Another reason to like Rudy Giuliani

Hay, P. (2007). Hillary slayer. The American Spectator. September 17, 2007. Available online: http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12030 (from Real Clear Politics).

HIllary Clinton is my prefered nominee out of the major Democratic candidates — she is a good politician — but she should not be President.

Rudy may be the Republican to stop her:

Last week, all Republican politicians worth their weight came out blasting MoveOn.org for taking out a full-page ad in the New York Times smearing Gen. David Petraeus on the day he was scheduled to deliver his Iraq progress report to Congress. The outrage among conservatives only grew as leading Democrats failed to condemn the ad, Hillary Clinton questioned the general’s honesty, and it was disclosed that the far left group was given a drastically reduced advertising rate in the New York Times.

But while other Republicans complained, Rudy Giuliani did something about it. Speaking to reporters in Atlanta on Thursday, Giuliani demanded that the New York Times give his campaign the same discounted rate so it could take out an ad defending Gen. Petraeus and assailing Clinton and MoveOn.org for “character assassination of an American general in a time of war.” He also called on the paper to run the ad at the time of his choosing (Friday, the day after President Bush’s primetime address to the nation).

As demoralized conservatives begin to fear that another Clinton presidency is inevitable, this episode demonstrates that Giuliani may represent the Republicans’ best shot at defeating Hillary in next year’s election.

Throughout his career, Giuliani has excelled at relentlessly pursuing opponents, whether in the courtroom or political arena. As a young prosecutor in the 1970s, before he became a celebrity for taking on the mob, he gained notice for his successful prosecution of Democratic Congressman Bertram L. Podell in a bribery trial. The New York Times magazine recounted the dramatic conclusion in a 1985 profile: “Under Giuliani’s intense cross-examination, Podell faltered, became so nervous he poked out his eyeglass lens, asked for a recess and gave up, pleading guilty.”

While it is popular for conservatives to lament the existence of the liberal media, Giuliani understands that it is a reality. Rather than belly-ache about it, or, as the Bush administration often has done, ignore attacks by assuming people aren’t paying attention and they will go away, Giuliani understands that conservatives need to simply be better at using the media to their advantage, as he did when he fought entrenched liberal interest groups as mayor.

“If I run against Hillary Clinton, I’m perfectly prepared to carry this battle, not expecting that the New York Times or the major networks…are going to give us anywhere the same kind of favorable coverage they will give her,” Giuliani told Hugh Hewitt last week. “I’m a realist, I’m not saying that in any way where I have a chip on my shoulder. I’ve lived with this all during the time I was mayor of New York City. The reality is we just have to be better at communicating.”

Agreed. We — Republicans, Americans — need a speaker and a fighter. Rudy fits the bill.

3 thoughts on “Another reason to like Rudy Giuliani”

  1. Hmm. I liked Rudy's Broken Windows approach to NYC. My hangup with Rudy as far as domestic design regard his politics regarding the great, evil and revered and mighty (and did I add evil, yet?) GUN. While I'm damn near certain Rudy won't, to put it simply, “come for our guns,” I'm not exactly comfortable with his executive power should another Virginia Tech occur.

    Further, Rudy's pitbull mentality in regards to opposition draws respect but also a flag. In one respect a country at war needs a leader that chomps down and worries. But then the visage of “being at war” has changed a bit in recent years. Rudy tosses about the terminologies of “terrorism” and “America's enemies,” in a rather loose fashion. I'd like to see him boil this down to something a bit more cogent.

  2. Jay,

    Rudy's policies on issues that are directly pro-life (abortion laws) or indirectly pro-life (gun laws) are troubling. But it seems to get to a politician who actually believes what the Right believes, we need to go down to a second-tier candidate. Given the choice between Giuliani, who lets his differences be known while respecting federalism, and Thompson and Romney, say, who have unknown or self-contradictory positions, I'll take Rudy.

    The major did a great job talking about foreign policy in his (ghostwritten?) Foreign Policy article [1], which I [2] and Tom [3] already reacted to.

    [1] http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86501-p0/rudolph-giuliani/toward-a-realistic-peace.html
    [2] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2007/08/16/giuliani-right-on-economics-free-trade-history-military-poli.html
    [3] http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/2007/08/sincerely_impressed_by_giulian.html

  3. “While it is popular for conservatives to lament the existence of the liberal media, Giuliani understands that it is a reality.”

    There seems to be a certain irony to be said about how accusations of (insert ideology) bias in the media often come from media outlets themselves, and I would think The American (so called) Spectator is all to familiar with this “reality” as well.

  4. “Given the choice between Giuliani, who lets his differences be known while respecting federalism…”

    Has he made any specific remarks in regard to federalism on the issues of parental notice and partial birth abortion? I remember reading somewhere about how Thompson supports federalism in regards to the issue of 1st trimester abortion specifically, but the article never even bothers to say anything in regards to the many other issues within the issue. This is why I am skeptical when someone asserts themselves as a federalist since all to often this is only in regards to issues that they are a minority on (I am looking at you, Jeff Sessions) rather than having the intent of putting everyone on an equal playing field.

  5. “This is why I am skeptical when someone asserts themselves as a federalist since all to often this is only in regards to issues that they are a minority on (I am looking at you, Jeff Sessions) rather than having the intent of putting everyone on an equal playing field.”

    Indeed. Politicians use it as a shield, rather than a goal. Still, it's a shield worth preserving.

  6. Dan,

    “The American Spectator is a partisan, niche magazine. It's no more part of the mainstream media than is, say, Mother Jones.”

    Fine, I will give them a pass, but I still stand by my words regarding accusations of media bias.

    However, for a niche magazine, there are quite effective at providing firepower for right-wing pundits, and David Brock can testify to that. Hell, I still can't convince my Dad that the accusation of Bill Clinton having an affair with a black woman (passed on by Limbaugh) has no substance to it, despite the fact that the American Spectator columnist who started the rumor later said so himself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *