Conservatives and Republicans who support Rudy Giuliani: Are you serious?
Abortion, gun control, anti-marriage amendment, amnesty, personal sleaziness, embarrassing hiring history (remember Bernard Kerik?), refusal to sign an anti-tax pledge, overrated war credentials, global warming, praise for Ruth Ginsburg, fighting the feds on behalf of illegal immigrants, campaign finance “reform,” embryo-killing stem-cell research…
Giuliani’s record isn’t “imperfect,” as many say; it’s awful.
His liberal stances outweigh his conservative ones. His best appeals to the Right—solid judges and wartime leadership—are trumped-up. He lacks the moral comprehension to stand against abortion, today’s slavery. The Kerik affair showed either incompetence or ethical bankruptcy. If he’s our nominee, Democrats will call his supporters who bashed Clinton’s personal sins hypocrites—and they’ll be right.
All this, yet he’s our party’s frontrunner. Why? Because he’s “electable,” character and values be damned. And even that assumption is highly dubious.
Many agree President Bush’s mismanagement of the Iraq War contributed heavily to our ’06 loss. So for God’s sake, why does the Republican establishment think the answer is somebody whose statements on Iraq consist of nothing but Bush cheerleading? Consider that we’re being told Rudy-the-Terror-Warrior trumps all other factors, and it’s even more maddening. Logic like this makes me expect Rod Serling to pop up any minute now and introduce whatever parallel universe he’s got in store for us this week.
What do you think the term “standard-bearer” means? It means our presidential candidate sets the standard for our party to follow. As our No. 1 representative, he’s supposed to be among the best our party has to offer—not merely average, and definitely not among the worst. Would anyone seriously argue that a liberal Republican leader would not move the party leftward? Of course he would—most of his positions are a direct repudiation of conservatism.
George W. Bush would not be president today if not for the support of religious Americans who saw the chaos wreaked upon society by the secular Left and were desperate for a leader to stand up to it. We devoted countless hours to his reelection in the hopes of stopping the slaughter of babies, the redefinition of marriage, and the ideological rot in our courts—not simply because we wanted another point for the GOP’s scoreboard.
Our efforts have been rewarded in disappointment: Bush has been silent on the Culture War, inept on the Iraq War and part of the problem for Americans who value our national sovereignty. So to say the conservative base is wary of trusting the Republican establishment again would be an understatement.
What are the odds that a candidate worse than Bush in nearly every way can repair that damaged trust and reignite that squandered passion?
This election cycle is a crossroads for conservatism. In this primary, we’re choosing what entity we want the Republican Party to be: a serious crusader for our Constitution, values and survival, or a cheap cabal whose highest value is power (ironically, power they’ll end up losing to their spinelessness, like a Greek or Shakespearean tragedy come to life).
Now is the time we need to stand up and say “no” to this New York liberal. Mitt Romney is a much better champion of American values. Even the often-misguided John McCain—who at least is pro-life and has been consistent on reinforcements in Iraq and responsible spending—is more worthy of the Republican nomination than Rudy Giuliani.
My fellow Republicans and conservatives, make your choice. Just don’t be surprised if the “electable” guy proves instead to be the movement’s death knell.
Calvin Freiburger lives in Fond du Lac.
April 4, 2007
Glad He’s On OUR Side! :)
Leave a Comment »
No comments yet.