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
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Dean Barnett :: Townhall.com Columnist
Mrs. President?
by Dean Barnett
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


In response to Barbara Walters' question of whether he would allow his wife Judith to sit in on Cabinet meetings if he becomes president, Rudy Giuliani said, "If she wanted to. If they were relevant to something that she was interested in. I mean that would be something that I'd be very, very comfortable with." Across the nation, one could almost hear the other Republican presidential contenders heave hearty sighs of relief. Perhaps the Rudy juggernaut will indeed derail itself.

As if Rudy hadn't done enough damage by telling America that he would not only be "very comfortable" with his third wife sitting in on Cabinet meetings but adding an extra "very" for good measure, his wife joined the conversation adding that she would enthusiastically sit in on policy meetings if given the green light by her husband, "and certainly in the areas of health care." As Mrs. Giuliani's name will not be appearing on any ballot, the couple is staking out some rather bold turf here.

A solid Red-Meat Republican's first instinct when hearing of the Giuliani's ambitious spousal plans will be to think back to the Bad Old Days when the Clintons ruled the land. Where a less uxorious husband might have been satisfied to give his wife a broach or some other expensive bauble to celebrate their newly won power, Bill Clinton gave Hillary Clinton 14% of the American economy to toy with as a cat does a terrified mouse.

Mrs. Clinton's effort to impose Hillary-Care on an unwilling nation was a historic blunder by the normally shrewd First Couple. While Mrs. Clinton had qualifications and a curriculum vitae far more impressive than the present Mrs. Giuliani, there was no possible defense for the notion that she was the country's most qualified individual to retool the American healthcare system. In short, the president's selection of his wife for such an important task was an outrageous act of nepotism.

Her suddenly sweeping power violated deeply held American values. The Founding Fathers' decision to avoid the trappings of monarchy was not accidental nor was it lightly made. In the system they designed, the President would be no king and his wife, therefore, would be no queen. Until the Clintons, every prior president showed a demonstrable understanding of this basic fact. As First Lady, the presidential spouse had ceremonial functions and was welcome to tackle uncontroversial Motherhood-and-Apple-Pie issues like literacy. And when a First Lady grew too big for her britches in the media's eyes (as Nancy Reagan often did), various forces vigorously acted to return her to her proper place.

To be fair to Rudy, the Giulianis' comments aren't entirely without precedent. When Geraldine Ferraro was Walter Mondale's running mate back in 1984, her husband, John Zaccaro, told the media that if she were to ever become president, he would insist on attending all the important meetings his President-wife held. One could argue that this statement somewhat undermined the whole feminist empowerment thing that Mondale's selection of Ferraro was supposed to advance.

And there have been First Ladies other than Mrs. Clinton who have wielded great power while in the White House. After her husband Woodrow Wilson suffered a debilitating stroke, Edith Wilson assumed many of the day-to-day responsibilities of president. While doing so, Mrs. Wilson had the good sense to not attempt a retooling of a massive chunk of the American economy or to launch any other significant policy adventures. She was a caretaker for the office of the president just as she was a caretaker for the president himself.

More importantly, the scale of Mrs. Wilson's role was at the time largely unknown. She operated behind the scenes. If the American people had known the scope of Mrs. Wilson's role, they likely wouldn't have tolerated it. President Wilson's eager Vice President, Thomas Riley Marshall, certainly wouldn't have tolerated it.

Where the Giulianis truly stumbled was in assuming that the Clintons established a new norm. Quite the contrary, the Clintons' dalliance with monarchial privilege was not only disastrous but widely unpopular. Bill Clinton's appointment of his wife to a role of such import was a moment of historic arrogance.

The Clintons did have the defense, however, that candidate Clinton was quite explicit that America would be getting "two Clintons for the price of one" if they voted for him. In other words, America had fair warning.

Still, when Mrs. Clinton became healthcare czarina, the common sentiment was that the first couple had gone too far. If the Giulianis anticipate a similarly sweeping role for Mrs. Giuliani, they might want to keep the lessons of the Clintons' missteps in mind. Besides, if Mrs. Giuliani truly wants a prominent voice on policy, there are avenues available that will give her the kind of legitimacy that a royal decree from her husband will lack.

She can always run for Senator.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Dean Barnett blogs almost daily at HughHewitt.com. He has also been a frequent contributor to the Weekly Standard's online edition, The Daily Standard. He can be reached for comment at soxblog@aol.com.

Be the first to read Dean Barnett's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Mrs President?

Not likely this time around.

Run Fred Run!
The more I get to know the MSM's anointed top GOP candidates...the less I like any of them!

Please Fred! Save us conservatives from having to wear a gas mask in the voting booth in 2008!

photogbill, I could not agree more!
The more I hear about Rudy, the sicker I get about him, as well as the other "conservatives" (what a joke) currently being touted for the Republican nomination. I echo your sentiment,
"Run Fred, run." I also heard today that Tom Tancredo is now putting his hat in the ring, which I am equally thrilled about.

As for Rudy, maybe he could have his lover sit in on the meetings along with his wife (kind of like he did at the Governor's mansion.)You know, the more the merrier!

As for Barbara Walters' question
to Rudy...what kind of stupid question is that anyway? The woman is supposedly a professional journalist and THAT is the kind of question she poses to the man? I think the woman has been losing it for some time now (especially with her support of Rosie O'Donnell.)

You Know, The Longer I Live,

The more "liberals" sound like wussies.

Sometimes

Addressing these morons on the issues is like beating your head against a wall.

Just sit back and pick them off from 100 meters.

Pol Pot

Never killed anyone...................

Did He?

Today's liberals renounce Pol Pot and MaO and Castro and Che and Stalin and Hitler - don't they??????????????

Perhaps some "liberal" could tell me the difference between Che and Hitler....

Come on, boobies. Where, exactly, does Medicaide leave off from Leninist Communism?

Maybe Some "Liberal"

Could explain the behaviour of Pol Pot?

I would be really curious to see the argument.

"Fat Chance, White Man!!!!!"

Before that happens, thou shalt roast on subsidiary heat of lesbian sexual excess.

See here
You know BlueBustard that went over the limit of reasonable free speech. To compare Democrats to some of the evilest men who ever lived is little girl hysteria. I dont care if you agree with their politics or not the bonds of country are stronger then hate filled gasbags like you. Democrats are dying at the same rate as Republicans in Iraq. In Vietnam, there were as many Democrats as Republicans in prison camps. In Afghanistan they fight side by side protecting each others a*s and could care less about one anothers voting records.

Those are my countrymen you're talking about.

Showtime
Barbara Walters has a long history of asking questions intended to throw her interviewees off balance (e.g. "What kind of tree would you be?"). Rudy has a history of personal eccentricity that tends to throw his supporters off balance. Result: Showtime, folks.


Of course Babwa Wawa
will ask Repubs stupid questions that make them look stupid. That is her job a Democrap operative.

Of course Rudy will give a liberal answer similar to the Klintons because that is what he is...a liberal with an (R).

Giuliani Is Not Looking Good
See washingtonpost.com 3-31: now Giuliani's longtime business associate Bernard Kerik (aka The Thug) has been advised that he is likely to be charged with several felonies including tax evasion and conspiracy to commit wiretapping. You may recall that Kerik was Giuliani's personal recommendation for National Security Advisor (G later said this had been a bad choice).

Then they need to act like countrymen...
Mike_lee, if you want to claim Truthers like Rosie O'Donnel, and "patriots" like the jackass photographed in Portland cr*pp*ng on the flag as fellow countrymen, that tells me all I'll EVER need to know about your judgement.

Rudy's Being Rudy
If you want to see Rudy's favorite cabinet member in action look at this video:

http://www.nysunpolitics.com/blog/entry_print.php?id=24


jimmah, roselyn and the cabinet
what about the Carters? I'm pretty sure Roselyn was one of those Iron Butterflies and that she was known for sitting in on the cabinet meetings.
Wish that could be verified.

I'm a Rudy supporter but ...
His handlers really need to tell him not to simper all over Judy Nathan on national television. Makes him look a bit whipped.

Hey BlueBastar...Ooops, sorry...
BlueBustard,
it's nutters like you that gives TownHall and America a bad name. Why not post on the Nazi sites, they're obviously more suitable for you tastes.

I'm sure my Democratic/Liberal friends in Iraq/Afghanistan/Yemen/Lebanon would like to pi*s in your beer.

Forgot to say to BlueB
Obviously the idea of lesbians seems to get you hot!

Rudy? Judy, Judy, Judy?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070331/ap_on_el_pr/giuliani_wife

At least he clarified his comment. Candidates have to go through the meat grinder in a Presidential race. It is especially frustrating when a guy you like commits an unforced error and jumps into Baba Wawa's meat grinder. Rudy is on top right now and the entire focus is on him.

The NYT is now suggesting what he knew or didn't know about Kerik's organized crime connections. Of course Rudy made an career out of busting and convicting organized crime members, particularly Italian-Sicilian organized crime, in New York City--but that is ignored.

And of course this will happen to McCain, Gingrich, Romney, or for that matter Thompson if he actually gets in. Republicans get a tougher time of it, but the Dems will get it too.

Vote lost
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

Giuliani's wife
I could live with a candidate's divorce (or even two) and many people are estranged from their adult chidren. But moving your mistress into Gracie Mansion while your wife and kids still live there shows an immorality I won't accept. We no longer elect just the man, witness the revolting Clintons. I won't vote for Rudy's tramp as a First Lady!

Rudy Means...
...that she can sit in until he finds the next replacement.

SPOUSES IN OFFICE
Why not have all the members of the cabinet bring their spouses to meetings. Why just the president. While were at it lets have all the senators and representatives bring theirs, or significant other as the case may be. We might need a bigger room. CEO's don't bring their wives to work, do you. It's ludicrous to think that one hates women because you don't want them in cabinet meetings. IT'S NOT THEIR JOB. THEY WEREN'T ELECTED OR APPOINTED TO THAT JOB. Comment like that have changed my opinion of an obviously PW Rudy. A real man would have told Barbara that it was a ridiculous question and to move on.

Mrs. President Giuliani
Hear! Hear! I was a bit startled when I read Rudy Giuliani's comments with regard to his wife attending meetings, etc. I'm female and it's a definite turnoff to see and hear that the division of duties between my elected president and his or her spouse are blurred. If I were to select a surgeon or a lawyer, would I want the spouse in the operating room or the court room giving their input? I vote for "The Man." Period. Laura Bush is doing it the way I prefer. There's many a spouse who has an incredible blind spot when it comes to their significant other. Have you ever worked with or for someone who had a spouse from hell?

uxorism
Giuliani is insane.

Ron Paul gets my vote in primary
Ron Paul now leads in the http://www.pajamasmedia.com poll, after being added back to the poll.

He beats out all of the other Republicans including even Fred Thompson and Tancredo.

Paul clearly has the best ideas for America at this point in time and it looks as though ppl are responding to it.

One of the first Christian websites or groups that I know of http://www.christian-quest.com, has come out and endorsed Ron Paul.

As the MSM choice for candidates get exposed the "dark horse", "long-shot" Ron Paul keeps gaining ground. I love it!

Their plan to get the most liberal candidates as frontrunners is backfiring on them.

If the true conservatives keep holding out for the best we will get the best candidates, it is working.

Go Ron Paul. http://www.ronpaul.com


Correction www.ronpaul.org
Correction on last post the site is http://www.ronpaul.org

Rudy / Judy
The only reasons I considered voting for Rudy in the primaries was his stance on terrorism and popularity as "Amer. Mayor." Other than that he's way too liberal for me. Getting someone on the ballot to beat "Commie Clinton" seemed to be the only choice this time around. But now there's a light at the end of this tunnel. RUN FRED RUN!!!


Giuliani flunks first "gut check".
Anyone running for Prez should expect lots of questions like this, whether they are relevant or not. Blaming Walters for asking the question is aside from anything that matters. What matters is that Giuliani didn't (doesn't?) have the stones to say "No. My wife will not be sitting in on cabinet meetings because she won't be in the cabinet."

He didn't have the stone to say "No. First ladies have never sat in on cabinet meeting except for Mrs. Clinton, and right now most people aren't too happy with her for doing it."

He didn't have the stones to say "I always listen to my wife's advice but I don't always take it."

His campaign has barely started and he's already starting to say what he thinks people want to hear instead of the genuine truth.

Ron Paul is the true conservative
Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record
* He has never voted to raise taxes.
* He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
* He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
* He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
* He has never taken a government-paid junket.
* He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

* He voted against the Patriot Act.
* He voted against regulating the Internet.
* He voted against the Iraq war.

* He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

* He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

CSPAN interview:
1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHxQGSiuLf4
2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHrteJCn8Ag
3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhex77v8NDQ
4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewghSVp-GIk

Archive of articles:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

Youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/RonPaul2008dotcom

Myspace:
http://www.myspace.com/ronpaul2008
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=70183124


Rudy
Tough on terrorism, Amer. Mayor, and popularity were the only reasons I'd vote for Rudy. He's too liberal on everything else, but better that Commie Clinton in charge. Now there's hope and a light at the end of the tunnel.

RUN FRED RUN!!!

I see...
the nation's only Ron Paul supporter has joined the conversation. Welcome!!!

TOO MANY VENGEFUL POSTS ON THIS BLOG
I am waiting to see all of these candidates play out their platform before I support anyone.

However, I do think WISEONE (March 31,12:03p.m.)and COOKIE (March 31,11:28a.m.) made some important points.

wiseone
You summed it up very well. Can't get past that gut check. As for Judy she kind of strikes me as a little empty headed.

P.S.
The more I read about Ron Paul the more I like him, but he really needs to get out there more.

Ron Paul
is a GREAT choice for president, though he is more libertarian than conservative - which is a GOOD thing - unless you are locked into the religious side of conservatism as so many are.

Unfortunately, Ron Paul is in the same boat as Walter E. Williams, who brilliantly said, "If the American people would vote for a guy like me, they wouldn't NEED a guy like me."

Liberals Love Pol Pot
so much. It's amazing how they come out of the woodwork when they get compared to their famous, murderous philosophical bedfellows.

Liberalism practices mass murder NOW in America. It's logical progression is to apply abortion retroactively to "nutters" like me who simply go overboard in free speech by calling them what they are: Political and ideological KILLERS. (All for the common good, of course.)

Che, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Castro, Lenin

Liberals, all of them.

So what
What first lady would want to sit in on a cabinet meeting and why ask such a stupid question? One has to assume that most presidents would discuss almost anything with their wives as do couples who communicate so there are few secrets between them except for the obvious exceptions. So a president could discuss what might be coming up at a cabinet meeting without his wife having to sit in.

Will Bill sit in on Hillary's meetings?
For all those playing the women's lib card regarding Mrs. Giuliani's rightful place in cabinet meetings, may we also inquire if this means Bill Clinton has the same right to access should Hillary win? Come to the meetings, be there to tell her the proper course of action, maybe have her appoint him to overhaul some vital aspect of national policy? The only acceptable response to the Walters question from any presidential candidate of either sex is: "The Constitution gives no office or authority to the President's spouse."

Hmm... David Cameron?
David Cameron or Gordon Brown? I'm beginning to wonder if I'm in the wrong country again.

Kodiac, It's different when you're a dem
If Hillary actually won the drive-bys would laud any decision she makes how anything as the most brilliant and progressive ever. Of coarse you are making a wholly logical viewpoint here and your insight is dead on, but it doesn't matter in the eyes of the drive-by media. It simply is just different when you're a democrat. It ain't justice, it just is.

Rudy analysis
The more I find out about Rudy the more the guy appears to be moderate at best. He is certainly not the ideal candidate, however he does posess certain qualities that conservatives cherish. First of which is a tough stand against terrorism; at least with Rudy we know the War on Terror will be taken seriously, which is almost reason enough on its own. Also, he has a way of dealing with the drive-by media that makes us stand up and cheer. There are also things about him that bother me but he is still a damn sight better than Hillary. I think Romney makes a great candidate even though I'm not to keen on his Massachussetts health care system. The upshot to either one of these guys is that they are both executives (Romney was Gov. of Mass. and Rudy was mayor of N.Y., arguably a bigger job than some governorships). Executives almost always beat senators in presidential races, and it would appear that all of the democrat candidates in this cycle are senators. This also one of many reasons I don't support Senator McCain. Fred Thompson is very interesting. He hasn't even announced yet and he is already gaining momentum. Now he was a Senator, but he was also an actor, and the characters he played all appeared to be tough guys. In today's world where perception is reality, and given the fact that Thompson is a tremendously effective communicator, I think he could snag a whole bunch of Reagan democrats. Also, he appears to be pretty conservative; I've been loving what I've been hearing him say on his Paul Harvey appearances. We'll have to wait and see.

The bottom line
Even if Rudy has liberal tendencies and Romney is a mormon (which shouldn't matter but it might), McCain has all of his shortcomings and Thompson hasn't announced yet, any of these people are preferable to Hillary. I'd love to think that guys like Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul had a real chance, but I just don't see it at this point. Like I said before, I really dig Fred Thompson right now, and if he does this right, gets in early enough so as to compete financially with Rudy, Romney, McCain and (potentially) Newt, stakes his claim to conservative principles, picks up a running mate like Rick Santorum, and fires back at the drive by media, he has an excellent shot. The most important thing is picking a candidate that all of us conservatives and republicans can rally around, and then handing the democrats the desicive defeat they so righteously deserve.

Ron Paul will never get my primary vote,
but I'd hold my nose and vote for him in the generals if he made it that far... I'm all for a Thompson/Hunter ticket, or a Thompson/Giuliani. (I'll take Hunter first) On immigration my rep, Daniel E Lungren R-Ca 3 did far better-- A- instead of B for Paul. Thompson is someone who when he speaks people listen; much like Reagan. We don't need another whingey Texan. Let's come up with some geographic balance here.

I wasn't going to anyway
But if I were Rudy supporter I would be worried right about now.

As far as allowing any spouse to "sit in" on cabinet meetings... if the spouse was on the ballot I voted for, OK. IF NOT... NO WAY IN HE11!

Does the advise and consent role of Congress apply to 1st spouses?

Does Congress hold confirmation hearings on all REAL Cabinet members?

PS
Someone stated yes on the Carter couple both attending cabinet meetings...something I've always suspected and have been getting a lot of proof of lately was that SHE was the brains of that family anyway...

BUT I would like to see the proof other than some TH poster saying it was so, or that Jimmy needed to be filled in on what took place.

Especially if the poster is a Lib...they'll say anything they "think" is good for their heroes.


Judy Rulan-armi...
started out for me as a play on his Drag Queen persona...NOW I have to worry that it could end being MORE TRUE when the 3rd Mrs.Giuliani "sits in" on cabinet meetings.....Oh Boy.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
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.