Friday, April 06, 2007
|
|
Bloggers to Blame for Rudy's Bad Week?
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
10:30 AM
|
|
Roger Simon reports:
Has it crossed your mind that this may be an extremely rough primary in 2008? I asked him.
"It has, and it will be," Giuliani replied. But he also said he did not think the attacks would come directly from other Republican presidential candidates.
"I think more of this comes from the atmosphere in the blogging atmosphere, in the instant news atmosphere, and the minute analysis atmosphere," he said.
Is Rudy blaming bloggers for his recent bad publicity?
Rudy's recent problems have arisen from interviews he granted or speeches he gave.
The most damning information has come from YouTube videos, which merely give the voters a chance to hear Rudy -- in his own words. His primary problems -- the ones that have stuck -- have not come from bloggers scurrilous accusations -- they have come from bloggers reporting his own words.
Debate and argument are healthy for Democracy. And as a conservative, I am happy that we are having these fights now -- rather than in the General Election. Imagine if we didn't find out that Rudy Giuliani was in favor of taxpayer-funded abortion until two weeks before the Genereal Election. In that scenario, we could actually have a Republican candidate who is more pro-choice than the Democrat nominee ...
By going through this process, bloggers are ultimately doing two things:
1. Helping inform the voters to make a better decision regarding who best represents their values.
2. Ensuring Republican voters have enough information to nominate a strong Republican candidate who has been tested -- before going into a General Election.
Granted, not all bloggers are responsible. That's how free speech works. But the cure for our problems is more debate and argument -- not less.
Enough of the hand-wringing. Politics is tough. Get a helmet!
|
|
|
McCain gets high ratings from all conservative groups on his overall voting record. And it cannot be denied that, when it comes to abortion, he has the most consistently conservative record of the three Republican front runners. For these reasons, I think that many people unfairly characterize him as a "RINO". |
|
|
|
|
or is it bottom up? I mean the way the party is run. Why, oh why, do we have to accept what is given to us rather than telling them what we want? None of the top three is acceptable. If the base can't stand on principles, what can they stand for? An (R) after someone's name? Strength for the Iraq war is great, don't get me wrong but it WILL be over someday - then what will you have? A democrat in republican clothing. All those who advocate voting for any of the top three simply because of their position on the war is not any different than anyone who advocates NOT voting for them because of their position on abortion, or immigration, or any other single issue. It a question of moral compass and principles. Nothing more, nothing less. |
|
Republican voters still get to decide who their nominee will be. Money only buys elections when people act like sheep. If 80% of Republicans are indeed seeking a conservative, we can nominate one. We can nominate Duncan Hunter. The money players won't like it and are trying to convince us only Rudy, Romney, or McCain can win. Hogwash. 49% of people will never vote for Hillary. Only 60% voted last time and turnout was the difference. My belief is Rudy would push turnout down. There might even be a third party, splitting the vote. Give Americans a chance to vote for a candidate who WILL secure the border and watch what happens to turnout. Americans want their government to fulfill it's most basic responsibility.
http://www.gohunter08.com
|
|
Darby,
Since you're posting in this particular thread, I would assume you are reacting to something in this thread you feel is "unfair" and "uninformed" in regards to John McCain.
Has someone been inaccurate in characterizing McCain's Senate record ?
Can you kindly be specific ?
|
|
|
I am not a McCain supporter, but I don't like the unfair, uninformed attacks on him that are always cropping up on Townhall. People who complain about his Senate record seem to know only three things about him: McCain-Feingold, comprehensive immigration reform, and the "Gang of 14." Granted these are important issues, but give the man credit for what is an overwhelmingly conservative record on the issues. I don't think either Giuliani or Romney come anywhere close to McCain on demonstrations of conservatism when all of the major issues are taken collectively. |
|
McCain has pretty much risk his run on Iraq. I have always agreed with McCain's position of more troops. I appreciate his valor in championing that cause.
However, Iraq has more twists and turns than a snake with it's head cut off. At the moment the surge seems to be working. However, who knows what twist Iraq will take even if the surge completely eliminates the so called insurgents. The surge if successful is a short run victory.
We need someone to step up and articulate a Comprehensive Middle East Policy that the average voter can understand and support.
In the short run we do not want to lose in Iraq, but going into Iraq was part of a larger strategy for the whole region that W never made a good case for.
The Republicans have to have an answer for voters on the Middle East going into 2008 or we are going to lose and badly. They will not buy 8 more years of War. |
|
I'm not surprised that Matt Lewis is instructing us that "Politics is tough. Get a helmet !"
It's very Freudian.
After all, isn't Matt's desire to avoid 'incoming fire' the very reason he has never stepped up to the plate here at Townhall to state the case for John McCain's candidacy ?
Instead, Matt focuses his energy on writing a lot of snarky posts about McCain's chief rivals, Rudy & Mitt.
Matt realizes if he were to articulate a defense of McCain's Senate record of co-authoring the McCain-Feingold Bill, spearheading the Gang of 14, voting against drilling in ANWAR, voting against the Bush tax cuts, supporting double-taxation in the form of the inheritance tax, and co-authoring the McCain-Kennedy Bill, he'd receive so much incoming fire from Townhall's conservative readers that he'd have to bunker down in the Townhall basement with sandbags, a laptop computer, Gatorade, a handful of Clif bars, and a week's worth of instant oatmeal.
Several days into his sanctuary, he'd jump on his Radio Shack walkie-talkie, and whisper, "Lewis to Ham, Lewis to Ham,---Mary Katharine, is it safe for me to emerge from my bunker ?"
Ironically, Matt is the one who also writes that "the cure for our problems is more debate and argument -- not less."
Unfortunately, Matt doesn't believe in debating McCain's Senate record.
Instead, we'll continue to get more posts from Matt about how Rudy once wore a dress in a funny television skit, and reminders that Mitt probably doesn't have a shotgun rack in the back of his pick-up truck. |
|
Rudy is over. The neo-cons will destroy him.
Next???? |
|
Neither does McCain. They do occasionally get angry and have outbursts, but no Muskie-moments from those two. Helmet--screw the helments. Rudy has not been through the national presidential meatgrinder but the hoops you have to jump through in New York State and City poltics are a pretty good training ground. McCain has been through the Rovian spin cycle.
And Matt--suggesting that Rudy's positions on abortion are the same or more liberal than Hillary and Obama's are just wrong. And frankly, even if that lie was true, I would still prefer Rudy as commander-in-chief over Hillary and Obama.
Show me the pro life candidate who is a fiscal conservative and strong as CIC who can actually win in 2008 (please do not suggest guys like Duncan Hunter who have zero chance of winning). McCain (and McCain has a proven conservative voting track record stronger than Romney's). Fred Thompson? I buy that. Romney is a good fall back alternative--But only if he can show he can actually win the big game. Got anyone else?
|
|
|
I have to laugh at some conservatives who claim there is no difference between Rudy or Hillary and Obama. Look no further than his strong support of the Iraq War to find a big difference. That in itself sets him apart from the Dems. If you think Rudy would conduct the war on terror in the same manner as Hillary or Obama, then you need to take off your blinders. |
|
|
I have to laugh at some conservatives who claim there is no difference between Rudy or Hillary and Obama. Look no further than his strong support of the Iraq War to find a big difference. That in itself sets him apart from the Dems. If you think Rudy would conduct the war on terror in the same manner as Hillary or Obama, then you need to take off your blinders. |
|
|
Just visited your latest post. Very interesting analysis and good point. I commenting here because I can't post at on your blog without getting spun off into a black hole by the "Magic Mountain Six Flags "Townhall Ride". I'll be posting my own list of questions about polls at my blog soon and will link to your blog as a source for another interesting question. My focus will be more about polling within the Republican party. Excellent post. |
|
|
Under current federal law, certain abortions are funded under the Medicaid program. If you care about that issue, then take it up with George W. He and the Republican Congress did nothing to change it. |
|
|
I really do not care if Romney can't hit a rabbit. Sheney can't hit doves but he still gets most issues right. I do care about federally funded abortions. |
|
|
Rudy's own words caused his problems, for sure. But conservative bloggers are having a cow over it. Hopefully, Townhall spends as much time criticizing Romney's ridiculous hunting comments. Now that was strictly out of the John Kerry playbook !! |
|
|
It seems to me that he is giving us a glimpse into an attitude by positioning himself inclusively with the fawning MSM. It isn't "us", it's "them". The MSM is part of the establishment "club". The blogosphere is not. It's an attitude that is often expressed by Hillary when she argues for a need to regulate bloggers by forcing us to register. Corporations spent billions and billions to buy out the broadcasters and newspapers but now what do we do with the bloggers? To paraphrase Bugsy Siegel when he expressed frustration over failing to control politicians in LA: "You buy everybody and still can't get anything done!" Something like that. |
|
|
Rudy is right on the money: the conservative bloggers had an utter conniption fit over his comments. What a bunch of whiners. Republicans have no chance of winning back Congress or the White House with this conduct. Say hello to President Clinton or Obama !! And Matt, you are contributing to the conniption fit by raising nonsensical questions. If you read into Rudy's comments that he is blaming bloggers for his recent bad publicity then you are delusional. This is getting humorous !! |
|
"I think more of this comes from the atmosphere in the blogging atmosphere, in the instant news atmosphere, and the minute analysis atmosphere," he said.
Matt, you asked if Rudy is blaming bloggers for his recent bad publicity with this statement, but he is not. For all its joys, the 24-hour news cycle has created a whole new world in our country, and that can't be ignored. There is no blame here; rather he is simply stating that while the primary will be tough, the attacks will be fueled by the new media, instead of the traditional mentality that other candidates are the biggest threat. It's not about blame.
Anyone can become a "citizen journalist" and that is an incredible blessing born of our society and technology, and it is undeniably becoming a big concern for candidates.
And you're right that problems have resulted from Rudy's own words, but we can all acknowledge that without the new media, few people would have access to hearing his own words in the first place. Thus, the "blogging atmosphere" has become a critical threat. |
|
|
It is symptomatic of the hubris infecting the upper echelons of the GOP that everything is now like Global Warming: too important to discuss. |
|
|
I don't know WHAT I was thinking. I didn't realize I was hurting people's feelings with my postings and comments criticizing the leading GOP candidates. Had I known feelings would be hurt, I never would have done it. I mean these guys are spending alot of money, other people's money, trying to get their carefully crafted messages across to us densely ignorant masses and some idiot like me comes along and craps all over it. I'm ashamed of myself. I need some serious couch time. A-A-A-U-U-U-M-M-M! |
|
|
|