Gay Patriot Header Image

Rudy & the Right

Like Roger Simon, I am happy that former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani has set up a Presidential Exploratory Committee allowing him to raise money for a White House bid. (Now, I’m trying to figure out if I can donate both to the Exploratory Committee and later to his presidential campaign when that good man makes his candidacy official.) Roger likes Rudy “because he appears able to lead . . . [and] seems not particularly bound by party and ideological cant.”

He has solid record as Mayor of the nation’s largest city which preceded 9/11. That crisis may have tested his mettle, but he had already proved his stuff long before the terrorist attack. He held the line on city spending, stood up to the public employee unions and lowered the crime rate, making New York a more livable city than it was in 1993 when he took over. In the early nineties, people speculated that the city’s decline was irreversible. Mayor Rudy Giuliani proved them wrong.

As a conservative mayor of a liberal city, Giuliani has the stuff to unite our nation. And to lead. Yet, given his stands on social issues, including abortion and gay rights as well as his support of gun control, some conservatives are telling Rudy to “Forget It,” claiming he has “no chance of winning the Republican nomination” (Via Powerline).

Other conservatives disagree. The American Spectator‘s Philip Klein writes that “a Giuliani victory would be difficult, not impossible.” I think Rudy’s going to prove his conservative naysayers wrong just as he proved wrong those who said the Big Apple’s decline was inevitable. To do that, Klein believes the former Mayor needs “to find a way to make conservatives comfortable with his candidacy.” He outlines how Rudy can do that, by emphasizing economic issues and “promising to appoint judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas.”

By stumping the country for conservative candidates, while Giuliani showed his commitment to helping Republicans to his right, he also showed that many voters to his right have great respect for his leadership abilities — and support him despite their policy differences. As I noted in a recent post, “In the heartland, GOP faithful seem more interested in his stand on national security than his positions of social issues.

In order to build on the respect he already enjoys and to make conservatives, as Klein puts it, “more comfortable with his candidacy,” Giuliani needs to continue to reach out to conservatives, particularly social conservatives, to make clear they agree more than they disagree. His judicial background would be a great place to show his conservative record. When Giuliani was just 37, Ronald Reagan tapped him as Associate Attorney General, the third highest position in the Department of Justice. Two years later, in 1983, he began his tenure as US Attorney for the Southern District of New York where he convicted mob bosses as well as corrupt politicians, earning a record for being tough on crime.

In the next six months, before Giuliani officially announces his candidacy for president, he can do a number of things to reassure the base that he is a conservative and to make clear that he may differ with some on certain issues, his door will be open to all those groups who form the GOP base.

A good first step would be for him to sit down with conservative bloggers. At the same time, he should reach out to hosts of successful talk radio programs. He should agree to appear on Hugh Hewitt‘s show for a full three hours (or as long as Hugh will have him). Given Rudy’s conservative judicial philosophy — and the importance Hugh attaches to appointing good judges — they should find much common ground. (Both men served in the Reagan Justice Department.)

As he reaches out to conservative media, Rudy should also talk to those interest groups who might oppose him because of his relative social liberalism. He should try to meet with the leaders of all the major social conservative groups, including some I would rather he ignore, such as Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council. Again, he needs focus on their areas of common ground.

And he should start talking to conservative Governors and other grassroots leaders across the nation. Perhaps he should make clear that he sees his Vice-presidential pick as a chance to bring the party together.

Were Rudy not so liberal on social issues, conservatives would be rallying around his candidacy as they did that of Ronald Reagan in 1980. Both men had, at the times they announced their presidential bids, a proven record of leadership and a commitment to the basic principles of our party on economic and judicial issues as well as foreign policy.

With his record of leadership — and his support even among those not entirely in sync with him on social issues — Rudy Giuliani has the capacity to unite our nation and our party. To get the chance to unite the nation, he must first rally the party’s conservative base to his side. The best way for him to do that, is to follow up on his efforts on behalf of Republican candidates in the past three election cycles, to reach out to the party’s conservatives. And emphasize their areas of common ground.

Rudy Giuliani may be to the left of the conservative base on a number of social issues, but on the issues where it really matters, Rudy Giuliani is a true blue Reagan conservative. And a proven leader. He would lead this nation as he led its largest city, making its people more secure, its economy more prosperous and its future brighter. And he’ll help us overcome the bitter political divisions of the sixteen years preceding his election.

Rudy has the capacity to make us proud, but first he needs convince conservative Republicans of his commitment to our principles. That must be one of the primary goals of his Presidential Exploratory Committee. And one your humble blogger would be delighted to support, both with his words on this blog and a financial contribution from his pocket.

B. Daniel Blatt (AKA GayPatriotWest)

UPDATE: Looks like Mary Matalin agress with me as she advices the former NYC Mayor to “Try to keep focus on constitutionalist judges.

She also offers advice on how he can deal with the problems in his personal life: “concede transgressions and pivot to relevance — ‘Do you want this race to be about my past (life) or your future (life)?’” (Via Real Clear Politics.)

Share

54 Comments

  1. Rudy Giuliani may be to the left of the conservative base on a number of social issues, but on the issues where it really matters,

    So you really think abortion doesn’t really matter to the GOP base? Honestly, I think he’ll flip-flop on the issue and perhaps gay rights too. After all, what “really matters” for people like Rudy and McCain is winning the GOP nomination. And the fawning press will let them get away with it. That said, if it comes down to choosing between the two, I think the GOP base will go with a real homohating anti-abortion conservative like McCain. Of course, there’s a real possibility that McCain and Rudy split the “moderate” vote and let a true radical right conservative slip through to the nomination.

    Comment by Ian — November 17, 2006 @ 7:49 pm - November 17, 2006

  2. being a gay conservative maybe i am overlooking the issues that rudy may have in securing the nomination and in a pre 9-11 world they may indeed be too great to overcome, but in the world in which we live today priorities change. i for one have never voted for a pro-choice candidate in my life and the issue is still important to me as it will always be, but the truth is the president has little control over the issue other than from a bully pulpit standpoint. the real issue of the day is national security and no one is going to be more able to get to the right of giuliani on that issue. i for one can hardly wait to get out there and work for a giuliani presidency.

    Comment by bill — November 17, 2006 @ 8:30 pm - November 17, 2006

  3. Ian, don’t even try to guess what matters to the GOP base. You aren’t going to get it right.

    And it won’t be a flip-flop for Giulliani on the social issues, it will be States Rights and separation of powers… things conservatives like.

    Comment by Synova — November 17, 2006 @ 8:36 pm - November 17, 2006

  4. Well said, Bill, esp. about changing priorities.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 17, 2006 @ 8:41 pm - November 17, 2006

  5. As far as Rudy being especially fabulous in protecting the homeland, here’s what I see:

    1. He set up the NYC disaster center in the already once-bombed WTC.

    2. He kept his cool on 9-11 which I guess was in stark contrast to the President but would surely be expected of any leader.

    3. He pushed his buddy Bernie Kerik for head of Homeland Security. Mob-connected Kerik, of course, turned out to be too much of an embarrassment even for Bushco and, fortunately, never got the job.

    4. He thinks the Iraq invasion and occupation was a great idea.

    That’s it as far as I can tell. What else makes him so fabulous as a protector of the Homeland?

    Comment by Ian — November 17, 2006 @ 9:03 pm - November 17, 2006

  6. “What else makes him so fabulous as a protector of the Homeland?”

    Believing that it actually needs protecting.

    Oh, and Bush kept his cool, too, but he doesn’t get complemented on that, he get’s “My Pet Goat’ed.”

    Comment by Synova — November 17, 2006 @ 9:38 pm - November 17, 2006

  7. Leaving politcal positions aside, Rudy could win because he is likeable. W didn’t win in 2000 because of any great ideas. The same is true with Clinton. If you wanted to throw a great party, would you invite Bill and George or Al Gore and Bob Dole. I’ve always thought that if John Kerry could tell a decent joke, he would have been president.

    Positions are important but there is that additional “it” factor that makes all the difference.

    Comment by John in IL — November 17, 2006 @ 9:44 pm - November 17, 2006

  8. Well, keep on pushing for Rudy. Cause really, any politician who holds a nightime gay pride party at Gracie Mansion, featuring drag queens and the gay elite of NYC for 8 straight years while mayor, is alright in my book.

    However, I don’t many Republican Party primary voters will similarly share my enthusiasm for that.

    Comment by Chase — November 17, 2006 @ 10:07 pm - November 17, 2006

  9. Dan, GPW, I’m glad you’re as enthusiastic about Rudy as I am. At this point, since all his likely primary opponents are social conservatives, Rudy is the only Republican I can back. If we and others like us, Dan, work hard enough, maybe I’ll get a chance to meet you at Rudy’s inauguration in 2009.

    Comment by Ashley Hunter — November 17, 2006 @ 10:26 pm - November 17, 2006

  10. #6:

    Believing that it actually needs protecting.

    How banal. Surely, you can come up with reams of examples of just how fabulous Rudy is when it comes to protecting the homeland. Still, I guess I shouldn’t hold my breath.

    Comment by Ian — November 17, 2006 @ 10:30 pm - November 17, 2006

  11. Dear ian,

    You are about as qualified, dear, to comment on the viability of Mr. Giulliani for President as I am to comment on the bathing habits of the mythical North American Yeti. You have demonstrated nothing but sheer, unadulterated ignorance of anything remotely resembling a worldview in contradiction to your own, and have, to date, only succeeded in justifying the widely-held, yet tragic nonetheless, opinion that leftists, like the Yeti, are sadly only able to scream on the sidelines of life, crying out only for acknowledgement of their sad lot in life.

    Oh, and of peeing whereever the spirit moves you. Such is the inevitable outcome of a life spent seeking out the attention of a nanny. I pity you, dear. Truly.

    May The Lord Bless & Keep You,

    Eric in Hollywood

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — November 17, 2006 @ 10:40 pm - November 17, 2006

  12. Oh, and might I suggest…

    Your local community college, no doubt, offers a course on overcoming whatever pathetic little tragedy you may have suffered that brought about the perpetual petulance with which you approach all aspects of your life.

    Ian, I truly feel sorry for you. I know, having been a “victim” of life at one point in time, what it must be like to continually feel as if all of humanity is out to get you (with the exception of Garofalo, Moore, etc), however, until such time as Our Glorious Nanny Emeritus Clinton once again takes blessed control of the universe, dear Ian (or is it “ian,” so humble are you), I fear we all must live in fear that ‘THE RIGHT” only seeks to DESTROY US ALL!!!!!!! HOLY SH*T, IAN, RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!

    Wait, the hills have rednecks, and we all know how THEY vote, don’t we? Especially since they all just luv them Diebold machines!

    I’m through with this tool, guys. He’s a complete idiotarian, and despite the fact that he, like his fellow Soiled Diaper Brigade members, continue to function under the misguided apprehension that lunacy can be interpreted as intelligent argument, the majority of us are destined to spend countless hours shaking our heads in disbelief that God, in His Infinite Wisdom, somehow decided that imbeciles were every bit as entitled to oxygen as the rest of us.

    Best pro-life argument I think I’ve ever come up with, no?

    Eric, in the land of silk and money (and a few reasoning human beings)

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — November 17, 2006 @ 10:55 pm - November 17, 2006

  13. I’m a pro-life gun owner, and I’m leaning strongly toward Guiliani. As others have noted, the President has little power over questions which are decided by the courts. IAC, the overriding issues of the day are national security and the War on Terror. They dwarf most others. Keeping tax and interest rates as low as possible, and overall spending as low as possible as well, are necessary measures to keep the economy growing so we can afford the first two.

    All the other issues have waited a long time without resolution, so their wait will just have to be a bit longer.

    The alternative is returning to plunging our heads in the sand and waiting for the inevitable terrorist nuclear strike on a US city. After that, there won’t be anymore niceties about “respecting Islam” and interrogation techniques – or even collateral damage as we strike back in kind to any Middle Eastern address we suspect is close to the perps.

    Or, we can continue the strong fight and avoid that eventuality.

    Hollywood NeoCon ~ That’s gonna leave a mark! Good one . . .

    Comment by Jim Addison — November 17, 2006 @ 11:03 pm - November 17, 2006

  14. #12:

    the overriding issues of the day are national security and the War on Terror. They dwarf most others.

    Fine, then you should have no problem explaining precisely what Rudy Giuliani has done to merit the worship he seems to garner on the issues of National Security and the War on Terror. As for poor Eric’s unhinged incoherent rants, well, I guess box wine will do that to you. ;-)

    Comment by Ian — November 17, 2006 @ 11:38 pm - November 17, 2006

  15. Surely, you can come up with reams of examples of just how fabulous Rudy is when it comes to protecting the homeland.

    Indeed we can.

    But it would be a waste of effort on our part to try to convince you, because your resistance to Giuliani isn’t based on his actions; it’s based on the “R” after his name.

    Bush’s behavior on 9/11 is an excellent example. His going to Omaha was roundly criticized by leftists like yourself as “cowardice”.

    However, when one looks at the facts, Offutt Air Force Base, where Bush went, is an excellent choice in the event of an attack on the United States.

    First, because of where it is located, it is one of the farthest points in the US AWAY from our borders; that makes it less vulnerable, since anything directed at it would have to have the range to reach it in the first place and would have literally thousands of miles of hostile space to cross.

    Because of that geographic protection, Offutt was also designated as the site of the Strategic Air Command headquarters, from which defensive, offensive, and retaliatory attacks, especially dealing with aircraft, were expected to be planned and directed if the United States was ever directly attacked — reason number 2.

    Finally, because of the SAC, Omaha has one of the best secure telecommunications grids in the United States, which would greatly facilitate the President’s ability to gather information and give orders.

    That is why Offutt is one of the operating centers designated as a safe point in the event of an attack on the country — and, given where Bush was and the fact that Washington, DC had been attacked, the closest.

    But again, you and your fellow leftists called Bush a coward for going there, and insisted that he should have gone back to Washington, DC — despite it having just been attacked.

    You’ll believe what you want to believe, and we don’t see the need to waste the effort.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 18, 2006 @ 12:08 am - November 18, 2006


  16. “Conservative” – GPW, I do not think that word means what you think it means.

    You use this word throughout your essay to describe various people and blocks of people. I know you are a “big tent” Republican, but i know most of the people you described would not give you the same benefit of the doubt.

    I think its very, very clear that there are two really different ideologies at work in the GOP. To gloss that over and ignore is to repeat the same mistakes as the past. The ideology of “social conservatives” is actually much closer to Socialism than anything displayed on the Left. I just don’t see how the ideology of small government , libertarian conservatism can coexist with what the conservative socialists want. They hold no positions in common. If you think they do, I’d like to hear what they are.

    Comment by Patrick (Gryph) — November 18, 2006 @ 12:29 am - November 18, 2006

  17. Ashley in #8, I do hope to see you at Rudy’s inauguration in ’09!

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 18, 2006 @ 2:00 am - November 18, 2006

  18. Some of you are forgeting, Giuliani does have significant baggage.

    How closely was Giuliani connected with the corruption that surronded NYC police commissoner Bernie Kerik? There is a lot of dirt to be dug through there.

    Then there is the specter of Amadou Diallo. If Giuliani were to win the nomination, everyone in the United States will know that name and the awful way in which Giuliani managed that case.

    And don’t forget, blacks in NYC really hated Giuliani. They hated him with venom. Mainly because, under his leadership, there was significant racial profiling done by the NYPD. They didn’t try to hide it either. When I attended college in NYC near the end of his second term as mayor, I could be walking around in the middle of the night, anywhere, without ever having a word said to me by a policemen. Heck, usually they’d smile at me. Of course, I am white. But my black friends, if they were similarly out late, they’d have police officers stop them, ask them where they were going, why they were out so late, what they were doing. As I frequently participated in the nightlife scene in NY while at college, staying out all hours of the night, I saw it happen a lot.

    Really, Giuliani’s record on race relations was so poor, by the end of any presidential campaign, Giuliani could wear black face and nobody would think any worse of him. That’s how bad they will tar him.

    Comment by Chase — November 18, 2006 @ 7:41 am - November 18, 2006

  19. Profiling is common sense. Good for the NYPD.

    Comment by rightwingprof — November 18, 2006 @ 8:21 am - November 18, 2006

  20. #14:

    Indeed we can.

    then proceeds to demonstrate he apparently can’t.

    Comment by Ian — November 18, 2006 @ 9:16 am - November 18, 2006

  21. #20 Ooops reference was actually to #15

    Comment by Ian — November 18, 2006 @ 9:18 am - November 18, 2006

  22. Dan, with your post we once again enter the land of the GayLeft opining what “makes sense” for conservatives or the GOP or religionists (sic) to do in the wake of Election Day or in anticipation of 2008.

    Here’s a novel concept, rather than for those here –like Ian and Gryph and Chase and others– to insincerely offer their “weighty” concerns for future of conservativism or the GOP or religion, maybe they might look to their own orbits of pseudo-influence and press Congress to repeal DADT, repeal DOMA, adopt a constitutional amendment to prohibit states from preventing gay marriage, increase AIDS funding even above Bush’s historic high levels, find a cure for the majority of STDs, et cetera.

    Instead, the GayLeft keyboardists here will advise conservatives what to and not to do in 2008, what the Election of 2006 means or doesn’t mean (my favorite on that score was the recent silliness of some of the lower-case-clan to argue the election was about hiking the minimum wage) and all sorts of other insincere, fly-away fluff laden opinions about the future salvation of the GOP or conservatives.

    Are they entitled to their opinions? Sure. Do they make remote sense? Hell no. Frankly, as any reader here with even half-a-brain knows, these GayLefties don’t have a clue on a lot –the least of which is what conservatives or the GOP should or ought to do in the future to reclaim their right as the Majority.

    When someone from that camp can write that social conservatives are more like socialists than anything on the Left… you just got to wonder how flat-out STUPID these morons can be on a given day. Two words for the idiot with that notion: Bernie Sanders. LOL.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 18, 2006 @ 11:09 am - November 18, 2006

  23. As can be seen in some of the above negative comments here about Rudy, what can help him tremendously in his 2008 run is his collection of enemies.

    Lots of folks on the left of the Democratic Party really don’t trust or like Hillary Clinton, but will rally around her if she wins her party’s ’08 nomination by consoling themselves that while she may trangulate just like her husband did, she drives many on the right crazy. Giulinani was known nationally before 9/11, but was only a marginal figure on the U.S. political stage, and most outside of New York don’t remember what a passionate hatred the left in the New York area had for Rudy, and how there drumbeat of critisism was going to help brand his second term as a failure and elect ex-Nader Raider Mark Green as the new mayor.

    Just as Ann Richards’ pal, Texas columnist (and ex-New York Times reporter) Molly Ivins helped shape the national vew or George W. Bush in the run-up to 2000 — Molly’s New York connection made here to go-to-gal for the big media types there on all things Texas — so will those on the left both inside and outside the big media outlets get their long knives out for Giuliani in the run-up to the 2008 election. Their goal will be in the primaries to try and horrify the GOP base about Rudy’s social beliefs, in an effort to deny him the nomination, but I’d say there’s an 50-50 chance they’ll overplay their hand so much they’ll have many on the Republican side thinking if the left hates Giulinani this much, there’s got to be something good there (the left will save any Diallo or Louima attacks for the general election, if Rudy were to get the nomination — going after him for those in the primary will just remind Republican of the left’s attacks on Bush over Gitmo, or trying to tar the whole miiitary with the Abu Gihrab abuses, where they seemed to think the military/police were a bigger danger than terrorists/criminals. The police abuse/mistaken identity incidents will be trotted out to try and woo swing voters in the fall of ’08).

    Comment by John — November 18, 2006 @ 11:31 am - November 18, 2006

  24. Will they produce a video saying Guiliani would love to pull a black man by a chain from the back of a truck? Bush had to endure that from the NAACP with white liberal blessings. A repulbican worrying about the black establishment might as well worry about the sky being blue. How many fewer black law abiding citizens were killed under Guiliani as under previous mayors. That is a question someone in the “realilty-based” community should have at least a small amount of interest in knowing. Extreme situations call for extreme measures and I’d rather be accosted by a cop than a criminal.

    Comment by VinceTN — November 18, 2006 @ 12:25 pm - November 18, 2006

  25. I think a strong federalist message is how Rudy overcomes his “socially liberal” side. The reality is that the president doesn’t have much say in social matters, other than the bully pulpit.

    I do think Rudy will have a difficult time appealing to portions of the base, and I think this will be a huge roadblock to overcome, and his opponents in the primary are going to make sure the “liberal” positions of Rudy are plastered all over the place.

    I don’t think it’s impossible, but he definitely has some stuff to overcome and his opponents aren’t going to make it easy for him to do so.

    Comment by just me — November 18, 2006 @ 1:16 pm - November 18, 2006

  26. 19: Excuse me, but how exactly is profiling “common sense”, especially in the description as written in 18? Are you a white person who thinks it’s ok for minorities to be followed and questioned for no reason except the color of their skin?

    If you’re gay by any chance, then don’t forget to put yourself in a group that is on the receiving end of that kind of nonsense. Then again, being gay it’s prety easy to hide, unlike the color of your skin.

    Comment by Kevin — November 18, 2006 @ 1:58 pm - November 18, 2006

  27. #22: Good grief, I harbor no “weighty concerns for future of conservativism or the GOP or religion.” Conservatism and the GOP have held the federal reigns of power for almost six years and they have proven disastrous for the country. Utter failure and the people have recognized this by handing over the Congress to the Dems. This past election was not about tossing out the incumbents: it was about tossing out the GOP. Don’t you realize that not a single Dem incumbent in either the Senate or the House lost on November 7? So what does the GOP do – they keep their corrupt House leadership and bring back racist retreads like Trent Lott to lead the Minority in the Senate! I will give you guys this: your “southern strategy” is working well: with Dem gains in the northeast, mid-Atlantic, midwest, mountain, southwest and far west, the GOP is fast becoming a southern regional party. And you think those folks are going to embrace a pro-gay, pro-gun control, pro-choice, divorced New Yorker as their standard bearer in 2008?

    BTW, I’m still waiting for some concrete examples of Rudy’s accomplishments in the National Security sphere. Don’t get me wrong. I can’t help liking a politician who doesn’t shy away from being photographed in drag, especially a GOP one. But as one who once thought Bush would be fun to have a beer with, I now want much more than likeability in those seeking the Presidency.

    Comment by Ian — November 18, 2006 @ 2:00 pm - November 18, 2006

  28. I have my misgivings about Rudy, but I could live with them….especially if he has the right, not necessarily the “correct”, vice-presidential running-mate. If he follows the Bush-Cheney paradigm of the VP is the President right-hand advisor, not just the traditional runner-up rival/competitor keep where you can see him, then he needs a policy and executive counter-balance like a Condi Rice or Newt Gingrich who understands how the Beltway works.

    What concerns me about Rudy in times of no-crisis he might tend to wander the halls of the White House late at night muttering to himself and starting lists of petty enemies like Nixon did. When Rudy doesn’t have a obvious major “target”…he focuses on finding “them” and picking unnecessary vendettas.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — November 18, 2006 @ 2:07 pm - November 18, 2006

  29. 1, 2: Frankly, abortion wouldn’t be such a big issue with the GOP if they hadn’t let religion become such a big part of their platform. It’s funny, because Giulani actually does embody the ideals that many GOP’ers commonly say they adhere to: less government, let people do as they want, etc. Seems to me that passing laws to have government oversite on a how a woman controls her own body and her reproduction fits quite well into that category. The truth is, the leadership of the GOP is very much interested in social control and has worked very hard to use it as a way of controlling the masses and getting votes.

    Gay marriage is probably the best example of it the last few years. Seems that there were more forces out there to “protect marriage” and to get it on ballots as a way of getting voters to the polls than there were people out there trying to get gay marriage legalized. Interesting that those ballot initiatives also got people out to vote for conservative candidates as well. Now that the gay bigotry well has run dry for conservatives, I wonder what will be the next topic of hate they can use to get voters to the polls at the next election?

    Comment by Kevin — November 18, 2006 @ 2:09 pm - November 18, 2006

  30. Gotta love how ian disingenuously states he’s looking for substance in Giuliani’s campaign, when even my dog knows that the little whiner has absolutely NO intention of voting for ANYONE with an “R” after their name.

    As for the “unhinged” label, sweetie, I’d advise you to stop trying to bullsh*t everyone here by concealing your uber-leftist, quasi-socialist, hyper-moonbat worldview in a cloak of civility. You’re a troll, and what makes the situation even more egregious is your insistence that your petulance be referred to as honest debate.

    Eric in Hollywood

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — November 18, 2006 @ 4:14 pm - November 18, 2006

  31. If a gay gene does exist and is discovered, will it continue to serve the gay community’s interests to be pro-choice?

    I suspect that the most gay-friendly of liberal, heterosexual couples, confronted with an amniocentesis revealing a gay-tending fetus, will quietly abort that fetus, before dressing up for their next charming evening out with their charming gay friends.

    Comment by Jeremy Abrams — November 18, 2006 @ 5:13 pm - November 18, 2006

  32. #30: Actually, this is the first election where I haven’t voted for at least one Republican. That said, I have never voted for a Repub for national office.

    Comment by Ian — November 18, 2006 @ 6:00 pm - November 18, 2006

  33. Ian, LOL! Right, and next you’ll inform us that NDXXX is the honorary co-chair in California of Hillary’s Prez bid… or that VdaK is thinking about moving to Vermont so he can vote for Bernie Sanders… or that the MSM isn’t biased, that OJ was innocent, Gore won the 2000 election and there were no WMDs in Iraq.

    Oh, and the UN is the only hope America has of taming Iran, North Korea and Syria.

    What other cliches are there for you? “Check’s in the mail”, “I’m not looking for a hook-up” and “I never read Calarato’s comments”?

    You’re a crack-up Ian. Certifiable.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 18, 2006 @ 7:02 pm - November 18, 2006

  34. Oh… and the best one to date: “I used to be a Republican but then I got me some learnin’s.”

    You go girl, ’cause you’re the only one who still believes you.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 18, 2006 @ 7:03 pm - November 18, 2006

  35. Thank you, Matt, for that response at #33.

    However, for myself, having been born & raised in Chicago, more often than not, I ended up having to vote Democrat for city- and county-wide offices, as the GOP seldom, if ever, ran a candidate.

    But more to the point, like ian, I have never voted outside my party line in state or national elections. Hence, you will NEVER find me engaged in discussion about Democrat candidates in terms of how they may best represent me and my family in Washington, Springfield or Sacramento. The DNC platform has never (at least so far) reflected my views nor represented my interests, nor have they shown any inclination to do so in the future. Consequently, I try to restrict me discussion of candidates to those in the GOP who may (or may not) best represent conservative thought and practice.

    Ergo, for ian to (in the immortal words of the late John Houseman) “stand and fill this room with [his] intelligence” regarding Republican candidates, under the guise of determining their viability as candidates is folly at best, and sheer deceit at worst.

    However, I admit to freely and gleefully engaging in ankle-biting punditry of ANY candidate, but at least I make it clear where my allegiances lay.

    By the way, I bet dollars to donuts that the next response I get from the American Castrati here is some lame-assed attempt to convince us all that I’m trying to stifle free speech. Take it and run with it darlings, because everyone here knows that to the Fellowship Of Perpetual Victims & Guardians Of What’s Best For The World, having am “R” next to your name is tantamount to have the SS Death’s Head Skull firmly pinned to your chest.

    Eric in Hollywood

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — November 18, 2006 @ 8:05 pm - November 18, 2006

  36. Rudy is on the wrong side of a major issue that will cause him to loose the GOP nomination to Romney. IMMIGRATION.

    Comment by Frank — November 18, 2006 @ 8:11 pm - November 18, 2006

  37. #34:

    I used to be a Republican

    Actually, I was a registered Republican for several years in order to vote in the GOP primaries and try to help moderate repubs. Unfortunately, today, there are virtually no moderate Repubs here in Arizona.

    #35:

    I’m trying to stifle free speech.

    Really? Last I checked you weren’t listed as in a position of authority here. Even if you were, I suspect there’s still enough of a glimmer of the libertarian in you that you’d feel guilty banning someone you disagreed with.

    Comment by Ian — November 18, 2006 @ 9:37 pm - November 18, 2006

  38. I also have my misgivings about Rudy, but I like and respect the man. That gives him a shot for my vote, unlike Hillary whom I despise. I have no idea whether he could get the nomination or not but perhaps his candidacy could help take the edge off the Right and moderate the GOP on social issues somewhat. Even if he won he would only be able to do so much on those issues since he’d face opponents in his own party to radical change. Eh, we’ll see but I will keep my eye on his campaign. If he does get the nomination and Hillary is his opponent, there’s no question I’ll vote for him.

    Comment by John — November 18, 2006 @ 10:27 pm - November 18, 2006

  39. “Last I checked you weren’t listed as in a position of authority here.”

    Wasn’t my point, ian. Simply stating how completely deceptive you continue to be in trying to argue the merits of a Republican candidate. If you wish to debate THAT, then by all means please do so. Otherwise, quite trying to skirt the issue.

    As for trying to have you banned, yes I would disagree with that decision, primarily because it’s ever so much fun watching you work. I’ve followed your comments closely here for the better part of a year now, and can safely say I know your strategy like the back of my hand. Why would I wish to deny myself that entertainment?

    Although, I do admit I’d really love to read something from you that came from your intellect, rather than your emotions.

    Would be refreshing, indeed.

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — November 18, 2006 @ 11:04 pm - November 18, 2006

  40. North Dallas 30, I don’t know if you’re still around at this hour, but I wanted to add to your comments about Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

    Some good friends of mine at HQ Strategic Command, which occupies the building that once housed HQ Strategic Air Command, said Bush went to Offutt on 9/11 not so much for geographic security as for the redundancy of the communications lines. No one was sure if the terrorist attacks ended with the crash of Flight 92 and once Bush was inside STRATCOM’s underground command post he was assured of communications with Washington and/or military commanders no matter what because of the redundant systems serving Offfutt.

    After General Curt LeMay established SAC Headquarters at Offutt he insisted on communications that could survive almost anything. The old Northwestern Bell Telephone Company (which later became US West and is now Qwest) built systems and back-up systems second to none. (That’s one of the reasons Omaha is a major hotel reservations center and a hub for telemarketing.)

    A year or two before SAC was deactivated, the phone company had to do some work on underground lines just north of Offutt. There were so many armed military police at that hole in the ground it was as secure as Fort Knox.

    When New York and other large cities complained about the cuts they took in Homeland Security funds and chided Omaha for getting a large increase, Vice President Cheney cited the obvious: the communications grid centered in Omaha is vital to the country.

    By the way, North Dallas 30, I want to correct an error you made about Offutt air Force Base. It is not IN Omaha. Omaha is eight or nine miles away. Offutt sits right in the middle of Bellevue, Nebraska, less than a mile from the high school that graduated me, my good buddy Jack Allen, who sometimes comments here, and Virginia’s U.S. Senator-elect Jim Webb (also Bob Hayes of “Airplane” fame).

    Comment by Ashley Hunter — November 18, 2006 @ 11:25 pm - November 18, 2006

  41. #39: How am I being deceptive? I don’t pretend to support Bush or the GOP. I do find a pro-gay, pro-choice, pro-gun control, drag-friendly candidate for the GOP Presidential nomination rather intriguing. With those attributes, he’d be running to the left of most potential Dem candidates. Yet he appeals to conservative commenters here who seem to accept his liberal views because he is so strong on national security. Yet when I try to learn why he is thought so strong on national security, no one seems able to provide concrete reasons. You may not appreciate that line of questioning but rest assured, his primary opponents will make the most of it.

    Comment by Ian — November 18, 2006 @ 11:35 pm - November 18, 2006

  42. The only part of Guiliani I don’t like is the expansive view of executive power that he shares with the Bush Administration. Barring a swing to court religious right voters I don’t think that will be enough for me not to vote for him. Meanwhile McCain has hired a debate darling from Falwell. His move to the right (such as this, doing an add for the draconian Arizona Marriage Amendment, and actively courting other top name religious right leaders) and Bush butt-kissing has turned my favorite 2000 candidate into someone I almost can’t consider voting for (unless the other team puts up Hillary).

    Comment by FormerRepublican — November 19, 2006 @ 9:27 am - November 19, 2006

  43. #19. Criminal profiling is common sense; racial profiling is not. I think it was Patricia Williams who talked about racial profiling on September 11, 2001: While airport security was busy racially profiling young black and latino men, 19 terrorists boarded planes.

    Comment by sean — November 20, 2006 @ 10:49 am - November 20, 2006

  44. I think Romney would be much better than Giuliani and hope that the GOP nominates him. However, the commercials and interviews with Giuliani’s ex-wife might make for great television.

    Comment by sean — November 20, 2006 @ 10:52 am - November 20, 2006

  45. #44:

    I think Romney would be much better than Giuliani

    Clinton was asked about his underwear. I wonder if they’ll ask the same question of Romney. ;-)

    Comment by Ian — November 20, 2006 @ 11:58 am - November 20, 2006

  46. Ian said…

    “Clinton was asked about his underwear.”

    Yes, he was, and it was among the most blatant examples of insipid ignorance I’ve ever seen. No wonder most American college students are regarded as nothing more than spoiled fools.

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — November 20, 2006 @ 12:06 pm - November 20, 2006

  47. “No wonder most American college students are regarded as nothing more than spoiled fools”

    They are? – I better review my company’s hiring policy….

    Comment by keogh — November 20, 2006 @ 12:41 pm - November 20, 2006

  48. keogh said…

    “I better review my company’s hiring policy…. “

    At least you may want to ask them how many continents there are, or perhaps how to balance a checkbook.

    Try asking a UCLA student those questions, and you may be dismayed by the responses you receive.

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — November 20, 2006 @ 12:54 pm - November 20, 2006

  49. I think the truth is, all the apparent candidates on the left and right have significant baggage. The country may be tired of Bushes and Clintons if as the MSM says they are tired of a polarized electorate. My faves continue to be Gingrich of who I know a lot. Romney, I wish i knew more. And Jeb Bush…but I’m tired of the hysterical anti Bush lying that would go on. Gingrich is brilliant and pro life, pro gun, pro liberty and pro freedom. Hillary has her own baggage, which is everyone knows her and her negatives are 45%. How does she overcome that when there are no “undecideds” in her case? Obama…how do you get elected President after 2 years in the Senate with virtually no record? I know we all want a woman or African American to be elected in our lifetime, but can’t we vote for an executive who’s served longer than an apprenticeship? Truth be told I think the cupboards are pretty bare on the left and the right. The Bushes and Clintons have so dominated the poitical landscape the past 20 years that no one seems prepared to emerge. When some light weight floats to the top…like Carter in ’76…the country will suffer. John Edwards is a light weight. And Sen McCain…an admirable life, but I’m not voting for anyone over 70 years old in times like these.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — November 20, 2006 @ 10:13 pm - November 20, 2006

  50. Theres a lot of debate in here about Rudy and what did he do to engender such love around the country. What did he do prior to 9/11. Didn’t he just nurture NYC after the attack. In truth what we saw of Rudy immediately after the attack was an executive who took charge, calmed the city and the nation. He administered an amazing search and rescue, then clean up of a war zone. His leadership calmed a nation not just a city. Contrast that with Pres Clintons ignoring of the terrorist threats during his term. Don’t think it’s a flippant shot a Pres Clinton. He just didn’t lead. If it doesn’t come natural it’s hard to manufacture it during a crisis. Rudy had it and showed it off. Pres Clinton was more comfortable at a photo opp turning over a shovel of dirt for a new office building. It’s displays a difference in style and substance.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — November 20, 2006 @ 10:22 pm - November 20, 2006

  51. Underwear…I would hope lessons learned ….any candidate asked what kind of underwear he or she wears would simply reply,
    “You know I hope to be the President of the United States, and the Commander and Chief of the Armed Forces, I’d rather not answer a personal question like that.” He or she may lose support of those 12-17 year olds who might get a laugh out of a different answer, but the candidate might gain VOTES of serious adults looking for a classey, calm, leader seeking the Presidency.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — November 20, 2006 @ 10:27 pm - November 20, 2006

  52. Probably it’s mostly about bravado… do you *dare* ask that question? What a shocking thing to do.

    I asked a similar question (won’t give details) during a question and answer at a school presentation and assembly… but that was in Junior High. I don’t know if I would have in college or not, but I know the same sort of dynamic of asserting one’s self in the world is still there.

    Comment by Synova — November 21, 2006 @ 12:46 am - November 21, 2006

  53. he is a leader that can get us through the tough times ahead and is a lot brighter than the other choices. I voted for Barry Goldwater and I don’t think the social issues are that important to most voters including some polls I have seen coming from the evangelical community.

    Comment by gary kitching — November 21, 2006 @ 5:49 pm - November 21, 2006

  54. There may be a base of the GOP that will vote GOP no matter what, but it would be a mistake for the Right to think that there isn’t a greater majority of people who are somewhere in the middle of the bell curve and will see someone of Rudy’s position a good one to support.

    This should be obvious to the GOP by these latest elections.

    Comment by Scooter — November 26, 2006 @ 7:17 pm - November 26, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.