Ron Paul Vs Giuliani? Paul Wins.

File this one under "Whodathunkit?"

From The Politico:

Ron Paul continues to best Giuliani

Ron Paul, the Texas congressman frequently dismissed as a long shot candidate with no real chance at winning the Republican presidential nomination, has won nearly twice as many total votes to date as Rudy Giuliani, a candidate still widely viewed as a strong contender.

With his second place finish in Saturday’s Nevada caucus, where Paul defeated Giuliani in every county in the state, the Texas congressman has now received 106,414 votes to 60,220 for Giuliani. Both candidates have collected zero actual delegates.

Literally if you had bet me four months ago that Ron Paul would beat then pundit predicted front runner Rudy Giuliani in every one of the races prior to Florida I'd have taken that bet and then asked you what you were smoking. Looking at it now I think it goes to show exactly how much strength Paul's message has with people and that Rudy's strategy was a total gamble. Frankly I hope Paul beats Giuliani in Florida too. That would shut down Rudy's campaign and possibly enable McCain to win on Tsunami Tuesday and still give Paul's campaign enough impetus to continue onward.

As predicted Paul isn't going to win the nomination. But I think its important for Paul's ideals to to receive as large a forum as possible. However given the recent brouhaha over his old newsletter I don't see him running past Tsunami Tuesday. He can't run on a third party ticket without excerpts from his newsletter being thrown in his face continually. So while I applaud him for reengaging disaffected voters and spreading libertarian ideas I think Feb. fifth is the perfect time to separate the message from messenger.

Pat Robertson Endorses Giuliani

Somewhere right now John McCain is laughing. McCain got Brownback's endorsement and Giuliani gets this....

From the WaPo:

Pat Robertson Endorses Rudy:
Deems Him 'More Than Acceptable to People of Faith'

Pat Robertson, one of the most influential figures in the social conservative movement, announced his support for Rudy Giuliani's presidential bid this morning at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

Robertson's support was coveted by several of the leading Republican candidates and provides Giuliani with a major boost as the former New York City mayor seeks to convince social conservatives that, despite his positions supporting abortion rights and gay rights, he is an acceptable choice as the GOP nominee....

Good news for Giuliani? Well having a supporter that can move hurricanes with his mind is always a good thing. However given Robertson's previous comments about the US deserving 9/11 many independents might start looking for another candidate. Over at The Carpetbagger Report Steve Bennen notes the following:

Robertson, even in religious right circles, is considered something of a clown. He has a cult following that keeps the Christian Broadcasting Network afloat, but Robertson’s Christian Coalition has practically been driven out of business, and other leading evangelicals are embarrassed to be seen with him. You’ll notice, for example, that at last month’s “Values Voter Summit,” the largest gathering of the year for the movement, Robertson wasn’t invited and played no role whatsoever.

I'm inclined to think that the votes of CBN viewers aren't going to outweigh the number of moderates and independents that this endorsement will cost him. The more I see of Rudy, the more I think he is the greater evil.

Giuliani Runs to the Far Right (Updated)

**Update**
Apparently the AP misquoted Guiliani as saying Osama instead of Assad (Pres, of Syria) blogger Phillip Klein picked up on the error while watching Countdown. I took a listen and he's right.**


Looks like he's trying to shed any semblance of "liberalism" or even centrism.

From Breitbart

On Iran, Giuliani criticized Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., also a candidate for president, for saying they would engage in diplomatic relations with Iran. Obama has said he would be willing to meet with Iran's leader in the first year of his presidency without conditions; Clinton has said envoys below the presidential level should begin diplomatic work.

"This is the world we live in. It's not this happy, romantic-like world where we'll negotiate with this one, or we'll negotiate with that one and there will be no preconditions, and we'll invite (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad to the White House, we'll invite Osama (bin Laden) to the White House," Giuliani said.

"Hillary and Obama are kind of debating whether to invite them to the inauguration or the inaugural ball," he added.

I understand the Nixonian strategy of "run to the right then run to the center" but I'm thinking that Giuliani's ploy of "Run to the fringe" is going to bite him in the keister with independents. Clinton is one one of the more hawkish Dems and Obama's strategy isn't "pull out once I'm elected". His comment was unfair and unfounded. In my mind the more he talks the scarier he gets. I think that in his bid to woo the remaining members of the GOP he will ultimately scare away moderates and independents thereby throwing the election to the Dem nominee.

McCain Takes Giuliani to Task on Torture

From the NY Times

Rudolph W. Giuliani’s statement on Wednesday that he was uncertain whether waterboarding, a simulated drowning technique, was torture drew a sharp rebuke yesterday from Senator John McCain, who said that his failure to call it torture reflected his inexperience.

“All I can say is that it was used in the Spanish Inquisition, it was used in Pol Pot’s genocide in Cambodia, and there are reports that it is being used against Buddhist monks today,” Mr. McCain, who spent more than five years in a North Vietnamese prison camp, said in a telephone interview.

Of presidential candidates like Mr. Giuliani, who say that they are unsure whether waterboarding is torture, Mr. McCain said: “They should know what it is. It is not a complicated procedure. It is torture.”

Mr. Giuliani said on Wednesday night at a forum in Davenport, Iowa, that he favored “aggressive questioning” of terrorism suspects and using “means that are a little tougher” with terrorists but that the United States should not torture people. On the question of whether waterboarding is torture, however, Mr. Giuliani said he was unsure.

“It depends on how it’s done,” he said, adding that he was unsure whether descriptions of the practice by the “liberal media” were accurate. “It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it.”

The article also points out that McCain's view of torture is similar to my own:

"...Mr. McCain, who believes that torture is ineffective because its victims will say anything to make it stop..."

Just five days ago Giuliani said "'My belief in God, my reliance on his guidance, is at the core of who I am, I can assure you of that...'' and now he's advocating situational uses of torture? At what point did this brand of hypocrisy/moral relativism become acceptable in a potential president? If we can't trust a person to follow the dictates of his "deeply held" faith how can we expect him to uphold the laws of man? To me where a person stands on this issue acts as a moral barometer (particularly if they also happen espouse mainstream religious views). Its a question about whether morales and values are more important than expediency.

Earlier this week there was some discussion of "Is America inherently good"? Pushing the textbook definition of the word inherent aside my answer is no. We are however incredibly well meaning. However if we continue to elect leaders that are willing to sacrifice values for expediency it won't be too long before we won't even be able to claim that.

Giuliani Sells Out to Values Voters?

I missed this but fortunately Sideways Mencken didn't.

From The Hill:

Perkins: Giuliani supports marriage amendment

Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, told The Hill Saturday that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) would support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.
Perkins said Giuliani told him in a private meeting that if the Defense of Marriage Act appeared to be failing or if multiple states began to legalize same-sex marriages, then he would support the constitutional amendment.

Giuliani did not mention the amendment or the issue of gay marriage during his address to the Values Voters Summit, but that position could win him favor with some social conservatives who view the former mayor warily.

Perkins said that was not enough to assuage his concerns about Giuliani, but “it was nice to hear.”

If what Perkins said is true this may be the first step in Giuliani selling out to reap the religious rights votes and that says a lot about Giuliani. He'd do well to remember how much flack Mitt Romney has taken over his changing stances on value based issues.