Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers


Monday, March 12, 2007
Is Rudy Nominatable? And, Is Nominatable a Word? (Plus: Rudy-Staff Conference Call)
Posted by: Mary Katharine Ham at 4:07 PM

Well, the junkety-junk's hitting the fan for the Rudy camp in the form of a Drudge-linked YouTube clip in which Rudy insists on the great moral need for public-funding of abortion. Well, there's a powerful saw, indeed-- one that can fell both a fiscal and social conservative oak.

RCP reflects on the relative dirtiness and depth of the dirt on Rudy:

Rudy is now at 38% in the latest RCP Average,which will most likely be his peak as more candidates get in the race and more clips like this continue to be unearthed. If Fred Thompson gets in the race, he would likely vault to a strong third very quickly.

Let's be clear: Video clips like this are totally expected and justpart of the long string of baggage the Giuliani campaign is going to have to manage if they hope to capture the Republican nomination. It is exactly clips like these (and the three marriages, and the Bernie Kerik sludge) that make many analysts discount Giuliani's chances.

Rudy is, indeed, carrying a full set of Samsonites with him on the campaign trail. Are his charisma, promises on judges, and toughness on terror enough to carry him through?

Right now, it's working. Another poll in an early-primary state shows Rudy easily atop, well, everyone:

In head-to-head matchups in the generalelection, the survey found that Giuliani was favored by 46 percent toClinton's 38 percent, and Giuliani had 44 percent to Democratic SenatorBarack Obama's 42 percent.The poll of 600 voters was conductedTuesday through Thursday by Research 2000 for the Reno Gazette-Journaland K-R-N-V--TV. It has a margin of error of plus of minus four percent.Inthe G-O-P field, the survey found Giuliani was backed by 38 percent toSenator John McCain's 18 percent, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's13 percent and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's four percent.

Today, well-known conservative Sen. David Vitter endorsed Rudy. Vitter is the proud owner of a 96 and 92 rating by the American Conservative Union in 2005 and '06, respectively.

And, a report from South Carolina dubs Rudy a "star on the rise," even in the Bible Belt. 

In his column last week, George Will pled with conservatives--a little more melodramatically than called for, I thought-- to consider the Top 3 candidates, the conservative credentials they do have,  and not make the perfect the enemy of the good (All of the Top 3 are moderate-ish guys, after all. What more does George want?). Here's his take on Rudy:

First, that some of the social issues have gone off the boil because argument about them seems sterile: Democrats have scant interest in federal gun control legislation; scientific advances may obviate the need for using stem cells; cultural changes will do more than any feasible legislation can do to reduce abortion numbers; the way to change abortion law is to change courts by means of judicial nominations of the sort Giuliani promises tomake.

Second, that his deviations from the social conservatives' agenda is more than balanced by his record as mayor of New York. That city was liberalism's laboratory as it went from the glittering metropolis celebrated in the movie "Breakfast at Tiffany's'' (1961) to the dystopia of the novel "Bonfire of the Vanities'' (1987). Giuliani successfully challenged the culture of complaint that produced the politics of victimhood that resulted in government by grievance groups.

Word. That second paragraph is what I love about Rudy, and what many people respond to, even those among us who might wish for a more ideologically pure candidate. Of course, I'm more passionately a fiscal/security conservative than a social one, but I know plenty of social conservatives who know Rudy well, know his predilections, and still dig him. The question is whether the luster will last as those social cons get closer to having to mark the dot next to the pro-choice, thrice-married guy in the actual voting booth, judge promises or no.

Will the charisma hold up?

Will the judges promises hold up, for that matter

He appointed Dora Irizarry, who had called herself pro-abortion and had the backing of pro-abortion Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton, to the criminal bench in 1996.

A recent review of judges Giuliani appointed to three of New York state’s lower courts found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans by more than 8 to 1.

However, Kelli Conlin, executive director of NARAL's New York affiliate, disagreed with the assessment, saying there was no real ideological pattern to them.

I was just on a blogger conference call with a couple of Rudy's exploratory guys--Ed Goeas and Brent Seaborn-- and they're touting the consistently good poll numbers Rudy's showing.

Someone asked if maybe the numbers are a reflection of the fact that voters don't know Rudy that well, yet. Seaborn pointed to a Gallup poll, which shows that a majority of voters say they know "a lot" about Rudy.

"Voters may be done being told that they don't know about him when they feel they do know about him,"
His feeling is that people understand he's liberal on social issues, but conservative on fiscal and security issues, and they think of him as "conservative," overall.

"I don't think that can be taken as a miscue or a misunderstanding of where he stands."

Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarters asked if they thought perhaps the polling was soft at this point, and how long the numbers would hold up. Seaborn again:

"It seems to me that the voters...the whole cycle's been accelerated...The primary schedule has moved up...We're really 8 or 9months away. We may have primaries in December this year. We'll have alot of the voting done by early February."

"I think the polling is remarkably strong. We have well-defined candidates.Both Mayor Giuliani and Sen. McCain have almost 100 percent name ID...We're all perfectly aware that the polling is gonna tighten...I think the polling is more accurate than not right now."

Gary Gross of Let Freedom Ring blog identified himself as a social conservative before noting that this go-round, he's more interested in how candidates would fight the War on Terror. Is that the sense the Rudy camp is getting from folks? Ed Goeas:

"I think you're seeing some of that in terms of the global war on terror. There is too, to some extent some factoring in of two other words--Hillary Clinton."

"I'm also a very strong social conservative myself. Sometimes we fall into the trap of believing what the other side generalizes about us."

"A large part of the social conservative family has always...been concerned about a multilayer of issues."

"It is that they (social conservatives) are factoring in (with Rudy)-- a balance between all of them."
I got on the call late, so I'm betting there was some good talk about the abortion video and the possible Fred Thompson candidacy (star power + conservatism = silver bullet for Rudy?), but I missed it. I'll try to find someone who blogged it up.


View in ascending order View in descending order
asymmetric blog writes: Saturday, May, 12, 2007 7:31 PM
Don't worry too much about social issues
Giuliani presents a problem for many conservatives in the party. He shouldn't. As Republicans, we should primarily concern ourselves with the economy and foreign policy while accepting any conservative that‘s at least neutral on cultural issues.

http://www.nelsonguirado.com/index.php/asymmetric/2007/05/12/giuliani_the_g_o_p_social_issues_and_you
one hot minute writes: Tuesday, March, 13, 2007 3:08 AM
tdau97, I'm going to borrow your line...

tdau97,

You and I would each ideally prefer, say, a Rick Santorum as the nominee, however, we know such a candidate probably couldn't win the general election.
Therefore, it's still better to go with a moderate GOP nominee who agrees with you 70% of the time vs. say, 0% of the time---which is what we'd get if the Dems win the White House.

By the way, I'm going to borrow your line about "being that picky when deciding who to marry."
That's classic.
I want to use it on the girl I'm dating, next time she takes 10 minutes to decide which salad dressing she wants when we're at a restaurant.
(That's God punishing me for dating a liberal.)
Virginia Patriot writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 11:45 PM
HUNTER 2008
The better choice:

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.

The primary responsibility of the U.S. government is to protect the territorial integrity and people of this country. They have completely abdicated this responsibility. Both parties have been complicit in this. We are being told it is not possible to control our borders, enforce our laws, and thereby control our destiny as a nation. Hogwash. We are being sold out by corporations intent on importing workers for jobs that can't be exported with the taxpayers paying the true costs, financial and human. If we act like sheep and don't stop the inundation across our borders, we will lose our country without a bleat.

http://www.gohunter08.com

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=23212
tdau1997 writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 11:45 PM
Fair enough...
"Rudy can say anything now, but could nominate Allen Dershowitz or Lawrence Tribe to the Supreme Court once elected."

Now list the nominations Hillobama could (substitute will) make and compare and contrast. FWIW, I have a laundry list composed of things I want in a candidate that is very similar to yours. You can be *that* picky if you are deciding who to marry, however you are going to be bitterly disappointed most every time when picking your candidate. If you sit this one out and the other side wins, then you have no one to blame.

BTW, onehotminute, I appreciate the Auburn Tiger reference. That was AUsome...
one hot minute writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 11:36 PM
1/2 a glass of water is better than none

Virginia Patriot,

Look, as my man tdau97 ably stated, "it depends on what your most important issue is."

From your brief response, it sounds like your number one issue is illegal immigration, rather than the GWOT.
And you don't actually believe that Rudy Giuliani would appoint judges who are any different than the ones that Hillary or Barack would appoint.

The way I look at is this; if I'm stranded in the Mojave desert, a half a glass of water is better than no glass of water at all.

Rudy or Mitt may not be the perfect candidate, but in life, we rarely are provided a "perfect" or "ideal" opportunity on a silver platter.
Thus, we maturely choose the one which is the BETTER choice.

Cynewulf writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 11:26 PM
Good posts, VPat
"Rudy can say anything now, but could nominate Allen Dershowitz or Lawrence Tribe to the Supreme Court once elected."

Exactly!
Virginia Patriot writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 11:08 PM
Judges
Rudy can say anything now, but could nominate Allen Dershowitz or Lawrence Tribe to the Supreme Court once elected. I believe he has even said good things about Ruth Ginsberg so there is no telling what you might get. Look at the judges he has appointed. More liberal than I'm comfortable with.
Virginia Patriot writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 11:00 PM
No Border Security/No Homeland Security
We can pretend we can win the WOT with the southern border wide open, but it's a fantasy. Any form of amnesty is surrender of our sovereignty and abandonment of the rule of law. Rudy favors amnesty. Once we give away our country, what exactly would we be fighting for?
one hot minute writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 10:57 PM
follow up comments for Virginia Pat

Virginia Patriot,

Respectfully, you claim you're unsure there's a difference between a Romney or Giuliani Administration vs. a Hillary or Barack Administration.

At the very least, do you not identify potential differences regarding the execution of the war against global jihad ?

How about regarding the nomination of a U.N. Ambassador ? How about Secretary of Defense ? And Secretary of State ? How about the authority to propose the federal budget ?
(Bro, you don't want to admit to Mary Katharine Ham that you don't care if the OMB director is a DEMOCRAT, do you ?)

Also, Virginia Patriot, you wrote earlier, ***************
Promises on judges is a pretty thin reason to vote for anyone who does not share your values.
***************

As our Auburn Tiger friend tdau97 says, it boils down to what your most important issue is.

Like tdau97, I feel that the GWOT transcends all other issues.
But the second most importance is the issue of judge appointments.

The ACLU, CAIR, People for the American Way, et al can subvert our legislatures and our traditions by having their cases decided by judges appointed by Hillary or Barack.
And think about cases regarding NSA wiretapping, terrorist detention centers, pre-emption of domestic terrorism---are you willing to risk such cases potentially brought before judges appointed by Giuliani or Romney---or Hillary or Barack ?

Think of all the wacky court decisions which have been handed down in recent decades.
Inevitably, it's always revealed that those judges were Carter or Clinton appointees.
And of course, Bush 41 gave us David Souter because it wasn't a big enough deal for him to even do a thorough assessment of Souter prior to his nomination.
Look at Clinton's Supreme Court appointments; Ginsberg and Breyer.

Giuliani may have been married a few times, and Romney may subscribe to a different theology, but at the end of the day, it is results which count, and if either of those gentlemen appoint Scalia-esque judges, that's the bottom line.
BG writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 10:54 PM
All the major candidate are good on WOT
All of the leading contenders are strong on the WOT. However, they are not anti gun, pro abortion, and pro gay agenda.

Further, Guiliani was pro life before he became pro abortion (not to mention pro government funding of abortion) so he could win in NY.

I would like to hear an explanation of his reasons for changing to a pro abortion position.

Yes, I will support Rudy if he gets the nomination. However, everything that social conservatives have worked for since Reagan is on the line. Expect a percentage of them to sit it out if Rudy is the nominee. You may even see a 3rd party.
Cynewulf writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 10:41 PM
Shubi, I gave up hope that you'd ever
show up on TH again. Good to see you. I do have to disagree with you on this one, however. What makes Giuliani tougher on terrorists than just about any actual conservative you could pull out of a hat? And what makes you think he would close the borders? If he did, I missed it. Just about every conservative, on the other hand, has been saying they want to close the borders.

I do agree with you that the war on terror and closing the borders, which is as much a part of the war on terror as it is its own issue, are top priorities. I just don't think Rudy's the only man for the job.

And, as a side note, let's look at this: Rudy wants a strong (federal) defense/offense against terror (as do most conservatives) AND supports gun control. That's a dangerous combo there. Now, I'm not saying that Rudy's the next Hitler or Stalin or anything remotely like that, but when a guy wants the govt. to be strong militarily, but the populace weak, that should get our attention.

Looking forward to seeing you posting more on TH.
Cynewulf writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 10:30 PM
Hold the sales pitch, MKat,
'cause I ain't buyin'. Let's take a look at just one issue. Gun control. First, to deal with Mr. Will, the Dems "have scant interest in federal gun control legislation" because up until recently there was no way it would pass. If I recall, they now have the majority in both houses. If there's a president who's A-OK with gun control, do you think there's maybe a slight chance that the Dems might discover a little interest in federal gun control legislation? But all of that's a wash in comparison to this: Anyone who gets it so wrong on any part of the Bill of Rights really shouldn't be running the country. I'm with VPat; nominate a conservative, someone we can all support.
shubi writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 10:15 PM
We Need a Tough Leader
Guiliani is the only leader we can count on to win the war on terror and close the borders.

If we get defeated in this war, if Iran gets nukes or if we allow the left to surrender; it won't matter if Rudy is divorced or thinks abortion is ok. However, I think Rudy is not for abortion. He was just for getting elected in NYC.

Guiliani is the only proven tough guy we have on either side.
tdau1997 writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 10:03 PM
I could/should have summed up...
my last post with "what onehotminute said"...

I didn't read it til after the fact, heh. Great job, onehot. Exactly the way I feel.
tdau1997 writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 9:29 PM
Boils down to your most important issue
mine's the WOT. I am with you on nominating a conservative, but the candidate who advances past the primary has to be able to win the general. I'm not confident that Romney, Newt, etc. can. However, the election is still a way's away. Rudy understands the threat for what it is, and I trust he would take the steps necessary to run it the right way.

One of my biggest concerns is the infidelity thing with Newt and Giuliani. That represents an extreme personality flaw which does not speak well for the fortitude of a leader. Now, I am not one to condemn someone for life based on a mistake, especially if they own up to it and attempt to make amends. But, that issue scares me with whoever we put in office. It really irks me to hear folks say, "I don't care what he does in his personal life..." That is about as wrong as wrong can be. Excuse the off-topic rant.
Virginia Patriot writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 8:57 PM
Romney maybe
Guiliani not so much. Once he "regularizes" the illegal aliens, we will never get another Republican elected nationally.
one hot minute writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 8:35 PM
question for my friend Virginia Patriot.

Virginia Patriot,

Do you honestly believe there is no big difference between a Giuliani or Romney Administration vs. a Hillary or Obama Administration ?

Virginia Patriot writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 8:10 PM
Let's nominate a conservative
Then we can concentrate on winnning and not trying to browbeat our own side. A choice between 2 New York liberals is no choice. Both pro-amnesty, both pro-abortion, both pro-gun control. Many will choose not to participate. They see the same destination, the difference being the speed we get there. Promises on judges is a pretty thin reason to vote for anyone who does not share your values.
one hot minute writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 6:51 PM
conservatives for Hillary in '08 ?

If we're talkin' bout a video from 1989, I hope it is a music video by Bon Jovi, The Cure, or Love & Rockets that is being discussed.
But are people seriously focused on a video of Rudy Giuliani....from 1989 ?

Ultimately, while abortion and other issues are important, we musn't forget that prosecuting the global war on terrorism is "the" issue which transcends all others.
If we lose to the jihadists, then abortion, and waiting periods to purchase guns will be the least of our concerns.

I hope Republicans & conservatives will focus on winning the White House, as opposed to being hell-bent upon nominating the most conservative candidate regardless of that particular candidate's ability to win the general election.

To paraphrase something which Ronald Reagan once said, "Someone who agrees with you 70% of the time is your friend---not your enemy."

In life, we don't always get to select the perfect "ideal" path.
Sometimes we have to go with the less-than-perfect choice---and that applies to presidential elections, as well.

Rudy promises to appoint Federal judges in the mold of Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Alito.
Those are judges from the SAME cloth as Gingrich, or Brownback or whomever the fantasy league conservative of the moment would appoint.
He'll also be tough as nails in the fight against global jihad.

Rudy can win over moderates, independents, and some Democrats.
His appeal might even put a few of the traditionally blue mid-Atlantic states in play.
In the electoral college paradigm, if Rudy could tilt Pennsylvania his way, that would break the Democrats' backs.

But if the GOP fails to be wise in fielding an ELECTABLE nominee in November 2008, we won't be blessed with complaining that President Rudy or President Mitt is too liberal---instead, we'll be complaining that President Hillary Clinton is too liberal.

Let me just say that again; President Hillary.

I realize there are a lot of 'hell or high water' Republicans who threaten to stay home on Election Day rather than vote for a pro-choice candidate such as Rudy or someone with a different religion such as Mitt, but before you do cut off your noses to spite your faces, ask yourselves if you truly would prefer Hillary's or Barack's Supreme Court appointments to those of a Giuliani or Romney Administration.
tdau1997 writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 6:38 PM
Virginia Patriot...
Hillary being on the other side of the ticket may inspire some old-fashioned party loyalty come Nov. '08. A non-vote is a vote in her column, and I am not about to help her, Obama, or Edwards in that way...or any other. Apathy is a poor excuse. (not directed at you)

Virginia Patriot writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 6:18 PM
Nominatable?
The RNC and money players may get him nominated, but won't get him elected. There are too many old-fashioned conservatives who just won't show up in Nov '08. Some actually have convictions that interfere with party loyalty, if you can imagine that.
IfAFrogHadWings writes: Monday, March, 12, 2007 4:40 PM
For Rudy...
...like everyone else, salvation follows "repentance." Rudy can recover from his overly-liberal past if he's a genuinely changed man since running for Mayor of New York City, but Rudy needs to demonstrate that he's changed course, and that his course change is genuine. He still has wrong ideas that won't change, but if he can agree that the debate over things like abortion belong in State Legislatures, and not primarily in the US Supreme Court, then we can agree to disagree. Let him go to work on the Global War on Terrorism, and let him leave all those things that the US Constitution is silent on, to the States.
Sign Up to Post Your Comments Sign Up to Post Your Comments
Please take a few seconds to sign up, then you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, create your own blog and more! If you are already registered, click here.
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.
 


Your Blog Postings:
Last updated 15 Minutes 30 Seconds Ago
Last updated 23 Minutes 31 Seconds Ago
Last updated 24 Minutes 37 Seconds Ago
Last updated 52 Minutes 39 Seconds Ago
Last updated 1 Hours 5 Minutes 15 Seconds Ago
 

Archives of our Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs

Blog Search



Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Townhall Blogs
Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Columns Columns
Your Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Your Blogs
By Month
 November 2009
 October 2009
 September 2009
 August 2009
 July 2009
 June 2009
 May 2009
 April 2009
 March 2009
 February 2009
 January 2009
 December 2008
 November 2008
 October 2008
 September 2008
 August 2008
 July 2008
 June 2008
By Issue
 A Culture of Life
 Budget & Government
 Campaigns & Elections
 Education
 Energy & Environment
 Faith & Family
 Foreign Affairs
 Health Care
 Immigration
 Jobs & Economy
 Judges & Courts
 Media & Culture
 Property Rights
 Safety & Security
 Science & Technology
 Second Amendment
 Social Security
 Tax Relief
Advertisement

Comments Comments

Tazzmax
 Re: 'This isn't the Britain we fought for,' say the 'unknown warriors' of WWII
  By pillar
just ESAD
 Re: Twenty lessons your teenage daughter will learn from the Twilight movies
  By dreadnaught
Bow and kiss
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Kenny Z
The Jig is up
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Rob
Yep,
 Re: 'This isn't the Britain we fought for,' say the 'unknown warriors' of WWII
  By Tazzmax
GO
 Re: And the Countdown Continues
  By Tazzmax
It's all a part
 Re: NYT: Being On Food Stamps No Longer Carries A Stigma
  By Tazzmax
Munck
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By NOTW
ray
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Pat
Oh yeah
 Re: 'This isn't the Britain we fought for,' say the 'unknown warriors' of WWII
  By twomay
Axe eternally gets it wrong:
 Re: This Day in American History...
  By homer noble
More facts wrong by Jo
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
Oops
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Pat
Jo
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
Say what?
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Jo
Been around over 60 years, Munck
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By ray
Peer review
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Pat
Jo, it was a pleasure posting with you..
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By clarityseeker
D'oh Homer...
 Re: This Day in American History...
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
NeoConScum 3:05 PM
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Bob Munck

The Latest on Town HallThe Latest on Town Hall


Blog Roll Blog Roll