Posts Tagged → Rudolph Giuliani
Bloomberg makes a more-honest man of himself
Current New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, the “favorite Republican” of all New York media types who can’t pair the words “favorite” and “Republican” together in a polite sentence, but of no one in the GOP, has dropped out of the GOP.
Well, at least he’s finally being honest with himself. Bloomberg, neither a conservative nor a real Republican, is halfway to being completely honest. He’s admitted he’s no longer in the GOP this week, filing in New York as an independent. Now he just needs to admit that his values have far more in common with MoveOn.org than the Cato Institute, and we’ll finally have the political breakthrough the world has been waiting for: a liberal Republican finally admitting he’s a sham artist out to win election under the GOP banner that he’d never win under more honest labeling.
Of course, don’t tell that to the New York Times, who is hoping Bloomberg can win as an independent if Hillary falls short. Either way, the entire drug-addled staff is readying their vans and their van racks for a return to the hippie hippie 70s, just as soon as Bush is either impeached for no reason at all (which they still believe is possible) or finally leaves office in favor of… anyone except a Republican.
Boy, are they gonna have a hangover when they wake up in November ’08 to President Newt Gingrich and Vice-President Mike Huckabee, or what? Heh-heh-heh.
Thompson rumbles to the front for now
Former Tennessee Senator and Hollywood star in films like Die Hard 2 as well as TV’s Law and Order, Fred Thompson, isn’t even formally in the GOP race for the presidency yet, and his star has already eclipsed that of former New York mayor Rudy Guiliani. While well within the margin of error, Thompson now has a narrow lead over Guiliani in most polls, seeming to draw conservatives who’d been undecided, as well as robbing disenchanted supporters away from John McCain and Mitt Romney.
By the time he enters the race formally, he’ll either be considered a reliable part of a two-man race for the nomination against Guiliani, or his 15 minutes will have faded as conservatives rally around a more obvious savior, Newt Gingrich.
The political sound machines are already getting fired up and it’s not even 2008 yet for another six months and two weeks.
Is Thompson a more reliable conservative than Giuliani, McCain and Romney? Sure. It doesn’t take much to lay claim to that mantle, but sure.
The real question is, can Thomson command the stage well enough to be victorious over the “girl-power” candidate, Hillary, and the “pretty-boy power” candidate, Obama.
Ultimately, that’s who he’ll be tested against if he gets the nomination. Might be nice to know he can go toe-to-toe without blinking before anointing the man.
Bloomberg a dangerous wildcard
Current New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg is a dangerous wild card in the upcoming 2008 presidential election. He is especially dangerous toward the hopes of GOP candidates for office, a danger made more real by a recent online report suggesting Bloomberg is willing to spend up to one billion of his $5.5B personal fortune in a third-party bid for the presidency.
The popular media take is that Bloomberg is a change of pace from far-left Democrats and far-right Republicans, because he is socially liberal, fiscally conservative and from the East Coast. Yet that holds no water as a viable difference from at least two, and possibly three, current top presidential contenders.
First of all, Bloomberg is a virtual carbon-copy of top GOP presidential contender Rudolph Giuliani, who has the benefit of running as a major party candidate. Their views are nearly identical and Giuliani has the benefit of receiving a lion’s share of the credit for post-9/11 leadership in New York City. It Giuliani secures the GOP nod, there would be no appreciable difference between the two that would make a Bloomberg run make any kind of sense, other than to split the vote and allow a Democratic presidential victory.
Second is GOP candidate Mitt Romney, currently battling with Arizona Senator John McCain for second place versus Giuliani for the Republican endorsement. Just like Bloomberg and Giuliani, Romney is of the exact same socially liberal, fiscally conservative, East Coast liberal type represented by Giuliani and Bloomberg. Again, a Romney candidacy would provide no contrast for Bloomberg to run against, other than to split the anti-Hillary/anti-Obama vote and ensure a Democratic win. And it should be noted that McCain, while not an East Coast candidate, fits in lock step positionally with Giuliani, Romney and Bloomberg.
In fact, the GOP field is so packed with East Coast social liberal/fiscal conservative candidates, one has to wonder if there’s any hope for the conservative movement in 2008.
But I mentioned a third candidate who – arguably – fits the same mold. I’m speaking, of course, about Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. Despite being slightly more liberal than Giuliani, Romney and Bloomberg, some votes actually have Sen. Rodham as more conservative than McCain on select issues. Sen. Rodham-Clinton is basically Mayor Bloomberg on Phentermine.
What I think motivated Bloomberg more than any real, substantive “difference” from candidates like Giuliani, Romnet, Bloomberg and Rodham-Clinton is something far more provincial: a good ol’ New York pissing contest. For the last several election cycles, East Coast candidates – and specifically New Yorkers – have been nonfactors in presidential politics, much to the chagrin of the New York-centric liberal news media. New York has taken a back seat to the deep South as the most influential voting block, and New Yorkers are eager to get back into the game of presidential politics.
Think about it.
Bush II/Cheney: Texas and Wyoming
Clinton/Gore: Arkansas and Tennessee
Bush/Quayle: Texas/Maine and Indiana
Reagan/Bush: California and Texas/Maine
Carter/Mondale: Georgia and Minnesota
Ford/Rockefeller: Michigan and New York.
So, you have to go all the way back to 1974-1977, a brief stint as Ford’s vice president, to find the last time a New Yorker was in the White House. That’s at least a 30 year absence and it’s clear that one of the largest states in the nation is eager to be “back in the game.”
By the way, Rockefeller was, in his day, the leader of the liberal wing of the GOP, so even he fit with the ever-more-bloated socially liberal/fiscally conservative mold that is so well represented in this election cycle by Bloomberg, McCain, Giuliani, Romney and – arguably – Rodham-Clinton.
To be blunt, Bloomberg’s “change of pace” proposed candidacy is no “change of pace” at all – it simply litters the field with another sound-alike candidate designed to blot out any legitimate conservatives from getting a foothold in the 2008 election cycle.
The only real hopes for a legitimate change in rhetoric in this election cycle are Fred Thomspon, Newt Gingrich, or – arguably – a dark horse emergence from someone like Mike Huckabee. Bloomberg doesn’t represent change in any fashion; but a potential third-party run could doom the country to a Democratic presidential victory.
Is it his cologne?
Just about every GOP presidential aspirant is running in two opposite directions at the same time: they all want to claim the Ronald Reagan mantle, and they all want to distance themselves from George W. Bush.
Whether it’s Guiliani, Romney, McCain or one of the Seven Dwarfs, it seems like President Bush is as popular as a New York ticket broker 20 minutes after a football game is over; no one wants to be around him.
That’s not Reagan-esque.
One thing Reagan knew well is, you stick by your friends and fellow party members through thick and thin. But simply because a handful of MoveOn.org Democrats have stirred up Bush’s negatives, all these wannabe mini-me Reaganites are leaping to play “Dogpile on W.”
Well, remember, you GOP candidates: one of you just may win the office and when you do, is this the kind of “loyalty” you’d want from your own supposed allies?
Truth is, Bush may not be as good of a social conservative as Reagan, but in terms of foreign policy, he resembles Reagan’s “No BS” approach far more than any of these “American Political Idol” wannabes.
Bush has understood the nature of the terror war far better than just about anyone else. This country needs its next president to be as fearless. And it needs its next president to be as pro-Israel as Bush.
If we fall short of that, our country may see a much bleaker future in 2009 and beyond.
One of the 57 percent!
According to a CBS News/New York Times opinion poll, 57 percent of GOP voters would prefer having more choices to pick from in the upcoming presidential season. For once, CBS/NYT has a poll I can agree with, even though I still think that all polls are hokum.
Of course, the primary reason at least 57 percent of GOP voters want more choices is because the three main front-runners are moderates at best, and in the case of John McCain, full-blown RINOs. While current front-runner Rudy Giuliani is the least objectionable RINO candidate, it remains true that Giuliani and Mitt Romney are northeast liberals of the highest order, even if they do wear GOP clothing. And geography has nothing to do with McCain’s liberalism.
Of course, there are minor conservatives out there, but none that are sparking a fire under GOP voters’ butts. Sam Brownback: Who? Mike Huckabee: Another Arkansasan to the White House? Not likely. Umm… are there any other conservatives in the race? Maybe even via video conferencing?
Perhaps.
Over the weekend, former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, a Reagan Republican of the highest order, tossed his hat into the ring. Thompson has name recognition because aside from his stint as senator, he’s been in the Die Hard movies with Bruce Willis and a regular on Law and Order. He’s a minor celebrity.
Now, no one is saying that Thompson’s the second coming of Ronald Reagan, and certainly if Georgia’s Newt Gingrich eventually tosses his hat in the ring, he has more name recognition, but Thompson’s the first decent conservative to enter the race this year. The real question is whether he can compete with the three RINO stooges, Giuliani, McCain and Romney.
I’m not sure he can, but I’d love to see him succeed. He possesses a higher profile than Huckabee, and people know who he is. That’s a plus. And Gingrich may never enter the race, for all we know. For now, Thompson is the default favored candidate of Wonderful Pessimist, but we’re still taking applications.
C’mon, conservatives! Pull your heads out of the sand and stand up for limited government, lower taxes, a free market economy and all the other values that made the GOP a majority party under Reagan-Bush and a congressional majority under Gingrich.
Conservatism works every time it’s embraced. Pulling back from it and governing like Democrats? That just makes folks want to vote for the real liberals.
Huckabee the first genuine conservative to announce
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee made it official today, announcing that on Monday he would file papers to formalize his exploratory bid for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination. Huckabee is the first candidate considered a genuine conservative to enter the race.
Huckabee, a native of Hope, Arkanses, is actually from the town of 11,000, unlike Democrat Bill Clinton, who claimed to be from Hope, but was actually born and raised in Hot Springs. Huckabee gained some national attention for a dramatic weight loss achievement that marked his tenure as governor of Bill Clinton’s home state.
Wonderful Pessimist still has huge reservations about Huckabee’s electability. When your return address labels come from the same state – even the same town – as Bill Clinton, that’s not a way to endear oneself to conservatives. And Huckabee’s name recognition pales in comparison to RINOs like Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney. And Huckabee needs more than weight loss methods to sell his candidacy to the country; he’s running for president, not The Biggest Loser.
But as the only notable conservative in the race – and no, the extremely obscure Sam Brownback doesn’t count – one at least has to consider the viability of Huckabee, or surrender to the inevitability of the GOP falling into RINO hands for the next four to eight years, at least. Dismal.
Giuliani still playing coy
Rudolph Giuliani may not have declared his candidacy for a 2008 GOP presidential bid quite yet, but it sounds like he’s getting ready to print up the business cards and the campaign literature. According to a New York Times report, Giuliani was sounding all the right notes in New Hampshire this past weekend.
While Giuliani remains a favorite of many due to his 9-11 leadership of New York City, many are conveniently putting aside his social liberalism while waiting for him to declare his candidacy. Still, he’s talking like someone ready for a marathon, not a 100-yard dash.
“When I say to you that we should reduce taxes to stimulate the economy, I’ll say it to you because I did it and I saw it work,” he said. “When I say we have to bring peace and security as sort of the beginning of anything, whether it’s in Baghdad or in other parts of the world or here at home, I’ll say that to you because I saw that happen in New York, and I made it happen. I did it.”
My take? Giuliani is the best of the RINOs, but I’m still holding out for a true conservative to declare and capture the imagination. Whether it’s Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee or someone yet to surface, the GOP is looking mighty thin on genuine conservatives this time around.
