Redstate

And his position on the amnesty for illegals travesty that was hatched today is......?

If we're supporting liberals and all.

"we must be the party known for what we stand for, not just what we stand against."

Rudy is for abortion, for amnesty, for gun control, for gay marriage. Does the party really want to be known as standing for these things?

If so, maybe my Kucinch suggestion was not so facetious after all. Why not him?

I liked your appearance on The Wire.

Can you explain how he can say that he is pro-choice, but will support constructionist judge - when such a judge would have a fundamentally different view of the Constitution than Mr. Giuliani?

That seems to me to be the ultimate pander of this campaign - being so desperate to win that you are willing to basically say that, "Even though I believe abortion is a constitutional right (as Mr. Giuliani has done, I will nominate a judge who disagrees with my own opinion just to win." That is the sign of a man with little moral compass.

Dirk-a-Dirk

Lets see how he takes the punches through the primaries. He did himself some good in the debate. Given the damage he did himself before the debate I wouldn't consider that an anointment.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Since we are all in for a new england liberal what is wrong with Hillary Clinton, Pataki, or Kenedy for that matter. I fail to see any clear difference between them and Rudy.

AMNESTY? We already know he likes sanctuary cities. Come on Rudy, tell us where you stand on AMNESTY.

Gun banner ==> Liberal, make no mistake about it.

Rudy will split the party over the abortion issue alone. With what James Dobson already said and what others will surely do, enough GOP voters will listen and sit home to hand the election to Rudy.

Of course he also will get hammered by the NRA and by the secure borders crowd. For his liberal positions there.

Are there any three issues that could inspire so much grass roots opposition within the GOP?

These are the issues we normally use to get people out to vote for us, instead they will be used against Rudy to keep our voters home. Rudy is an electoral landslide waiting to happen, for the Democrats.

Rudy Giuliani is no Bob Ehrlich.

I campaigned for you and Michael Steele in 2002 and 2006 on the Eastern Shore of Maryland.

You guys represented a new hope for our state. A change from the tired knee-jerk liberalism that had left Maryland aimless and poorly governed.

Still there is an important difference between your administration of Maryland and Rudy's administration of New York City.

You and Lt. Gov. Steele brought Marylanders together and tried to work for citizen of the state. There weren't any personal vendettas or grudges against segments of the state.

However Rudy Giuliani ran New York imperiously and aired personal disputes publicly and dishonorably.

We don't need a hot head for President Governor. We need someone with cool emotions and strong instincts. Someone who governs the United States like you governed Maryland.

I think today's announcement of a capitulation bill will finish him unless he disavows it fast.

“Political Correctness” is just short for “Capitulation to Extortion.”

In case one hasn't noticed, what with all the back stabbing that took place in Washington today on immigration, we certainly do not need another RINO in power in any capacity.

three of the fort dix would be terrorists were here illegaly,

9/11 terrorists had overstayed visas

so my question to rudy supporters is how can you say he's tough on national security when he is so lax on immagration which will cause terrorists attacks sooner than will making sure we set up a country in iraq?

Governor, you don't need to make the case for Rudy on national defense regarding islamic terrorists - no one here has any doubts about where he stands. He is a charismatic man with proven leadership qualities.

However there's so much more that overrides these strengths. Leaving aside his socially liberal positions:

He is anti-gun ownership.
He supports sanctuary cities.
His stance on illegal immigration has been lax.

Where does he stand on the amnesty that the congress is ready to pass?

These issues will destroy the US as certainly as a jihadi attack - actually, more completely as it corrodes our unity from within.
Without Rudy taking a firm and unequivocal stand against illegal alien amnesty and the other issues above, No Sale.

Giuliani won't solve the problem of illegal immigration.

No, Giuliani and his ilk are PART OF THE PROBLEM !

So Rudy's good on the GWOT and the economy. He's still wrong on immigration, abortion, and gun control, to name a few. Not good enough.

Steve
--
Free Tibet! (Offer good while supplies last. Limited quantities available. Offer cannot be combined with any other offers or promotions.)

...they don't stand a chance. Especially Rudy. Like the proverbial snowball in a very warm place, this meltdown will give impetus to the creation of a multi-party system
instead of the morass of corruption it has become. What choice do we have?

Just another career politician thinking only of incumbency or the acquisition of even greater power...

I say we let things run the course...the damage that will be done will take DECADES to undo...and the American people will deserving of what they get. After all, good numbers of them were stupid enough to vote for it, others not bright enough to participate.. you get the picture?

From now on, my vote goes to the as yet created Constitutuional Reform Party...

Edmund Burke: "The only thing necessary for the triump of evil is for good men to do nothing"

So, with exquisite timing, here's Giuliani on the immigration sellout put forward today (as per the NRO):

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWQ0YWQ4ZjBhMzQzNzIyM2NlZmMxNmJ...

"Rudy's top priority and main objective is to ensure our borders are secure and to stop potential terrorists and criminals from coming in. The recent Fort Dix plot is a stark reminder that the threat of terrorism has made immigration an important matter of national security. We need to know who is coming in and who is going out of this country if we are going to deal with those who are here illegally.”

In other words, he's trying to finesse this, same as abortion. Aren't we tired of politicians who toss off these platitudes, and insult us by dodging the question asked.

So, Rudy:
Are you for the Senate bill, or against it?

We all bought into compassionate conservatism - look how that turned out. I say, either vote for an authentic conservative, or stay home, but for cryin' out loud, stop playing "pat me on the head, then kick me in the backside"

The following words come directly from Mr. Giuliani's mouth. Not only did he oppose the 1996 Welfare reform bill, he opposed it because it cut off funding for illegals. Below are the key parts of the speech. For the full text, follow the link.

---------------------

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996

www.nyc.gov/html/rwg/html/96/welfare.html

As delivered by Rudolph W. Giuliani
September 11, 1996

"Thank you. I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to discuss the Welfare Act that was recently passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. I was also very pleased to have lunch with a number of faculty members and the exchange was very helpful including some ideas that I will now bring back to Corporation Counsel.

There are aspects to the Welfare Reform Bill that, as just a matter of policy, I disagree with and I think could pose very serious problems, and although I do think the bill does some good, in the end I believe it does more harm than good.

But actually, what I would like to discuss, at least in terms of the remarks I prepared, is the area in which the Welfare Reform Bill raises serious constitutional questions.....

....But there is one aspect of the bill that has immediate application, and one that I believe raises serious constitutional and legal questions. And it is part of the Bill people pay very little attention to, and I'm not certain many knew it was in the bill when they passed it. It's a provision that attempts to reverse an executive order that New York City has had in existence since 1988 which basically says that New York City will create a zone of protection for illegal and undocumented immigrants who are seeking the protection of the police or seeking medical services because they are sick or attempting to or actually putting their children in public schools so they can be educated.....

....The question is what's the best thing to do about that? Put them in a situation in which they keep children out of school, put them in a situation in which they don't go to hospitals, or put them in a situation in which they don't report crimes to the police, or do we put them in a position to take advantage of these very basic services which protect them as well as protect the health and safety of the rest of the population."

Make no mistake about it. They have proven to be just as unprincipled as the Democrats. Politicians know only how to do two things: Spend our money and grab for more and more power. Both parties go through the motions of wanting to "help the people, but their actions speak much louder than their meaningless words. The immigration bill just tells us that now they want to the sell out the entire country!

It's impossible to be stong on national security and weak on illegal immigration. In the GWoT those issues are indistinguishable. That's why I consider W. to be weak on security, and that's why I consider Rudy to be weak on national security. Unfortunately, that leaves Tancredo and Hunter as the only two supportable candidates. Neither have a chance to win.

I appreciate your input Governor, but the last thing a faltering Republican party needs is another "moderate" at the helm.

Sure, he talks a good game with regards to national defense, but so do the other contenders; with little relevant experience as mayor of NYC and never having worn the uniform, we really have little indication how he'd truly perform on the GWOT.

Same arguement with the economy- NYC already had high taxes; cutting city taxes is a far cry from dealing with the federal budget monster.

Given his stances, he's clearly not a Constitutionalist; rather he's just another "moderate" telling us what we want to hear to get elected. After seeing what the "moderates" have done to the party, I can't support Rudy. If it takes 4 years of Hillary for the Republican party to wake up and return to it's roots, so be it.

This seems like an odd thing to be posted here, without even an acknowledgement of the Mayor's controversial stance on a host of issues. Certainly, there is a case to be made on Mayor Giuliani's behalf, as Dan has pointed out repeatedly, but how can the post simply ignore those issues?

To me, this is like talking about the long history of the Chicago Cubs without pointing out that they've not won for 99 years - it's not dishonest, but you can't blame others if they think you're deliberately leaving a big part of the story out.

Let me be the first to point out that no one has read the bill at this point, NO ONE, so let's not pretend we know how dire it is at this point.

To bash anyone for saying at this point in the process that they support overhauling immigration policy is moronic.

I support it, perhaps not the way the bill will end up being hashed out in congress, but yes it's about time immigration got overhauled and enforced.

So the anti-Rudy people stopped by, big surprise, this site is turning into the the home of the anti-Rudy and many of you are late to the table, for some better stuff I encourage you to search the archives.

I'd like to join the few to thank the Gov for stopping by and expressing his views.

We used to be the Big Tent party where we had much common ground that could join us together, today we are no longer that, we only listen to the shrill who demand that all toe the line to all their platform and expulsion for those who do not.

Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin

Stand up and say no to the Amnesty and Open Borders bill.

Without showing courage on this matter he might as well run in the Democratic Primary.

Yes he showed leadership in NYC, and got things done. But without showing political courage to say no to Open Borders he might as well be Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich.

I'm not a particular fan of Romney, but he he called it like it was when he said it was Amnesty and he opposed it.

If Rudy helps kill this bill I will not only vote but campaign for him. If he tries to waffle or show political cowardice he will find my utmost opposition even if he is the nominee.

Failure to vigorously oppose the Open Borders and Amnesty Bill makes him Hillary Clinton, and if that's what I want there's already a candidate like that running in the race.

I regard the first paragraph of this post as an insult to the intelligence of this community. We are long past the point at which we can accept a few tough sounding phrases as a subsitute for real expertise and critical thinking on terrorism - and yet here we go again with a major Republican figure telling us, in effect, that all we need to know about a candidate's approach to our present predicament is their ability to deliver a third-rate Clint Eastwood impression.

I, for one, want specifics, and some evidence that Giuliani has actually learned some of the lessons of the last few years. Unfortunately, there is nothing in his record to suggest expertise in national security matters, and when he has got specific, he has demonstrated an appalling ignorance of some basic facts about the middle east.

Yes, we know he was the mayor of NYC on 9/11. As a resident (at the time) I was very grateful for his ability to verbally distill our feelings and provide some reassurance. But that, I'm afraid, does not amount to a record of expertise on national security, and I don't think that Mr. Giuliani and his supporters will be able to get away for much longer pretending that it does.

connections with the gambling industry?

Those are vital to the success of a candidate, I'm told.

------------
[F]or by the fundamental law of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred...

-John Locke

BUT its acid test time. If Rudy supports, or even mealy-mouths, the present incarnation of McCainKennedyBush Amnesty, I will take my support elsewhere. Fred? Mitt?

I will not vote for Rudy.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

Ugh. I wasn't impressed with the thoughtfulness of his blast at Ron Paul. That was demagogy.

--
Are Humans Smarter Than Yeast? (video clip: 8.5min)

should he ever become a Republican.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.