Giuliani Takes Step Toward '08 Bid

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
704
Location
California
We don't want this. Have to discourage him from the race. He is gun control advocate.

Vick



Nov 13, 8:06 PM (ET)

By DEVLIN BARRETT

(AP) Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, left, speaks during an election day campaign rally for...


WASHINGTON (AP) - Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, a moderate Republican best known for his stewardship of the city after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has taken the first step in a 2008 presidential bid.

The former mayor filed papers to create the Rudy Giuliani Presidential Exploratory Committee, Inc., establishing a New York-based panel that would allow him to raise money to explore a White House run and travel the country.

The four-page filing, obtained by The Associated Press, lists the purpose of the non-profit corporation "to conduct federal 'testing the waters' activity under the Federal Election Campaign Act for Rudy Giuliani."

The paperwork, dated last Friday, is signed by Bobby Burchfield, a partner at the DC-based law firm of McDermott Will & Emery, a firm that handles political work.


(AP) Former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani speaks during a campaign rally in South Carolina on Nov. 2,...
Full Image


Giuliani spokeswoman Sunny Mindel declined to comment.

One potential rival for the GOP nomination, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, said Sunday he was taking the initial step of setting up an exploratory committee.

Under federal election law, an exploratory committee allows an individual to travel and gauge the level of support for a candidacy without formally declaring themselves a candidate and adhering to all the federal rules of fundraising. An individual who spends money only to test the waters - but not to campaign for office - does not have to register as a candidate under the election law.

The GOP field is expected to grow with Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and New York Gov. George Pataki expected to join the presidential fray.

Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack of Iowa has filed to establish a full-blown campaign committee and will make a more formal announcement of his candidacy later this month.

Giuliani was widely praised for leading the city during and after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. He has said for months that he would wait until the end of the 2006 elections to decide whether to embark on a White House bid.

The former mayor is a moderate who supports gun control, same-sex civil unions, embryonic stem-cell research and abortion rights - stands that would put him at odds with the majority of the GOP conservative base.

Giuliani has tried to sidestep those differences and offered strong praise for President Bush at the 2004 GOP convention in New York.

"It doesn't matter what the media does to ridicule him or misinterpret him or defeat him. They ridiculed Winston Churchill. They belittled Ronald Reagan. But like President Bush, they were optimists. Leaders need to be optimists. Their vision is beyond the present, and it's set on a future of real peace and security," Giuliani said.

"Some call it stubbornness. I call it principled leadership."

In 2006, the Giuliani brand remained strong. He headlined fundraisers for Republican candidates nationwide and his travel has done little to deny 2008 ambitions. During a visit earlier this month to Columbia, S.C., Giuliani dodged the question: "There's a chance, but that's after this election is over."

He then left South Carolina for New Hampshire, site of the nation's first primary and another GOP fundraiser.

Giuliani enjoys strong name recognition and a recent AP-AOL News poll conducted in late October found that among Republicans Giuliani was essentially tied with Condoleezza Rice and McCain on who they would most like to see elected president in 2008.

Rice has insisted that she will not run.

Giuliani, who was in his final months as New York City mayor when a pair of planes crashed into the World Trade Center's towers, became a national hero. Within hours of the attack, the mayor was visiting the site, caked in dust and walking through the chaos - a moment replayed repeatedly on television.

Assuming the role of "America's Mayor" and Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2001, Giuliani remained an in-demand speaker and GOP fundraiser. He was the first Republican to lead New York in decades, had cut crime and redeveloped rundown parts of the city.

He was a former U.S. attorney, leading campaigns against organized crime and corruption. He spent two years as the Justice Department's No. 3 post, overseeing all U.S. attorneys, the Drug Enforcement Agency and the U.S. Marshals Service. The Brooklyn native was first elected New York's mayor in 1993.

Giuliani eyed a run for the U.S. Senate in 2000, but ended that bid while battling prostate cancer and a made-for-tabloids divorce from television star Donna Hanover. The messy divorce and his relationship with Judith Nathan also made his campaign against Hillary Rodham Clinton all the more difficult.

Long before the Sept. 11 attacks, the mayor cultivated a kind of celebrity status. He made a cameo on "Seinfeld" in 1993 and "Mad About You" the next year. He hosted Saturday Night Live in 1997 and followed up with other cameos. And in 2002, he was a presenter at MTV's Video Music Awards.

The filing is available at: http://wid.ap.org/documents/giuliani_filing.pdf
 
This guy is a bigger threat to 2A rights than Hillary Clinton, if elected President.

Hillary would be fought tooth and nail by everybody opposed to her. Opposing Hillary would be a galvanizing force on the right. Her polarizing nature would assure a fight to death on 2A issues.

Rudy, on the other hand, would co-op all the "moderate" Repubs--he'd provide political "cover" for them. Add them to the liberal Dems, and we'd have BIG problems.

They said only Nixon could go to China (a Dem would have been called a commie for trying that act); and a Dem like Clinton was the one who signed off on welfare reform (a Repub would have been called "cruel" or "racist")--maybe only a Republican like Rudy could bring on the most onerous forms of gun control.
 
I would be concerned that he might catagorize gun owners in with terrorist's. Then we would see how far wire tapping went with this "new federal administration":uhoh: Then again if you ain't got nothing to hide, well, no big deal, right? Boy, Rudy with a Democratic house and Senate, what a mix.
 
God...I can easily see a Giuliani/MCain ticket in our future and that vision is as ugly as a dingus on a dog.
~shudders~

Biker
 
Bill Richardson D NM is a better choice for gun owners

If it's a dang rino like ghoulianni and mcclib I am voting Dem for the first time since the early 90's.

ghoulianni and mcclib stink bad, real bad

I would rather have gridlock then ghoulianni and mcclib
 
If you think Giuliani would make a good President, Google the names "Louima", "Diallo" and Dorismond". I think it says something that when Giuliani was mayor, two cops thought they could rape a guy with a wooden stick, in front of witnesses and get away with it. Neither of the convicted perpetrators pled insanity nor were they adjudicated mentally incompetent. They stuck their fingers in the wind and determined that that was acceptable behavior.

The thought of Giuliani in charge of the BATFE makes my blood run cold.

I will NEVER vote for Giuliani, under ANY circumstances. I would no more vote for him than I'd vote for Ayman al Zawahiri. I don't care WHOM he runs against, whether it's Hillary or Cindy Sheehan. I'll be sitting THAT election out.
 
He doesn't stand a chance. I wouldn't worry. He's pro-abortion and extremely pro-gun restriction, neither of which goes over well in the red States.

Consider what happens when all the other candidates are also suspect on the issue of gun ownership rights.
 
A choice between Hilary and either McCaine or Giuliani would be an impossible choice--the proverbial feminine hygiene applicator versus the feces sandwich from the South Park episode. Let's hope the Republicans offer up a better candidate from a 2A perspective. If they insist on one of the above feces sandwiches, then let's hope the Democrats at least offer a pro-2A candidate, like Brian Schweitzer, the governor of Montana.
 
Guilaini and McCain are NOT going to be the nominee when all is said and done.

Sure they'll kick around the idea of running ... I expect McCain will actually attempt it but die in the primaries just like last time (Guilaini will realize its a waste of time and money and not even run).

These guys are grandstanders that the leftist run media loves, thats the only reason you see ANY coverage of their consideration of running.


Relax.
 
"President" Giuliani

Just doesn't have the right ring for me...

Mods, let me know if I'm off base here, or just flat out wrong.

This came from my blog, and I decided it warranted placement here, so here goes...

By way of our "friends" at cnn.com, I give you this:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/13/giuliani.president/index.html

It seems that one Rudolph Giuliani, former mayor of New York City of 9/11 fame, has decided to open an "exploratory committee" to decide if he has enough national party support to make a run as the Republican candidate in the 2008 U.S. Presidential race. Lovely.

"I do not think the government should cut off the right to bear arms. My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a gun owner should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to pass a written exam that shows that they know how to use a gun, that they're intelligent enough and responsible enough to handle a gun. Should both handgun and rifle owners be licensed...we're talking about all dangerous weapons." Isn't that wonderful? Nevermind the fact that our forefathers guaranteed us the undeniable Right to Keep and Bear Arms WITHOUT a license. This guy thinks we should license every gun owner. Great. We in the pro-gun world like to refer to that as "step one."

Step one is something that every anti-gun has. It usually refers to some step that comes across as initially harmless to those who don't follow Second Amendment issues too closely. Something like licensing, or limiting the number of guns one can own, citing that no one man should have thirty or forty guns, right? That collection will turn into an arsenal one day, and that's dangerous. Bollocks. Next thing you know (and this is PROVABLE FACT), they start picking out weapons and calling them "assault rifles" (thank the Clinton Gun Ban for that one) since they serve no "sporting purpose." Bollocks, again. Next, they'll attack handguns. They say that there's no significant reason to have more than 10 rounds in the magazine of a handgun (that makes it an assault weapon), so they outlaw FACTORY magazines containing more than 10 rounds as "high capacity" magazines (on a side-note, the current anti-gun agenda, which stands a chance, now that so much control of Congress is in anti-gun hands, wants to limit magazine capacity to SIX ROUNDS!). After that, the floodgates open. Soon, every practical self-defense rifle, shotgun, and handgun becomes an assault weapon and is subsequently banned. Every inexpensive but high-quality semi-automatic gun of any type (hunting or otherwise) follows suit. After that, it's gun registry, where you must register every firearm you own, and open your house to random searches by BATFE (The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) as many as three times a year. Now, they're wiping their arses with the Fourth (unreasonable search and seizure), Fifth (private property), and Ninth (protection of rights not specifically enumerated by the Bill of Rights) Amendments to the United States Constitution. See, y'all. It goes much deeper than your average redneck NRA-hat wearin [deleted] with a gun, doesn't it?

We gotta open our eyes BEFORE the wool goes over them. Once that happens, some liberal [deleted] somewhere will immediately write legislation keeping us from removing wool from our eyes, and we'll be too blind to stop them.

I'm reminded of what Senator Amidala said in Episode III: "So THIS is how democracy dies. With thunderous applause."

Stop clapping for the bad guys, people.
 
Last edited:
You lost me at "President". One of the most annoying things a person can do is the "quotation marks" stunt. Intellectually bankrupt and morally suspect. Make your case and let it stand or fall on its merits and your skills. Shutting off thought and discourse by using this cheap little trick to trivialize whatever one would prefer to ignore - yes, Michael Moore is a director, William Clinton was President, Pamela Anderson is an actress, and Arlen Spectre is a Republican - is fine for getting pats on the back from the True Believers and Marching Morons. It's beneath the honest intelligent adult who has written your other posts.
 
About the "Drivers License" Arguement

http://john-ross.net/mistakes.htm

WE SHOULD SAY: “You know, driving is a luxury, whereas firearms ownership is a right secured by the Constitution. But let’s put that aside for a moment. It’s interesting you compared guns and vehicles. Here in the U.S. you can at any age go into any state and buy as many motorcycles, cars, or trucks of any size you want, and you don’t need to do anything if you don’t use them on public property. No license at all. If you do want to use them on public property, you can get a license at age 16. This license is good in all 50 states. No waiting periods, no background checks, nothing. If we treated guns like cars, a fourteen-year-old could go into any state and legally buy handguns, machine guns, cannons, whatever, cash and carry, and shoot them all with complete legality on private property. And at age 16 he could get a state license good anywhere in the country to shoot these guns on public property. Sounds great to me.”
 
Suppose someone came up to you and said "If you can pass this written test, and show on a gun range that you can hold and operate a gun safely, you can buy any gun that you can afford. Revolver, autopistol, fully automatic pistol or rifle, grenade launcher (with grenades), recoilless rifle, ma-deuce... anything."

What then?
 
""

Alrighty then.

Thank you for noticing my other posts, and I do appreciate that folks are reading them!

The quote marks didn't imply a distaste. I actually meant that to represent the fact that he isn't the pres yet, and hasn't fully committed to the race yet. True enough, though. Thanks for pointing that out, tellner.

And lance22, that John Ross thing is great! Oughta be required reading.
 
<digression - off topic>

I noticed you have a JC Higgins ... my dearly departed dad had one of those. Brings back fond memories.

</digression off>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top