James Dobson has apparently focused on Rudy and does not like what he sees. The election is well over a year away, and the splintering of the delicate coalition of conservatives has begun.

"The jig is up. Rudy Giuliani finally admitted in a speech at Houston Baptist University last week that he is an unapologetic supporter of abortion on demand. That revelation came as no great shock to those of us in the pro-life movement. His public pronouncements as mayor of New York, together with his more recent tap dances on the campaign trail, have told a very clear story.

How could Giuliani say with a straight face that he "hates" abortion," while also seeking public funding for it? How can he hate abortion and contribute to Planned Parenthood in 1993, 1994, 1998 and 1999? And how was he able for many years to defend the horrible procedure by which the brains are sucked from the heads of viable, late-term, un-anesthetized babies? Those beliefs are philosophically and morally incompatible. What kind of man would even try to reconcile them?

This self-styled defender of marriage says he is "proud" of having submitted, as New York's mayor, a bill creating "domestic partnerships" for homosexual couples. Admittedly, many liberal Americans will agree with the social positions espoused by Giuliani. However, I don't believe conservative voters whose support he seeks will be impressed. Presidential elections are won or lost by slim margins. Rudy has an uphill slog ahead of him, even though he is the darling of the media.

There are other moral concerns about Giuliani's candidacy that conservatives should find troubling. He has been married three times, and his second wife was forced to go to court to keep his mistress out of the mayoral mansion while the Giuliani family still lived there. Talk about tap dancing. Also during that time, the mayor used public funds to provide security services for his girlfriend. The second Mrs. Giuliani finally had enough of his philandering and, as the story goes, forced him to move out. He lived with friends for a while and then married his mistress. Unlike some other Republican presidential candidates, Giuliani appears not to have remorse for cheating on his wife.

One more question: Shouldn't the American people be able to expect a certain decorum and dignity from the man who occupies the White House? On this measure, as well, Giuliani fails miserably. Much has been written in the blogosphere about his three public appearances in drag. In each instance, he tried to be funny by dressing like a woman. Can you imagine Ronald Reagan, who loved a good joke, doing something so ignoble in pursuit of a cheap guffaw? Not on your life.

My conclusion from this closer look at the current GOP front-runner comes down to this: Speaking as a private citizen and not on behalf of any organization or party, I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision. If given a Hobson's – Dobson's? – choice between him and Sens. Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, I will either cast my ballot for an also-ran – or if worse comes to worst – not vote in a presidential election for the first time in my adult life. My conscience and my moral convictions will allow me to do nothing else."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55736
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55743

That's fine with me. I am probably not going to vote for him either.

Can you imagine Ronald Reagan, who loved a good joke, doing something so ignoble in pursuit of a cheap guffaw? Not on your life.

You mean, like act in a movie called "Bedtime for Bonzo?" I'm surprised if Reagan never appeared in drag as a joke - I don't see what the big deal is. Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon got away with it in the classic film "Some Like It Hot" back in 1959...

Andrew

Maybe Dobson, an even bigger "...self-styled defender of marriage..." will attempt a triple gainer into the shallow end of the Dead Pool. Righteous Jerk.

*Be sure to say "hey" to Falwell for me*

If James Dobson is against him, I'm for him.

I can't stand the sanctimonious types on either end of the political spectrum. I'm with Deane on this one!

It's the first thing Dobson and I have ever agreed on. And probably the last.

It's the first thing DJ and I have ever agreed on!

Why don't you pro-life folks stay the F#$% out of other people's lives. Like Dr. Phil says, "It ain't about yooooooooooooooooou! Keep your church out of my life and my government.

(there, that ought to put some fun into Friday)

Happy, Happy, Joy Joy. Happy, Happy, Joy Joy.

Wait, I'm working on getting my head wrapped around the fact that I think Dr. Phil said something smart ....

"Why don't you pro-life folks stay the F#$% out of other people's lives"

Thats probably what the slave owners said about the abolitionists. with pro-life replaced by pro-abolition

I thought I read somewhere that there were programs that will pay people to be sterilized. So if your a drug addict, prostitute, derilict, or other you can get money for getting the lines snipped or tubes tied!

An ounce of prevention saves a ton of welfare!

wat u gotz ta say bout dat!

Nwokie writes:
Thats probably what the slave owners said about the abolitionists. with pro-life replaced by pro-abolition

No, probably not, since slavery and abortion are completely unrelated.

Andrew

I wonder when Michael Bloomberg decides the price is right for the White House. This fellow thinks that Wall Street is Main Street. Both sides are rolling out a lot of scary and scarier, but this guy is king. If you thought that Ralph Nader was a third party nightmare, substitute all of his grassroots politics for a bottomless well of money. Also, unlike Mr. Nader, he owns and controls a media empire.

Remember, because the primary was being held on 9/11, free elections were suspended by Giuliani after the attacks. In a time of chaos, came opportunity, so Bloomberg changed parties and won in a short run designed to aid his success. In his recent re-election bid, he far outspent his challenger, and essentially reinvested in the position of Mayor of New York City.

I do not see how he could appeal to anyone, quite frankly, as he seems to be at odds with most Americans on some level. He is for strict gun control, he is pro-choice, he supports gay marriage, he is for immigration reform, okay, that might appeal to some voters on the left, but wait, isn't he a Republican? Not a soul on the right seems to believe that, so is he a still a Democrat?

So, now half of the country might like him, if they can figure out that riddle. Uh-oh and woopsy, there are other problems? In a quick Google, I find that he has sexually harassed his staff, and not just once. He has also made questionable statements about women in general, and even called someone out for being pregnant.

Well, that narrows his appeal to misogynist trust-fund hippies. Ah, but he doesn't even like misogynist trust-fund hippies. He has repeatedly denied peace groups and minorities permits for gatherings in Central Park. His police are also not famous for tolerance and kindness, even to tie dyed white kids with credit cards.

If all that wasn't enough to chase everyone away, remember, he is still fighting to deny benefits to 9/11 rescuers, even after the courts told the city they had to pay for their medical care. For years, he has essentially spat in the faces of the dead the dying, and the families of Ground Zero. Heroes returning from the Gulf should expect the same welcome from Mr. Bloomberg.

To many, it just boils down to this: He has vast wealth, and the second poorest part of the United States is still in his city. Somehow, this does not embarrass him year after year after year. Please, save the money Mikey. Put it into the philanthropy that may have kept you off the front page, but in the good graces of America.

This election is gonna be a circus.

Both slave owners and abortions deny some people are persons, in the case of slave owners it was blacks, abortionists deny unborn children are persons.

Littlesongs writes:
I do not see how he [Bloomberg] could appeal to anyone, quite frankly, as he seems to be at odds with most Americans on some level.

As I understand it, Bloomberg is very popular in New York City, which says a lot. He's got a very high approval rating, about 75% I think. So it might not be such a longshot for him to appeal to mainstream America, especially with a lot of marketing money...

Andrew

Let's get serious about gun control. Only you nut cases feel the need to pack guns.

Yep, we should. Every high school should have a mandetory gun class.

Hmmmm....I think in this day and age you'd be crazy not to pack some iron! And that's "Major Nut" to you!

"Four years ago, Bloomberg barely squeaked into office. Yet the political neophyte governed with urgency and a surfeit of splashy schemes. Like them or not, the smoking ban, the firehouse closings, the public-schools takeover, the Olympics, the West Side Stadium, nonpartisan elections—all broad strokes that battled conventional wisdom. Bloomberg’s partisans claim that his busy first term inevitably makes any second-term initiatives look puny and that the next four years are about implementing the good ideas of the first four. Their other major point is that Bloomberg has always aspired to be a manager, not a visionary."
http://nymag.com/news/politics/citypolitic/16112/

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said he has no plans to run for president in 2008, but New Yorkers overwhelmingly believe he would make a better president than his predecessor, GOP presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani.

According to a New York Daily News poll released Monday, 46 percent of New Yorkers chose Bloomberg while only 29 percent chose Giuliani in a head-to-head matchup of the two mayors.

Moreover, the poll also indicates New Yorkers believe Bloomberg to be a better mayor than Giuliani. Asked who was a more effective mayor, 56 percent said Bloomberg while 29 percent picked Giuliani. 10 percent ranked them about the same and 5 percent said they didn't know.

The poll, conducted for the Daily News by Blum & Weprin Associates, surveyed 503 registered voters and carries a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points."
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/index.html

I will concede Andrew, he is popular in New York, but beyond his cash, I do not see an overall appeal to most Americans. Pair him with Chuck Hagel, and he appeals to who exactly?

I don't know who the guy appeals to, because I don't know much about him myself. Can't say I've ever seen or heard him speak. Let's remember that in this era, seeing and hearing a candidate is crucial to judging his or her appeal. Ross Perot would never have been able to run so successfully if he hadn't had Larry King to show off his cranky, let's-get-under-the-hood-and-fix-it personality.

Andrew

This is true, and like Ross Perot, he has all the money in the world to play with America like a big toy.

The political junkie in me is screaming, "Go, Michael, Go!!!" but I worry about the bad side effects this could have on the 2008 election in regards to who is ultimately elected...

Andrew

Herb's noticeably quiet in this topic. I thought he had an opinion for everything.

I would think that an independent has a zero chance of being elected, but he could sure mess up the election in some fashion.

If Bloomberg ran, it would certainly mess up a Rudy campaign.

Good God, what if it became a Hillary, Rudy, Michael B. 3-way race?

"Start spreadin' the news..."

An independent wouldn't have a zero chance of being elected. Ross Perot actually had an excellent shot in 1992. His undoing was that he revealed that he was a paranoid kook (fortunately for American history I think) just in time. If in the summer of 1992 he had put together a real political campaign and kept sounding sensible instead of dropping out of the race abruptly, he might have won.

The Republicans DO NOT look like they will field a great candidate for 2008, and if Hillary winds up with the Democratic nomination...well, so many people hate her (even though I imagine I'd vote for her) that there could well be an opening for a strong independent candidate. There's a long way to go to the election - could be an interesting ride.

Andrew

Wannabe....Remember in school when they taught about the Constitution?

Remember the 2nd Amendment?

We don't "Feel the need" as you so aptly put it.

It is our right to keep and bear arms.

I agree we need to get serious about gun control. Good gun control is a nice tight grouping.

Bloomberg is so far out of line that if he gets elected to anything but Mayor of NYC we are all in big trouble. I feel sorry for the people that live in NYC.