We, the members of Congress just want to say something. We, the members of Congress have spoken!”

This is an emotional outburst wrapped in the legitimacy of parliamentary procedure.

RedinBlueCounty on February 15, 2007 at 8:02 AM

What is a non-binding resolution anyways?

It is called ‘Don’t just do something, Stand there’.

As a taxpayer I am pissed these people I pay to run the government are just running their mouths. But then again, the less they do the better off we are.

I wish I could get away with doing nothing but ‘pass non-binding resolutions’ on my job.

Wade on February 15, 2007 at 8:18 AM

Wade: Don’t insult Calvin Coolidge! He was right, and the most appropriate action for the government usually is to do nothing. A non-binding resolution is worse than nothing, since it appears to be nothing but acts to reduce our morale and increase that of our enemies. If the Dems truly want to end the conflict, then take a stand rather than window dressing without substance.

libertarianuberalles on February 15, 2007 at 8:43 AM

If the Dems truly want to end the conflict

They don’t want to end the conflict as it is too useful of a tool to help dismantle the public’s confidence in this Administration and they will use that tool every chance they can, just like they did with Vietnam and the Nixon administration.

RedinBlueCounty on February 15, 2007 at 9:31 AM

Looks like Rudy is the best bet. For those people who wont vote for him because they don’t like his position on abortion, immigration, or gun control, well, you have to ask yourself this question.
“who is more apt to look at all the data and come to a solution that is best for America? Rudy or Hilary?”

Rudy may be against some of your most cherished tenents, but that does not mean he is going to outlaw guns, mandate an abortion for all 9 year old girls and up and open our borders. I truly hope that President Guiliani would look at all the data, and come to the right decision. I know that President Clinton won’t. I am caught between the knowledge that the dems will make the worst possible decisions for the country, and the Hope that Rudy can make the right decisions at the right time.
A third party candidate will not win, the ugly truth is the next president will be a dem or a rep.

To not vote for Rudy because I do not agree with some of his positions is just another way for me to do my own “non binding resolution”
I would rather be a man of action.

Course thats just my opinion.

Wyrd on February 15, 2007 at 10:24 AM

The thing you have to look at in a candidate is not his beliefs but who he is. Rudy, like my Fmr. Gov (Ehrlich), is extremely candid. He doesn’t BS, he comes right out and says what he thinks and doesn’t care what people think of him. That’s what I don’t really like about Mitt. I don’t know too much about him but he doesn’t seem like he is proud of his beliefs. But, that may change, who knows.

Ian on February 15, 2007 at 10:24 AM

Ian on February 15, 2007 at 10:24 AM

I don’t think Mitt knows what his beliefs are at this point. I get the feeling that he’s just trying to figure out where to stand on things, based on what public opinion is.

Rick on February 15, 2007 at 11:37 AM

Yeah, whatever.

He can take his silly Global Warming bullshit and run on that. Now that the Dems have figured out that they don’t like Hillary, Obama is not just an empty suit, but a stupid empty suit, and Edwards has all the judgement of a cowboy in a whorehouse on payday…well, maybe they’ll nominate Rudy.

Jaibones on February 15, 2007 at 12:32 AM

Did you actually read or listen to what he said here? Or about global warming?

Both are reasonable and actually strong statements! He speaks from of being a decision maker. He didn’t agree with AlBore about global warming, he challenged him to actually make some suggestions about workable solutions versus just using scare tactics and hyperbole!

I don’t know what anti-gun laws he has ever passed or enforced, same with abortion! You also have keep in mind that he was running for mayor of NEW YORK CITY!!

So far the more I hear, the more I like about him. His statement about the type of judges he would appoint and the role of the federal government versus states rights sounds about right! I do not agree with him on abortion or gun rights (from the little I’ve heard on this issue), but if he sticks to the position that those should be up to the states to decide – I’m completely in agreement with that!!

SSG Fuzzy on February 15, 2007 at 12:59 PM

Rudy was my Mayor for 8 years and the city never had it so good as wen he was at the helm. All the yahoos against Rudy will have to live with a Hillary/Obama government for 8 years while having wet dreams of Newt Gingrich and Duncan Hunter.

Hilts on February 15, 2007 at 3:13 PM

Mr. Giuliani is a Leader with political aptitude; the rest are Politicians.

blogRot on February 15, 2007 at 4:17 PM