The Politico Claims Rudy Has "National Security Stature," Compares Him To Eisenhower
Today's lead story in The Politico claims that social conservatives are supporting Rudy Giuliani despite his views on abortion and gay rights, offering the following astonishing explanation for this:
Giuliani has tried to appeal to social conservatives, embracing their agenda by pledging to appoint "strict constructionists" to the Supreme Court, using Justices John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr. as examples. Conservatives expect "strict constructionists" to determine that the Constitution does not mandate abortion rights.But, like Dwight Eisenhower's in 1952, Giuliani's national security stature after the Sept. 11 attacks more likely explains his continued popularity within the religious right, whose voters have long held hawkish positions on the issue.
So we're now writing that Rudy outright has "national security stature?"
In the real world, of course, Rudy doesn't have national security stature at all. He was a mob-busting U.S. Attorney, ran New York as mayor for two terms, walked through the smoke and dust on 9/11, then did a bit of globe-trotting as part of his post-mayoralty moneymaking efforts. Rudy has no national security experience of any kind -- let alone "stature" in this field.
By contrast, Dwight Eisenhower -- with whom Rudy is astonishingly compared here -- had served as the Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, as well as becoming the first supreme commander of NATO, before becoming President.
What Rudy does have is an aura of national security experience -- that is, the appearance of having it, or something like it, anyway -- based on the fact that he happened to be Mayor of New York on 9/11. One gains "stature" in a given field when they have actual experience in it. Even if you agree that Rudy's post 9/11 leadership was admirable, it simply doesn't constitute an achievement in the field of national security. Rudy's aura of national security experience is a media creation, nothing more, helped along by silly passages like this one in The Politico.
We wouldn't be stamping our feet about this if it didn't make a larger point with far-reaching implications for the Presidential race: If the media, and Rudy's political rivals, cede Rudy the aura of national security experience based on nothing other than his performance on 9/11, he stands a much better chance of becoming President. Descriptions of the candidates matter.
You betcha! Six months ago, I kept saying to myself "No WAY Giuliani stands a chance". Today? After reading the NY Times piece on how Rudy is learning to tone down his responses (apparently, no more suggestions that questioners need psychiatric help) and, the sort of claptrap he's feeding his audiences (and they're CHEERING for), I'm not so sure.
If his rivals don't jump all over this and start attacking him, we may be looking at "America's mayor" as the next president.
May 29, 2007 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
spin like this is always appreciated too:
HARWOOD: Well look, Keith, I think those answers by both McCain and Giuliani help both men perhaps in the primary and in the general election for different reasons. McCain‘s core message is toughness, and that I‘m tough enough that I can go against my party on this issue. Why? Because I‘ve been in combat. I‘ve been tortured myself, as you mentioned.
Rudy Giuliani also has a bit of a claim to combat in a different way, because he was on the ground in 9/11.
May 29, 2007 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah, saw that piece, ct. really something.
bkny, where was that "claim to combat" line?
May 29, 2007 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hopefully, we can count on an extremely vicious primary fight on the right. There is certainly no clear winner yet. In fact, I think that the strongest Republican candidate hasn't even entered the race yet.
May 29, 2007 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
greg -- may 16 countdown:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18720630/
May 29, 2007 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've got it all wrong, Greg. Appearance matters, not substance or experience.
David Brooks today spent his column calling Gore a technology determinist, a radical one, at that, for believing the media is the predominant force that shapes our politics and society.
This article, along with Rudy's eventual nomination, simply proves Gore is correct.
"Thank God George Bush is our president." -Rudy Giuliani
May 29, 2007 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's also yet another example of a phenomenon you've pointed out frequently, Greg -- a media outlet describing a narrative as something that just is, or just happened, despite the fact that they're intimately involved in creating it.
May 29, 2007 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suppose "America's mayor" would be a step up from "America's village idiot", but it's not a big step up.
May 29, 2007 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the Repubs running against Giuliani will cede him the issue (altough I can't imagine McCain doing so), but our nominee damn well better not, no who he or she is.
May 29, 2007 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also: note that the claim that Giuliani is beloved by "social conservatives" is based on merged Pew Polls from March and April -- IOW, polling that is on average two months old. During those months, Giuliani's numbers have dropped sharply.
Which Repubs have been abandoning him? "Social conservatives," perhaps?
May 29, 2007 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
ahh, interesting...we'll keep looking into this
May 29, 2007 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has he learned the difference between Shia and Sunni yet? Does he know which sect al Qaeda comes from?
Last I heard, he didn't. Maybe someone got him up to speed.
Colbert pointed out how the cachet of Being There on 9/11 brings cheers from supporters. At the debate, he says less than "I was there..." and the crowds cheer.
Don't look too far into why he decided to move the Emergency Response center into the WTC after it was attacked once and was known to be a huge symbolic target for terrorists.
It's those things that should cause supporters to question his judgment. But they won't.
May 29, 2007 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the problem: very few Dems have the cojones to call Rudy out on this kind of bs because there will be some consultant telling him or her not to do it becuase it will piss off some media person somewhere.
What we need is a Democratic candidate with the cojones to stand up and say that he or she is not putting up with the media's bs. Don't have a press plane. Don't give any journalist who has an office address in DC any interviews. Do meet with local reporters at every city you go to. Do use You Tube and other such media outlets to get your message out.
If Democrats wait for the media to call Rudy on this stuff, they are going to be waiting until hell freezes over because most of them came to political maturity under Republicans and are partial to Republicans. Even if they aren't, their superiors are and they know how to make the bossman happy.
Also, we need to learn that most pundits are idiots and are people who you wouldn't listen to if they were giving you advice in your private life, so why should you listen to them just because they happen to be on TV or have a column in a paper or magazine. Think about it, if a blowhard like Tim Russert was telling you something at a party, would you pay attention to him? No, you wouldn't.
Mrgavel
May 29, 2007 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I served under Ike in Europe from D Day till the end; to put Giuliani in the same sentence as Ike and national security is farce.
May 29, 2007 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
For Republicans, 'national security stature' means acting like the rest of the world doesn't matter, and the president can do anythign he f-ing wants to do. Just by saying that he wants to keep the killing going in Iraq, stick it to Iran and torture people, that translates into stature for right-wingers who are only interested in taking out their fear and blind rage on the rest of the world. If Rudy had anything more than macho posturing he would lose credibility rather than gaining some.
May 29, 2007 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
By that token, Hillary Clinton should claim to have National Security Stature simply from being married to a Bill. She probably absorbed plenty of experience from Bubba talking in his sleep....
May 29, 2007 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Politico
Exactly what one would expect from the place where Drudge "rocks their world."
May 29, 2007 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't even use that "America's mayor" phrase sarcastically. You know it's BS, I know it's BS, but every time you say it you reinforce the frame that he's some kind of sympathetic favorite.
Giuliani's a DA turned crook, and New Yorkers hate him. If he's America's mayor, then Chicago's Richie Daley is the world's.
Giuliani is America's party boss.
May 29, 2007 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is ridiculous, pure and simple. The only two things those two men have in common is that they are both men. And even in death, Ike has him beat in that department.
And as a side note, Ike's "national security stature" should be looked at separately from his impressive military career. As a president, his foreign policy was incredibly reckless and at times paranoid although so were the times. For example, Ike's continuous policy of flying American bombers with cameras in them over the Soviet Union on surveillance missions was incredibly dangerous and heavy handed. Granted the Soviets did need to been monitored, but flying bombers (that could be seen as an aggressive strike) into another nation's sovereign airspace -- especially a nation with which you are in a nuclear stand-off -- strikes me as borderline insanity. So as an example of a great international statesmen I'd hesitate to hold Eisenhower up too terribly high.
May 29, 2007 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am simply flabbergasted that both the media and Rudy's rivals have done so little looking into Rudy's anti-terrorism activities pre-9/11.
He took over the mayoralty just after the first bombing of the WTC and what did go and do, put the counter terrorism headquarters in the building.
Wasn't it partly Rudy's job to prevent another attack?
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ George Orwell
May 29, 2007 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's probably little more than a fluke that Giuliani has any support from social conservatives at all. First, I think his opponents split the "informed" social conservative vote, as some support John McCain, despite his disagreement with them on some issues, and others support Romney, despite his flip-flops. The other two factors play off each other. Just a few months ago, a poll found that a majority of Republicans were completely confused about Giuliani's positions on most social issues. I would be surprised if many weren't still. Then, there is the overlap of the social conservatives with pro-business and "national security" conservatives, with both groups having some favor toward him. As the cycle progresses, Giuliani will lose all favor with this group and will inevitably have to rely on other poorly informed, dogmatic Repub constituents.
May 29, 2007 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps you're misreading this in a negative light - Giuliani has taught the American public a great deal about national security. He's shown us what can happen when you give key leadership positions to unqualified yes men, what happends when you don't have a communications strategy between police, fire and other key government departments, what happens when your departments fix bidding for key services (such as they for Motorola and fire fighter phones), what happens when your emergency plans are outdated and you tell those trapped in burning high-rises to stay put instead of trying to escape, and how hazardous cleaning up a disaster area or living near it can be.
The MSM media will not, for the most part, call him on his failures because they are complicit in creating and sustaining the myth, just as they are so hesitant to give creedence to the fact that the Iraq war is a disaster. There may also be hesitation because his decisions likely led to hundreds of unnecessary deaths on 9/11, and will lead to many more as more of the clean up workers and nearby residents die of various lung ailments and other health problems resulting from the bad air quality following the collapse of the towers.
May 29, 2007 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
The fabricated Giuliani myth of 9/11 needs to be challenged by Dems now, do not wait till 08'.
On that day Giuliani wandered around the streets because he had decided to place his emergency command center in WTC 7, which was on fire.
The 9/11 aftermath showed Giluiani's callous disregard for 9/11 workers health.
May 29, 2007 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said.
Thank you.
May 30, 2007 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
They both had a mistress, or in Rudy's case several. But Ike saw the light a little.
May 30, 2007 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink