April 10, 2007

PANIC AMONG THE ZEUS WORSHIPPERS:

GET REAL, RUDY (JOHN PODHORETZ, April 10, 2007, NY Post)

DEAR Rudy Giuliani,

I'm writing this open letter to you because I'm worried you're blowing it.

I still think you stand the best chance among the candidates in the Republican field of winning the general election in 2008, and I think you have it in you to be a great president.

But something strange is going on with your candidacy - something that doesn't reflect the conduct and behavior of the Mayor Giuliani whose ferocious competence and clarity are what have led me to advocate your nomination for more than a year now. [...]

As a presidential candidate, you seem to be winging it these days - giving off-the-cuff, ill-considered answers to delicate questions. If you keep winging it this way, you're going to fly off a cliff.

For example, the answer to your pro-choice difficulty with social conservatives on the matter of abortion isn't to blather about how much you "hate it" and then ruminate on whether the government should be responsible for helping pay for one. That's what you did last week, and you must never, ever do anything like it again - if, that is, you actually want to become president.

The answer to dealing with the abortion question is to do what you did as mayor - to master the issue the way you mastered the weird particulars of zoning law in Manhattan.

By which I mean, all the jurisprudence. All the arguments. The history of legislation on the matter. The history of court rulings. Immerse yourself in it and then argue your point from a position of strength, rather than relative ignorance.

The same is true on issue after issue.


So passes another great neocon hope for a pro-death Republican nominee.

Posted by Orrin Judd at April 10, 2007 9:21 AM
Comments

Too bad. The best hope for peace is the fear in the hearts of of the enemy. Guiliani was a very scary guy. It's all over for him now.

I am going to supply some free advice for some future Guiiani down the road. When trying to work out some "nuanced" approach to a difficult issue, float your ideas past the people who will be watching the issue closely and who will pounce if you misstep.

For example, if you are trying to arrive at a position on some gun-related issue, talk to some solid RKBA people to find out in advance whether this or that idea is going to get you in trouble.

Public funding of the Kindermord? What do you thing a right-to-life activist would have said to that? Some Stormfront or VDare correspondent might have thought it a good idea, but there are a lot more people for whom it was the deal-breaker.

Posted by: Lou Gots at April 10, 2007 10:24 AM

Giuliani doesn't scare anyone. He was even afraid of Hillary, Chuck Schumer & Elliot Spitzer.

Posted by: oj at April 10, 2007 12:04 PM

Missing the point on Guiliano: it is precisely his off the cuff remarks that expose him as being too much of a loose cannon to be president. I'm glad he's revealing how stupid he can be (ie: abortion comment and comment about letting his wife sit in on cabinet meetings). He simply can't be the front runner in the race. I suspect it will be someone who is not in the top three yet. I pray it will be someone who gives measured responses to weighty issues, but is not afraid to reveal his convictions and base his policies on them. The abortion debate has to be addressed much more thoughtfully. Though the democrat leaders and Guiliano try to fudge saying, "it has to be up to the woman" and, "we cannot legislate morality", this is copping out, not to mention being disingenuous. We legislate morality as a matter of course with all types of issues: from taking care of the poor and elderly to helping fledgling democracies to sending all types of aid overseas to third worlds. If we can "legislate morality" where other issues are concerned, why not where an innocent helpless human life in the womb or petri dish is concerned? How much more so should we "legislate morality"? After all, doesn't our initial founding document list mankind's "right to life" as our very first and unalienable right? Jefferson was not penning abstracts! Guiliani has not given the abortion controversy the thought it deserves. For instance, he said it is the woman's "Constitutional right". Oh, really, Mr. Guiliani? Have you even read the Constitution? If he had, he'd have said instead, "it is a woman's 'legal' right according to the Supreme Court case, Roe v Wade," rather than citing the Constitution! This is precisely the point of the pro-lifer: that the Supreme Court circumvented the Constitutional separation of powers by establishing Roe v Wade in 1973 which put the 10th amendment on its ear. The entire case should be thrown out. How many millions of innocent children have been murdered under this abominable unconstitutional law? Guiliani does not get my endorsement because he reveals his lack of depth on so weighty an issue, which leads me to conclude that this is how he would operate on a world stage. Thanks, E. Lyke

Posted by: Elizabeth Lyke at April 10, 2007 5:22 PM

Elizabeth

Obviously you just don't get do you? Ha, a tightly reasoned paragraph laying out the issues and coming to a dispassionate, fair conclusion. Don't you know that debate in this country has to be reduced to "bumper sticker" length.

Gratuitous, demogogic insult that's the ticket. So please let's have no more of this Okay?

Posted by: h-man at April 11, 2007 4:47 AM
« GLOBALIZATION IS JUST ANGLICIZATION: | Main | WHAT ELSE CAN A REACTIONARY PARTY DO?: »