I discussed in a post this past Saturday that for some reasons which simply were not computing with me, former NYC mayor Rudi Giuliani is leading in a GOP presidential straw poll I happened to run across. I found this odd mostly because I sort of figured that his views on abortion and gay rights alone would be enough to disqualify him by much of the party. Apparently, I'm not the only one who thinks so.
Mr. John Hawkins over at Right Wing News drags out a laundry list of reasons why Rudy as the GOP's candidate in 2008 would "be a big mistake." Some of his problems include his pro-abortion stance; his supposed anti-second amendment streak; his position on gay marriage, specifically as it pertains to it being used as a campaign issue; his position on immigration and his past marital problems and indiscretions.
The article is actually not a terrible read (as far as blogging goes on the right) if you can avoid his occasional forays into Wacky Winger Land. Overall, I think that Mr. Hawkins presents some valid points in his position as self-appointed representative of the right wing of his party,. There are a couple of times, however, where he slides off into the loony fringe of the right wing. One such example follows:
One of the biggest selling points for Rudy Giuliani is supposed to be that he's "electable" because a lot of independents and Democrats will vote for him. The problem with that sort of thinking is that if he becomes the Republican nominee, the very liberal mainstream media will spend nine months relentlessly savaging him in an effort to help the Democrats.See, when someone writes that kind of malarky, it immediately costs that person a few points in my "Legitimacy Book." The media has done nothing but fellate Giuliani for the last five years! They absolutely adore "America's Mayor." But then, I guess you never can tell with that fickle "liberal mainstream media." After all, Al Gore and John Kerry really benefited from their largesse. I mean, look where they are now.
Personally, my main issue with Giuliani has everything to do with that fact that I do not believe that he is qualified to hold the position of President of the United States. Of course, I held the same opinion of a former governor of Texas who is currently hastening the coming of the End of Days, so my opinions about presidential qualifications may not resonate with the voting public at large. (For those not aware, the position of governor for the state of Texas is one of the, I guess one could call it easiest, governorships in the nation. Being the "rugged individualists" that they are, Texans are very much wary of a consolidation of power in one office. Most of the power in the state is held by the legislature and that legislature convenes only once every two years. Bush's daily itinerary for much of his six years in the office always had room to squeeze in an afternoon nap and a couple of hours of working out in the afternoon.)
I suppose that if I had to choose who I believe is the more qualified of the two, the mayor of the largest city in the United States or the governor of Texas, then I suppose that Giuliani gets the nod, but that's mostly by default.
Of course, if I were forced to choose between the two in a mythical GOP primary, Giuliani would get my vote given his social liberalism on women's rights and gay rights. But it's for those reasons and the additional reasons highlighted by Mr. Hawkins, that I think Giuliani stands no shot in '08.