To the extent that I understand how most Republicans think, it would seem
that former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani comes closer to the Republican ideal
than any of the other viable Republican candidates. They are all good and decent
men.
But it is difficult to see, from a conservative- and Republican-values
perspective, what major shortcoming Giuliani brings as compared to the other
candidates. And given the obsession of liberal news media with publishing
negative reports about Giuliani and frequent praise of John McCain, it would
appear that it is Giuliani whom Democrats most fear as the Republican
presidential nominee.
On the "war on terror," no Republican contender but John McCain equals
Giuliani in longtime efforts on behalf of that war or in understanding and
articulating the threat radical Islam poses to America and to liberty on earth.
And they both have great courage. If the only issue that mattered in the next
election were the "war on terror," all those -- including Democrats and
independents -- who share this awareness of the Islamist threat could be happy
with either candidate.
Anyone who does not understand the nature of the war that liberty is now
waging against tyranny should not be president of the United States. And the
Democratic candidates until now have shown no such understanding -- the term
"Islamic terror," invoked by nearly every Republican candidate, was not
mentioned once in any of the Democrats' debates. But while this understanding is
necessary, it is not sufficient. America needs a strong leader domestically, as
well as internationally.
And when it comes to being strong on both domestic and international
issues, it seems that no presently viable Republican candidate matches Rudy
Giuliani.
The current leading contender, Sen. John McCain, is a great American and
a true American hero. However -- and this is written in sadness -- on too many
significant issues, conservatives, and even many moderates, would not only
disagree with John McCain but also would question his
judgment.
John McCain is a leader in promoting legislation on behalf of "campaign
finance reform." Aside from limiting freedom of speech, such legislation has
done real damage to our democracy. For example, it has severely limited how much
money one American can give to another American to run for public office.
Consequently, increasingly only the very famous and/or the extremely wealthy --
e.g., California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, former senator -- now governor --
Jon Corzine of New Jersey, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg can run for
office. The percentage of very wealthy members of the U.S. Senate is the
greatest in American history. Thanks to John McCain and "campaign finance
reform," Americans running for public office can spend hundreds of millions of
dollars on themselves, but individuals can give only $4,000 to non-wealthy
candidates.
John McCain, in a recent Republican debate, asked, "Why shouldn't we be
able to re-import drugs from Canada?" (With its socialized medicine, Canada buys
drugs at cheaper rates.) This is not merely not conservative; it is radical and
it is foolish.
As George Will wrote this week, "That amounts to importing Canada's price
controls, a large step toward a system in which … new pain-relieving,
life-extending pharmaceuticals would be unavailable. … When Mitt Romney
interjected, 'Don't turn the pharmaceutical companies into the big bad guys,'
McCain replied, 'Well, they are.' There is a place in American politics for
moralizers who think in such Manichaean simplicities," Will concludes. "That
place is in the Democratic Party."
John McCain twice voted against President Bush's tax
cuts.
John McCain has wholly bought the politically correct view of man-made
carbon emissions leading to global catastrophe. It is true that all the
Republican candidates pay lip service to a hysteria that is capable of truly
harming the American and world economies, but John McCain is the major
Republican activist on this issue. He is co-author, with Sen. Joe Lieberman, of
a bill empowering Congress to legislate carbon emissions, and he has dismissed
all scientific questions with Al Gore's, "The debate has
ended."
John McCain's view of drilling for oil in a remote corner of Alaska: "As
far as ANWR is concerned, I don't want to drill in the Grand Canyon, and I don't
want to drill in the Everglades." Any comparison of a part of frozen Alaska that
has been seen by almost no human being in history with the Grand Canyon and the
Everglades, which tens of millions of people have visited and always will visit,
is, shall we say, odd.
John McCain is a good man, a good American and a good leader, but he is
not a conservative in some important ways. That is why John Kerry considered
John McCain as a possible running mate. Would John McCain be a better president
than a Democrat? Yes, primarily because of his stance on the "war on terror."
But conservative supporters of McCain need to acknowledge that some fundamental
conservative principles -- as noted above -- probably would be rejected in a
McCain presidency.
Rudy Giuliani may have made a great mistake by not campaigning in New
Hampshire, Nevada, Iowa and South Carolina. But between Rudy Giuliani (and, for
that matter, Mitt Romney) on the one hand and John McCain on the other, there is
little question as to who more embodies mainstream conservative and Republican
principles.
But Giuliani is not merely more of a conservative than John McCain. In
fact, if it is Ronald Reagan that Republicans want, Giuliani is extraordinarily
close to that venerated man. Ronald Reagan stood for two great beliefs: that big
government is a big problem for a free society and that America must be
militarily strong and lead the war against global
communism.
Substitute "global jihadism" for "global communism" and you have Rudy
Giuliani's twin pillars. His one major weakness in appealing to all
conservatives is that he is for abortion rights. Let me, then, briefly address
all those who, like me, consider nearly all abortions
immoral.
Ronald Reagan was pro-life, and it mattered little to the pro-life cause.
Concerning abortion, what matters most in a president is the type of judges he
appoints to the Supreme Court. As George Will wrote on behalf of Giuliani, "The
way to change abortion law is to change courts by means of judicial nominations
of the sort Giuliani promises to make." It is extremely unlikely that John
McCain would appoint similarly conservative judges. After all, why would he
appoint judges like Scalia and Alito who apparently differ with him on the
constitutionality of McCain's own "campaign finance reform"
laws?
Pro-life Republicans need to ask themselves: Will a Democrat or Giuliani
as president render abortion less common in America? The best is the enemy of
the better. And Giuliani is far better on abortion than any Democratic
nominee.
Giuliani is for school vouchers, against bilingual education, for
reducing taxes further, for reducing government spending. And he has
well-thought-out positions on how to achieve these things. He also has the
experience of cleaning up the most liberal major city in
America.
I write this column aware that Giuliani may have lost his chance at
getting the Republican nomination. But I could not live with my conscience if I
did not articulate one week before the potentially decisive Florida primary my
beliefs about Rudy Giuliani.