Posted by
GenXDad on Monday, October 22, 2007 2:34:48 PM
This will come as a surprise to nobody, but I've officially endorsed Rudy Giuliani for President. The three main reasons I have for supporting him do not include "most likely to beat Clinton." I believe, based on the objective evidence, he is the best man for the job, period. The three reasons are:
1. The only candidate with proven experience at creating positive, conservative reform
2. He's the best candidate at fighting for what he believes
3. He's the strongest voice in support of the Global War on Terror
Taking them individually.
1. Only candidate with proven experience at creating positive, conservative reform.
Rudy inherited a New York City run by Dinkins and Co. into the proverbial ground. Crime was high and considered incorrigible. The city government was inept at all levels. Taxes were sky-high and only scheduled to go up.
Rudy brought in new leadership at NYPD and gave them the tools to fight crime, which they did. He pursued law and order with a tenacity and stood by his officers when the liberals tried to undermine them. The result was that, by the end of his term, NYC was the safest big city in America. He accomlished the "impossible" through aggressive, positive conservative principles.
He did the same thing at City Hall, reforming bureacracy and lowering taxes. He gets a lot of heat for his positions on some issues, such as civil unions and abortion, but he's the only candidate who truly governed as a conservative and got real results. Mitt Romney spent a measly four years in Massachusetts doing next to nothing. At no time was that state ever governing as a conservative state. Romney takes credit for vetoing, but that's not a positive governing strategy, it's a negative one. "I like vetoes" is like saying "I'll do nothing." That's no leadership, that's a recipe for stalemate at a time when we need leadership. And Fred Thompson? He has no leadership on anything. The man can't even run a campaign, he would be a disaster as President.
2. Best Candidate for Fighting for What He Believes
Rudy is a fighter. When people think of a "moderate," they think of a compromiser, but a look at Rudy's record shows he didn't compromise on things be believed in. He fought for reform in the police department and city hall with a tenacity that won him the respect of the city and the hatred of his enemies. The liberals in NYC despise Giulianai because he took them on and beat them on their home turf. He's one man who won't blink at the Democrats or world leaders who disapprove of our foreign policy.
Romney has a histpry of changing his positions to suit the times, and there's no history of him ever fighting fo anything. Fred Thompson had a chance to fight for something, and instead chose to quit the Senate and return to acting. Hillary Clinton has a history of fighting for her own success at the expense of everybody else. Not very noble, and the contrast between her fighting for goodl ol' Hillary and Rudy fighting for us would be huge.
3. Strongest Voice in Support of the Global War on Terror
Bottom line, there is no candidate on either side of the aisle who has been as steadfastly supportive of an aggressive global war on terror as Giulianai. Yes, McCain has been steadfast, but the differences between Rudy and McCain on this issue are negligible. (And I'd add that McCain is washed up, which is why I'm dismissing him.) We need a strong, consistent voice. When the President's surge plan was being assailed by the liberals and it looked like it was a loser, Rudy stood in support. Now that we're winning, suddenly everybody likes the surge, but we who have steadfastly supported the war know who are real friends are. Guys like Thompson who bailed out when America needed leadership aren't our friends.
I see Rudy winning the nomination on his merits, Dobson's buffoonery notwithstanding. If he can beat the Democrats, and the prospects are looking a little brighter every day, he would make an excellent President.