I read an interesting article recently about the current choices conservative have for the Republican ticket in ’08. Personally, I haven’t been paying much attention at this stage — people are still entering the race and ides can change with one slip of the toungue–so I try to refrain from becoming personally invested in any particular candidate. However, Rudy Giuliani has stood out in my mind as the only person worth entrusting leadership to in the Republican party. After all, McCain has been jumping ship and ignoring the conservative cause right and left (the gang of 14 and the Kennedy-McCain immigration bill are just the first 2 examples that come to mind–plus he’s too old). Romney is a big-government Massachusetts politician–and unelectable as a Mormon. Finally, no one else shows any sort of leadership potential.
Rudy, on the other hand, EXUDES leadership. The man was born one (or fate turned him into one on 9/11 … who knows). And it just so happens that a recent article in the American Thinker (I Highly recommend this article to be read in its entirety) makes a pretty convincing case that Rudy is the right man for the job.
The basic premise is this: Conservatives abhor liberalism and social rot:
Mayor Giuliani delivered what they [conservatives] needed most. He reclaimed New York City from the toxic leftism of his predecessors…
While Giuliani may not be a social conservative, at least he fixes 90% of the social rot we have wanted our current leaders to fix–and have been left empty handed. Giuliani may not be pro life, and may even be for civil unions–nevertheless, he promotes the society conducive to the pro-life adgenda.?Ǭ† For those conservatives who would disqualify Giuliani for these moral positions; I would only challenge them by saying that the President isn’t some “pope” of the Religious right.?Ǭ† The more Conservatives delude themselves with this idiocy, the further isolated they will find themselves.?Ǭ† Even Bush, the “conservative christian”, has scarsely mentioned a word about gay marriage or abortion–he avoids these topics like the plague.
He [Bush] will nominate sound judges (most of the time) but never make the case that Roe v. Wade needs to be overturned because it is the cornerstone of the left’s profoundly destructive jurisprudence of judicial supremacy. He will stand against federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research but never articulate the strong libertarian basis for that stand or attack the callous disdain his political opponents show for the inherent value of human life. He will say as little as humanly possible about the drive for “gay marriage.”
And finally, the crux of the piece: “Social conservatives could benefit from the presidency of someone who agrees with them less but fights for them more.”
And I think this is the reason I am leaning towards Giuliani; I am tired of polite “compassionate” conservatism. It might as well be “turn the other cheek” concervatism for all the good it has done. We need true partizans back in Republican leadership if our goals are to be reached.
“We need true partizans back in Republican leadership if our goals are to be reached.”
I agree with the above statement. However, I don’t think Guiliani is such a partisan politician. He is fiscally conservative, but he has made statements for nearly a decade with regards to gay marriage, abortion, and gun control that are contrary to partisan conservativism. Now that he is running for president, he is withdrawing from some of those positions, much like Romney. This kind of backstep has always bothered me. If someone is going to run, run on what you believe. Don’t sugar coat your views simply to get elected. It’s not honest.
Never ever forget that Mr. G is first and foremost a politician and therefore will sell whatever people are buying. It was easy to do crush the enemy routine on 912, its much more difficult to see it through 5+ years later.