So you would be against the US Supreme Court legislating from the bench to force on the country social changes for which there is no democratic consensus in their favor? That’s the basis of the conservative complaint about Roe vs Wade. That’s the basis of the conservative complaint about the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts decreeing that “gay marraige” must be introduced. Liberal social policies are introduced without democratic procedures and without persuasion, by judicial fiat or bureaucratic sleight-of-hand. Glad to see that you agree with social conservatives about that.

It comes down to this for Republicans as far as I’m concerned: Do they want to pander to their far-right base, or do they want to win the presidency in ‘08?

Too true. Too many yahoos actually think that the President can make abortion illegal (he cannot) or make gay marriage legal (he cannot). There are those who would rather lose but make sure that the candidate remains ideologically pure (see Pamela of Atlas Shrugs website who wants Cheney to run. Cheney would be toxic).

There are fiscal conservatives and social conservatives and security conservatives. I trust Rudy Giuliani on security, and I think he’d beat Bush’s record fiscally by not expanding the government so much.

I disagree with many conservatives on social issues. I believe true conservatism should want people to follow their own ways on social issues instead of toeing some orthodoxy rooted in medieval attitudes.

I strongly believe that democracy must protect diversity and that true social change comes from knowledge and persuasion, not judicial fiat or legislative action.

It is not hypocritical, but it is perhaps disingenuous, or might we say naive, for a “conservative” to decry Roe v. Wade, and then try to use the same kind of governmental force to decide other social issues.

And Condi would make a helluva president. She’s probably one of the coolest politicians in America, she’s tough, she has knowledge and experience, she has panache, she’s presentable etc etc.

And she would attract female votes, black votes, absolutely would she attract conservative votes etc. The only downside is that she’s single. And the other downside is that she’s not running.

As for electability, I cannot predict that. Didn’t the Dems go for Kerry in 2004 because they thought he was the electable candidate?

Right now Romney lacks name recognition compared to McCain and Rudy. There is a year until the first primaries, since we have gone to the permanent,interminable campaign for presidential elections. Much may change in a year. Dean was the leading Dem for the 2004 election right up to the point when the voters got involved. As soon as their actual voting came he went pfft.

McCain lost me with the McCain-Feingold travesty of a law. We used to be told that we had to remove any restrictions on pr0nography in order to safeguard political speech. What we now have is a situation where there are no restrictions on the most vicious pr0nography but ever tighter restrictions on political advocacy and speech. Sorry, but that is bassackwards. And this stupid law did not achieve anything towards reducing the power of money in politics, which supposedly was its goal. It is partly due to ever stricter restrictions on campaign financing that we now have, according to some, a Congress with less turnover than the old Soviet Politburo.

In the primaries I’m am inclined to vote for Romney, if for no other reason than the absolutely vile religious prejudice being expressed against him as a Mormon. When people start going around saying he is unacceptable because his great-grand-father, fer crying in the night, was a polygamist, he gets my vote.

As for Rudy being a liberal, well, he’s known in my part of the world as a New Jersey Republican. Christine Whitman was a NJ Republican, as was Tom Kean. While that name is a swear word in conservative circles, it is a compliment from liberals.

Which is what I used to be, and now I consider myself a left-leaning centrist.

So Rudy is just perfect for me. I’m not a conservative. People generally think I am because of my stance on Israel and the War on Terror, but I have never fully left my liberal (VERY left-leaning, but not LLL) roots.

Rudy fixed New York when they said it couldn’t be done. He fixed it financially, he fixed it socially, and he kept it together during 9/11.

It comes down to this for Republicans as far as I’m concerned: Do they want to pander to their far-right base, or do they want to win the presidency in ’08?

Rudy can win. I don’t think the others are electable. And I don’t think they’ll be as great a president as I think Rudy can be.

It isn’t just 9/11 that won me over. It’s all the other things he did to a city that was in disarray and disrepair.

Rudy in ’08.