About Kesher Talk


NPJrecipe-sidead.jpg

Recent Comments

  • Fat Man [TypeKey Profile Page] on Che Moods : ""In plain truth, he hardly cared for them at all." And Che? He didn't give...."

« The Southern Front: Rules of (Non) Engagement | Home | Thermal Depolymerization redux »

February 06, 2007

Straight talk from Rudy

Sean Hannity interviews Giuliani on the eve of his formal announcement. Rudy talks honestly about his positions on abortion and gun ownership and gay marriage and immigration. He doesn't dodge the issues or try to appease his critics. Conservatives - what you see is what you get. A civ-con. Think about it.

I think Giuliani is smart to lay out his unvarnished positions now. People have a year and a half to discuss them and challenge them and figure out whether they can live with them. [LGFers got a head start - that thread now has over 1100 posts.] Over that time his popularity in the polls will wax and wane, and as he said in a previous interview, it's not a good idea to be the front-runner all the time.

UPDATE: The 2nd Amendment purists are unhappy. Like I said, we got a year and a half to go. Discuss amongst yourselves.

Judith | 02/06/07 at 08:32 AM | Categories: - GOTV '06 to '08

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.keshertalk.com/cgi-bin/mtb.cgi/6119

Blogs which link to Straight talk from Rudy:

» The dark side of Rudy Giuliani from Kesher Talk
We have promoted the presidential candidacy of Rudy Giuliani since before he actually announced, not only for his clarity on an aggressive response to terrorism, but for his understanding of civic values. We are part of a groundswell of enthusiasm... [Read More]

Tracked on March 6, 2007 08:02 AM

Comments

This man has to be our next President.
Hillary & co will do their best to divide the right but I think even the religious right will be wise to this and throw their support behind Rudy. Wouldn't it be great if Hillary lost the election in a landslide to Rudy?
Let's make it happen people.

Rob | February 6, 2007 03:06 PM

"Straight talk"?

What he's basically saying is that (1) he's personally hates abortion, but (2) he doesn't want it recriminalized because women should have it as an option, yet (3) if elected, he'll appoint judges that'll chip away at that option, or maybe just recriminalize it entirely.

His gun control argument makes little sense. He's willing to outlaw handguns in high-crime regions, even though high-crime regions are the very places where law-abiding citizens are most likely to want to have guns to defend themselves from criminals.

And it's no surprise that he's claiming credit for the nation-wide drop in crime that started before he even entered office. He's been doing that for years.

(I didn't watch all of the second clip; there's only so much of that sonuvabitch I can stand.)

Avram | February 6, 2007 07:01 PM

"He's willing to outlaw handguns in high-crime regions, even though high-crime regions are the very places where law-abiding citizens are most likely to want to have guns to defend themselves from criminals."

The 2nd Amendment folks who are suspicious of him are making that argument. It clearly was a well-thought out response to a specific problem and may have been a wise move given the realities of NYC at the time. Maybe not. But I like someone who actually thinks about what he's doing, and is willing to risk being unpopular.

The drop in crime may have begun before he entered office, but can you say that the dramatic drop in crime in NYC was all due to demographics? I don't think so.

I frequently came to NYC from Philadelphia in 89-90 because I was dating someone here. Then I didn't come to NYC for a decade after I moved to Austin. My first return was 1999. The difference was like night and day. Not all of that is a drop in crime, there was also the fiscal reform and restructuring of welfare and civic projects detailed in the City Journal article.

Judith | February 7, 2007 03:10 AM

I've lived in NYC all my life, except for a few years in Rochester in the mid-80s. (Now I live in Jersey City, but NYC's right across the river and I go there frequently.) I lived through those years you skipped over.

Giuliani's time as mayor was marked by legendarily awful incidences of police brutality (you'll have heard of both Abner Louima and Amadou Diallo), and of a protective relationship with the police, immediately backing them in any controversy, even if they were in the wrong. If he were president, law enforcement agents would have even more license to abuse anyone they want.

Avram | February 7, 2007 10:56 PM

Straight talk? You want straight talk, check out the 3 year old Palestinian Media Watch video linked here

http://jewsforhillary.wordpress.com/2007/02/07/unwavering-against-palestinian-terror-indoctrination-on-tv-clinton-hightlights-new-palestinian-bias-in-childrens-textbooks/

If anyone can claim that kind of a hard line is just "pandering" then they are on crack. Rudy might have made a couple of jestures pissing off a guy in kaffiyeh or two, but hillary is doing the real dirty work.

The Town Crier | February 8, 2007 10:29 AM

There are thousands of people alive today who would have been just another murder statistic in the 1990s if it were not for the reforms he introduced with massive resistance fron the New York Democractic Party machine. He made New York great again. If it is a choice between Hillary Clinton and Rudy, come on and get serious. Giuliani will make a great President.

Rob | February 8, 2007 02:18 PM

"Rudy might have made a couple of jestures pissing off a guy in kaffiyeh or two, but hillary is doing the real dirty work."

Let's see. Hillary makes a statement to the press about Palestinian textbooks. Rudy gives back several million dollars to a Saudi prince for saying the US was partially responsible for 9-11, refusing $$ that NYC could have used, on principle. Rudy kicks Yassir Arafat out of NYC, angering the liberal and international elite. Those aren't just gestures. Those are very public actions against the prevailing political winds for which he took a lot of flak.

But Hillary is doing the dirty work. Right.

Actually PMW is doing the dirty work uncovering the Palestinian media propaganda. PMW head Itamar Marcus has appeared before Congress showing this material and Congress withdrew funds from the PA as a result. If Hillary was one of those voting that way, good for her. But it's a joke to claim she's doing any heavy lifting.

If this is the level of the Jews for Hillary campaign, you guys are pretty feeble.

I'm sure Hillary is good for the Jews. Anyone representing NY has to be. I even think she would be a fairly hawkish president. But Rudy has a track record in that regard, and isn't a shifty manipulative chameleon like her.

Judith Weiss | February 8, 2007 04:46 PM

Judith, how are either of those things -- giving back the Saudi money, kicking Arafat out of Lincoln Center -- not gestures? Neither one actually did anything to reduce or prevent terrorism. They're more dramatic gestures than Hillary's, but they're still gestures, not substantive actions.

Avram | February 8, 2007 08:54 PM

Both of those gestures are extremely important.

At a time when Arafat was being welcomed by the Clintons and awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and treated like a hero, Rudy treated him like the vile terrorist he was and Rudy was proved right.

When he refused the Saudi money, that was another very important gesture. It shows he has what most politicians like Hillary do not have; an understanding of the enemy and the will and endurance to confront them.

One of the few times he left the city as Mayor in the 1990's was to visit Israel for one afternoon, ride on a bus line that was attacked by a suicide bomber and then come back to New York, just to show solidarity.

Hillary Clinton in the 90's was kissing Arafat's wife who now lives on the millions of dollars of aid meant for the people of Palestine. She has proved time and again that she is a rotten judge of character.

Rudy did everything he could do as a mayor; as President I feel he will do much more. He will remind the world that we are on the right side of this fight.

I was in the UK on 7/7. In a strange turn of fate, Rudy was also in London and the people of England turned to him as their real mayor at the moment, not Red Ken Livingston.


The difference between Rudy and Hillary is night and day and if our society was sane Rudy would win in a landslide.

Rob | February 9, 2007 03:32 PM

Rudy, in what way exactly does Rudy "understand the enemy"? I've yet to be convinced that anybody in the Republican party understands either what motivates terrorists or how to fight them. If they did, we wouldn't have our troops tied down in the middle of a civil war in Iraq right now, training and encouraging the next generation of terrorists.

And if Rudy's such a great judge of character, why did he appoint his personal bodyguard, who turned out to be a crook, an adulterer, a stalker, and to have mob ties, to be Commissioner of the NYPD? (And then Dubya went made Kerik Interim Minister of Interior of Iraq, after considering him for head of Homeland Security! It's like these guys just love crooks!)

I'll give Rudy credit for the two honest, significant accomplishments of his first term -- fighting the mob over Fulton Fish Market and the trash-hauling industry, and winning. And he appointed William Bratton to be police commissioner, which was a plus. But then he fired Bratton for no clear reason, and spent most of his second term throwing crazy tantrums and making bad decisions.

His rejection of Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal's money did nothing to fight terrorism, it was just a knee-jerk reaction to the prince's statement that the US "must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack".

BTW, did you know that Al-Waleed owns 5% of Fox News Corp? I didn't till I looked up background info on him just now. He's also a pro-women's-rights reformer, and (according to Forbes magazine) a generally pro-American political activist. Here, read this interview with him from 2004. Does he sound like a terrorist sympathizer?

Avram | February 9, 2007 04:23 PM


We are at war and this man is willing to fight it. Tragically that has become rare among politicans in this world five and a half years after 9/11 and I believe he does not scare or intimadate easily.
It is time to grow up and appreciate the seriousness of this moment in history.

Rob | February 9, 2007 06:16 PM

We are at war and people like Bush and Giuliani and you, Rob, are intent on losing it.

Avram | February 9, 2007 07:21 PM

So, the American Rob was in the UK on 7/7, was he? Well the British Rob was living here and can tell you that American Rob's outgassing about Ken Livingstone and Rudy Giuliani is total BS. "The people of England turned to (Giuliani) as their real mayor" did they? And what proportion of the people of - I assume he means London - had any idea that Giuliani was in town? And what proportion of Londoners, or Brits in general, had (or have now) the slightest notion of who Rudy Giuliani is? American Rob imagines that just because an American big shot they'd never heard of was in town, the people of London deserted their immensely popular (despite his manifold faults) mayor? Do they need his huge experience at dealing with terrorism? Unlikely, since London has been facing down terrorist bombers about a slong as Israel has. Maybe it's his experience of air attacks on buildings that the Londoners were supposed to be so overawed by? Oh, wait, the Londoners had Hermann Goering try that one.

Support Giuilani if you like, but don't drag Londoners into your squalid campaigning. If they ever noticed he visited, rest assured they've forgotten him completely by now. "Real mayor" my ass.

Rob | February 11, 2007 11:06 PM

Did any of you even whatch that PMW video? Did you see where Hillary takes on the PA Rep? Did you see how angry she gets?
Why is everyone whining about when arafat came to the white house? It pales by comparison when you count the umpteen dozens of times Condi rice has had her arms around Mahmoud Abbas. But nobody mentions that of course.

If hillary had kicked out arafat would she be praised or would she be accused of "pandering" which is how people now choose to "thank" her for the good she does by belittling it?
sure and rudy didnt ever pander. Did the halberstam family really need 12 sigs on the bklyn bridge ramp? you think they would have been upset with just one?

The Town Crier | April 17, 2007 09:09 AM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style and URL links.
My spam filter rejects any word containing "sex" and "poker" - use asterisks like so: "p*ker")