For those who wonder the origins of our SWNIDish enthusiasm for the presidential candidacy of Rudy Giuliani, we note again that it is largely the product of our conviction that of the three most likely winners of the 2008 election, he is far the preferable.
Our preference is illustrated by the NY Times's recent revelation that the other two engaged each other in a vodka-drinking contest while on a senatorial junket to Estonia two years ago.
We prefer our presidents neither stirred nor shaken, thank you very much.
Update: And for good measure, columnist Salena Zito in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review poses the most relevant political question: "Rudy: Hero of Our Age?" and notes that (a) Gallup has Rudy as the number one choice of 75% of Republican voters; (b) significant conservative Republican leaders see Giuliani as readily electable (e.g., Barry Winn, "If the primary were held today, Rudy would be out in front just on leadership. ... The house is on fire and we are sorely lacking firemen -- Giuliani would fill that role").
2 comments:
If what you want is a crack administrator and articulate defender of the U.S. against terrorism, Giuliani may well be the man (though I suspect the federal government is a whole different animal from New York City when it comes to administration). On the other hand, if what you want is a reconstituted oligarchy (i.e., Supreme Court), the smart money is against Giuliani. He's unlikely to challenge the status quo in that department.
JB in CA is right, of course. Rudy must pledge to appoint judges in the mold of Roberts and Alito if he is to gain the nomination and carry a united party into the general election.
I would cynically judge the federal government to be easier to administer than NYC.
Post a Comment