AmericanPapist Comments
Well, I'm far from being a Rudy supporter . . . as a pro-life Republican I certainly would find it difficult to support him (on a number of issues).
But I don't see any evidence of him "trying to fake being a Catholic to gain votes," as you charge. Maybe it's happened, but I haven't seen it.
This is one of those issues that the media love to promote. When the candidate under scrutiny is a Democrat like Kerry, the media slant will be to question whether Catholic religious leaders should "intrude" into political issues. When the candidate is a Republican, the media will probably slant from the perspective that Rudy is being a hypocrite by claiming to be a Catholic.
In any event, I suspect that Rudy has more baggage than Bill Clinton, and the media would probably love him to win the Republican nomination and the would then be an avalanche of personal scandals.
Sigh.
There is such slim pickin's this election season. I may have to vote third-party again this year. Unless Fred! can get his candidacy on track. ;)
O.T.: What, no House posting yet? Two episodes into season four and no entries!
Cameron and Chase had speaking parks this week with only a passing peek of Foreman. I was thinking that it would take three episodes for House to re-hire the team, but now I think they will string it out to episode five.
Oh, and a new cast memeber - cool.
brassband - i completely think he's playing up his claimed catholic identity. he's polling very well among catholics and like most politicians doesn't want to lose a substancial margin of his support.
Brian - don't worry. it's in the works!
AP --
I really don't see Rudy "playing up" his Catholic identity.
I'm not saying you're wrong; I just haven't seen it. I do follow the Republican campaigns fairly closely, so I'll try to look for it.
I saw a clip of Sean Hannity using the same defense to justify his support of contraception: "I wanted to be a priest."
"There is such slim pickin's this election season. I may have to vote third-party again this year. Unless Fred! can get his candidacy on track."
If you want a Republican to have a chance at winning the White House next year, you should probably support McCain, who I still hope will win. Evangelical Protestants are scared of Romney's Mormonism (very reminiscent of their fear of Al Smith and John Kennedy), and Rudy is campaigning solely on 9/11 (if anyone reads the New York Times, check out a recent column by Thomas Friedman on the repulsiveness of such campaigning). McCain can win over independents and I think the Religious Right would get behind him if they see their only other option is Hillary.
No matter who's the Republican nominee, the odds of that person winning are very poor. President Bush, with the support of the Republican Congress, abandoned fiscal conservatism, botched a war--a war I supported--that really shouldn't have been botched had we listened to generals rather than neo-conservative suits, and has alienated the rest of the world not only by going to war but also withdrawing from the Kyoto and ABM treaties. The only thing President Bush can hang his hat on is putting two intelligent jurists on the Supreme Court. I don't know how the next Republican candidate can overcome all of that, especially when Republican voters are also fed up with profligate spending and a botched war.
Even if support for the Democratic Congress is at a nadir, the Congressional Republicans have had to deal with an incompetent Attorney General, a gay senator's sex scandal, corruption scandals surrounding Senators Stevens and Domenici...how much more can the public take of such "leadership"?
So we don't have to worry about Giuliani's pro-choice views or Romney's Mormonism finding the Oval Office. Unless something dramatic happens, plan on a Democrat in the White House for at least four years.
I wonder what Ray is up to here. I don't understand the purpose of publicly speaking out on denying Giuliani communion when Missouri is still months away from its primary. It's like by beating the few other bishops who speak similarly to the punch is a self-serving ploy for attention. "Look at me! I'm defending Church orthodoxy when no other Church leaders are!" Makes me wonder if the Archbishop of St. Louis is doing a campaign of his own for a promotion...
botched a war--a war I supported--that really shouldn't have been botched had we listened to generals rather than neo-conservative suits
I agree that the war was botched, but a case could be made that the neo-conservative prescription for fighting the war, involving a much larger deployment of troops and a more thorough crackdown once Saddam was ousted, was what was called for. Many neocons feel that it was Bush that ignored them, and they may have a point.
Commenting by HaloScan
