A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

Depends on what you mean by "do". I do still support vouchers, I don't proclaim it on a daily basis anymore. Proclamations annoy people. Just try it, and you'll see what I mean.

I dont think she needs encouragement...

A poster on TNR observed, very nicely and concisely:

<slaps nimh>

BTW, VP Cheney's Excellent Adventure...

He had a bad day.

Oh, good!

<Thomas stalks off to find puppies to drown>

says a lot about "intelligence." this was a "secret" meeting at a "secret" location.

I think we're going to have to find a new word for "intelligence."

In today's Washington Post:




Blacks Shift To Obama, Poll Finds

Previously, the consensus opinion of anyone I read was that he would have no chance of winning the primary because of his pro-choice position, his stance on gays, and his multiple marriages/infidelity. These had been considered by everyone (does anyone know of even a single pundit/analyst exception even a year ago?) as make or break issues for this constituency.

One factor must be dwindling options...heading for the "lesser evil". But still, that demonstrates a bite-the-bullet resiliency on key issues that folks didn't really imagine would appear. Establishing a third party seemed perhaps as likely and it has been threatened by folks like Viguerie and Dobson. No ideal candidate (or even close, really) is available. Perhaps these folks are getting a bit brighter on why that is the case - any candidate openly professing a Dobsonian agenda has no chance electorally.

But then, why Guiliani over McCain or Romney?

My supposition is that he represents authoritarian leadership far moreso than the other two or three options. And this is a community that really likes authoritarians.

As a strategist, would you recommend that he rename himself Giulialini?

"Multiple marriages/infidelity" doesn't even begin to describe Rudy's public actions toward his wife. That aspect of him has not really been nationally covered.

We are not talking about a Bill Clinton sneaking around trying to get it on with the intern who threw her skirt up in his face-about even lying under oath to try to hide it. We're not talking about that at all.

We are talking about a Mayor-a great Mayor-who purposely used his office and his public appearances to humiliate his wife so badly that she would be forced to move out of the Mayor's mansion-with his kids-and let his new girlfriend move in.

While still married to his wife, while she and their children lived upstairs, Rudy went out to public appearances with his new girlfriend-at first staying physically separate, later standing with him as if she was his wife.

He publicly made it be known that he wanted his wife and children OUT of the governor's mansion so his girlfriend could move in.

He held public dinners in the Mayor's mansion with his girlfriend at his side-while his wife and children were upstairs in the living quarters. That's right, Rudy was on the receiving line saying "Hello, Mr. Ambassador" and such with his girlfriend acting as his wife, while a walk up the staircase would show his actual wife and children living upstairs, keeping out of his way.

His wife found out the divorce papers were filed from reporters who came to knock on her door to ask her reaction-she had not received them yet in the morning mail, and had no idea they were coming. Rudy told reporters about filing for divorce before he ever told his wife.

That's not even the half of it. Public humliation upon public humiliation was piled upon this woman, Rudy's wife, because she would not accede to his wishes and get out his life so his new squeeze can move in. And take the kids with her.

We are not talking about a guy who likes a little action on the side, and tries to sneak around to maintain appearances. We are talking about a guy who went out his way to publicly make a mockery out his marriage, at EVERY conceivable public opportunity.

After what they did to Clinton, Republicans might have some trouble nominating a fellow who got caught having an affair, even some years ago. But to nominate a viciously defiant egotist who embarked on a long public campaign to humiliate his wife out of his life is another thing altogether.

You have any support for your opinion on that KW? I have a really tough time to think that the NYT and other northeastern liberal publications wouldn't have headlined a scandal of that proportion. Seems to have been pretty low key, however.

Is Giuliani a Conservative?
By Mona Charen
Friday, February 9, 2007

Last week C-SPAN featured a discussion about Rudolph Giuliani that left me shaking my head. The gist of the guest's message was that Giuliani was a "Rockefeller Republican" who was suddenly transformed into a darling of conservatives after 9/11. Today, Fox News echoed the same theme.

That's quite wrong. Social conservatives have trouble with Giuliani, but by no stretch of the imagination is he a Rockefeller (i.e. liberal) Republican. In fact, in many ways Giuliani is the most conservative of the top three candidates for the Republican nomination. He came by that conservatism in the toughest crucible.

City Journal's Steven Malanga reminds us of the details. When Giuliani was elected mayor, New York City was Exhibit A in failed liberal governance. Crime was out of control. Public spaces were marred by a combination of omnipresent graffiti; so-called "squeegee men" who preyed on motorists; and raving homeless people who took up residence on sidewalks and in building entrances. Public employee unions had shaken down the city government for years. The tax base was eroding. The city government was deeply in debt, and fully one in eight New Yorkers was on welfare.

Giuliani transformed a city whose budget and workforce were larger than those of all but five or six states. He and police chief William Bratton famously cracked down first on quality of life crimes like panhandling and public urination. Teenagers who leaped over the turnstiles at subway entrances were arrested -- a departure from the practice under Mayor David Dinkins. Giuliani later quipped that the police under his predecessor had become "highly skilled observers of crime." Those turnstile jumpers turned out to possess a huge number of illegal guns, which were confiscated, and criminals throughout the city discovered that the New York police were breathing down their necks. The number of murders dropped from 1,960 in Dinkins's final year in office to 640 in Giuliani's last year. The overall crime rate dropped 64 percent, to levels not seen since the 1960s.

Giuliani accomplished this in the teeth of a genuinely ferocious assault from liberals, so-called "civil rights" figures like Al Sharpton (with whom Giuliani declined to meet), the New York Civil Liberties Union and the New York Times. Actors and artists protested in the streets, and leading chin pullers in national magazines pronounced themselves troubled by Giuliani's "tactics." He was steadfast -- and the greatest beneficiaries were poor New Yorkers who lived in formerly dangerous neighborhoods.

Though he inherited a budget deficit, Giuliani declined to raise taxes on New Yorkers nearly bled white. He closed the budget gap with a combination of spending reductions (what a concept!) and modest tax cuts. Business boomed.

Giuliani attacked another sacred cow when he ended "open admissions" and remedial courses at the City University of New York. He was called lots of names by the usual suspects for this principled move. The result was to revive the university -- SAT scores of incoming students rose 168 points.

New York's welfare system was among the most bloated in the nation. Giuliani first culled the ranks for cheats and frauds -- eliminating 20 percent of the caseload. The mayor then introduced a workfare requirement -- able-bodied adults would be expected to do 20 hours of work in municipal offices in exchange for a welfare check. There were howls from the New York Times. The mayor was undeterred. Giuliani transformed welfare offices from check distribution centers into employment offices, where welfare workers coached clients on how to read the classifieds, how to dress for interviews and how to prepare a resume.

His approach toward the homeless was similar. Those who were able to work were encouraged to do so. Those who rejected an offer of shelter and insisted upon blocking public spaces and harassing passersby were issued summonses. For this Hillary Clinton lectured the mayor that Jesus was a homeless person.

There is no question that Giuliani's position on abortion and gun control will offend many Republicans. But let's be clear, he is no liberal. His conservatism has been tempered in New York City -- so it is steely indeed.
SYNDICATED COLUMNIST FOUND IN MANY LEADING PUBLICATIONS

Did he lie under oath about it, or point his finger at a camera and boldly state to his constituency that he was not having an affair when he was?

Clinton's womanizing was not the issue -- his lying about it was.

Or perhaps the social liberal/fiscal conservatives finally have enough numbers to swing the balance.

McCain was that option eight years ago. He's lost a ton of credibility by pandering to the CC. Romney has flipped on a number of important positions. He doesn't have much credibility either, and I would think that his religious baggage is enough to put off large numbers of voters. Bush alienated vast numbers of Republicans and anyone with a religious agenda is going to have a hard time.

Giuliani's erstwhile wife is called Donna Hanover. His girlfriend's name: Judith Nathan.

Google search for <giuliani "donna hanover" "judith nathan"> on the New York Times website: 3,890 hits.

There will be doubles in there, of course, but thats still an impressive number.

Do I have any support for this OPINION? It was chronicled over the course of a year and a half in the Daily News and Post right on the front page headlines!!!


No, the national news did not cover it, because at the time it was happening 9/11 had not happened yet and Giuliani was an interesting figure who drove crime down in New York and led a citywide renaissance in many ways. But no more than that.

When the public finds out what Rudy did to his wife over the course of a year and half or so, his popularity ratings are going to go WAY down.

From the NY Times website:

132 articles about Donna Hanover

Of the first 15 results, 14 focus on the scandal around her and Giuliani's divorce.

I'm very sorry, but Clinton's womanizing WAS the central issue, and the lying under oath was the legal aspect which grew out of that. In an attempt to cover his affair, Clinton lied under oath to an investigation.

To many people, Clinton slides by on this because they feel any investigation which is somehow gets focussed on investigating an affair between consenting adults has become a sham anyway.

Be that as it may. People are well aware that Clinton lied under oath, and regardless of the circumstances that's not good.

But let's be realistic-Clinton's critics were not just put off by the oath aspect, it was just the excuse to focus on the moral aspect.

Legally, Rudy did nothing wrong. Morally, his actions make Clinton's look like a Boy Scout who gave in and stole a lollipop from a candy store.

Yes, Rudy was that bad. Amazingly bad. Bizarrely bad. A great Mayor-but an absolute psycho toward his wife in public.