The Case for a Bureaucrat
By Achance Posted in 2008 — Comments (27) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Well, I've spent more money and got less than I got for the money I gave FDT, but it's morning now and life goes on.
The only thing that would cause me to support a former governor of Arkansas is a former First Lady of Arkansas, so there's no reason to discuss Huckabee; if he's the nominee, I'll get a yard sign and cast a vote - that's it. Oh, and I'll relearn how to say "President Clinton."
John McCain has backstabbed the Republcan Party and pandered to the MSM so many times that the only thing that would cause me to support him is that same former First Lady of Arkansas, so I'll get a yard sign and cast a vote. And, I'll learn to say "President Clinton."
So, that leaves Guiliani and Romney; what to do, what to do?
I can't get past my revulsion at all the "motivational speakers" I've been subjected to over the years; the canned message full of buzz words, the perfect hair, the faked enthusiasm. All of you who've spent any time in government or corporate life know what I'm talking about. I love the commercial currently on TV where the motivational speaker rattles off a long string of meaningless buzz words and a young woman in the audience yells, "Bingo." Mitt Romney would have to go a Helluva ways to convince me he's not one of those guys.
And that leaves Guiliani. I'm not going to mythologize the guy; I know better than most what it is like to deal with unions and mafiosi, you get dirty. I'm not going to criticize his womanizing or his shady friends, and unless you've had money and power and lived in a politically influential city, you're not qualifed to question them either. I'm amazed that some think his being divorced is disqualifying: fifty percent of marriages end in divorce, fifty percent in death; you pick it. America isn't Smalltown, USA anymore; I'm not convinced it ever was.
Guiliani ran the toughest, dirtiest, most corrupt city in America and did it well. He took on the Mob, the Unions, the Educrats, and the New York Times and won a Helluva lot more than he lost.
Rudy Guiliani is no doctrinaire conservative. He isn't likely to get elected to the City Council of a small town in The South or Midwest. But the US Government isn't a small town, and DC is, likewise, a tough, dirty, corrupt city. I'm absolutely confident that he will fire the people that need firing and take decisive action to stop the leaking, backstabbing, thwarting, and sabotaging that has bedeviled the GWB Administration. I'm also confident that he will appoint reliable judges; he's a prosecutor at heart, and more than anything else, a prosecutor needs reliable, predictable judges - that's a synomym for strict constructionists. I'm also confident that he will wield a big stick in dealing with what will undoubtedly be a Democrat Congress, and he's the only one who's done something like that.
So, in a RG Presidency, there's not likely to be any great small government or federalism initiatives. There's not likely to be a constitutional amendment on anything, and, no, the Department of Education won't be abolished. Reagan couldn't do it either; remember that. But, there will be a strong and confident hand on the switches and levers of power. There will be the will and ability to confront a Democrat controlled legislative body. And there will be a man, perhaps the man, most highly motivated to pursue the war against radical Islam.
At this place in time and circumstance, we can't get what we want, but it is my conclusion that in Rudy Guiliani, we can get what we need.
I was leaning that way. Your case is pretty convincing. Let's hope he's still alive after Super Tuesday.
There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life. - Frank Zappa
because I like what you're saying here and the positives about Guiliani that you do espouse.
Guiliani is dynamic in person. After you hear him talk, you want to go do something. Incredibly motivating.
The Republican brand needs someone who will fight and win now.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Romeny's still my guy, but you make a powerful case. I believe if he doesn't get the nomination, the winning candidate should definately bring him on board the Administration to "clean house". :-)
Good post. It does not sell me on Rudy, but it is a good post.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
as in seeing him as the "be all and end all." I just see him as the best for the times that we can get. We aren't going to be able to go "on offense" ideologically for the foreseeable future. We need a tough guy, a brawler if necessary, in the WH, and we need somebody who can at least neuter the federal bureacracy. Besides my concerns about disingenuiity with Romney, I've dealt with more than my fair share of captains of industry coming into government and taking two or three years to find the rest rooms and light switches - if ever. Having dealt with the NYC government, pushing the rope of the federal government will not come as a shock to RG.
In Vino Veritas
I'm on board with McCain, but I do like Rudy as well. Yeah, so he's had a messy marital life. Whatever.
The man's also had cancer. He's also had the trauma of 9/11--and make no mistake, that HAD to be a life-altering event for him as well. I think that with the challenges he's faced and overcome in his life, he's got more more character than most men I've known, and far more than he's given credit for. It's too easy to make him into a caricature from his more embarrassing moments, but those are not his most significant ones.
I believe a man or woman is better equipped for incredible expectations of the Presidency when he or she has overcome tragic events in life. Rudy Giuliani, like John McCain and Fred Thompson, has passed that test.
Giuliani ran the toughest, dirtiest, most corrupt city in America and did it well. He took on the Mob, the Unions, the Educrats, and the New York Times and won a Helluva lot more than he lost.
Well said.
---
Beth
I haven't picked a #2 after Fred, but I agree that Rudy's toughness and hands-on executive experience are major assets. (And I again urge SoCons to consider him based on his promises AND advisors on judges.)
As opposed to other terms such as a technocrat, or simply a Manager?
having been one. We need a President that understands the workings of a large government and only a high-level bureaucrat has that understanding. RG had his time as a federal prosecutor and jobs like that give you an overall view of who does what and to whom. Then he was Mayor over the second or third largest government behind the Federal government. He won't have to spend much time learning where the rest rooms and light switches are.
With a Democrat Congress, we won't have ideological control over the Country; we need to be able to effectively run the government and use the powers of the Executive. Hence, we need a good bureaucrat.
In Vino Veritas
Like, for instance, an executive? Better yet, the Chief Executive of New York City's bureaucracy? I'm sorry if I'm being nitpicky here, but I've recommended your diary for the substance, but I just don't see the bureaucrat link.
re-runs than get into some contentious semantics game with you. Really, all the President was ever intended to be was the administrator of the limited government. In the last half-century or so, we've deified the Presidency. All I'm saying is that with a Democrat Congress, we just need someone who knows how to operate and use the powers of the Executive.
And if that doesnt' sastify you, hitting recommend again will unrecommend it.
In Vino Veritas
You were so wrong about McCain, 'eh?
He's totally the front-runner now. MAC IS BACK! MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!MAC IS BACK!
But you gotta be one to know about slimy corrupt cities, I'll give you that. Maybe should have done something about the illegal stuff in the government . Like you talk about elsewhere. Like you know the FEDERAL FELONY illegal stuff
* _sweeep_sweep_ * you left under the rug. Sometimes the Federal Government does take interest in that kind of stuff.
Like File 223-03-0342, a true illegal contract of racketeers, and an agreement that burdens the complaint process until the Government has to enforce their own laws in Alaska after it became so corrupted. Is that what you remember? Best to settle that stuff at the lowest possible level like the job description. I guess the Attorney General lied about 223-03-0342 not being public.Lies, Lies, Lies, through the mail.
^^^^^^^/l^^^^^'^^^^^/l^^^
. . ______/ l____________/ l
<' ' ' ' o . . . . ......................(
' VVVVV' ')))))____>-''''''''''''\l
' . vvvv_ - - - \/
RG Turned out to be the weakest even in Florida where he campaigned. What's your sudden interest in Prosecutors. Some are sleazebags. But I guess they know ,as you say,
*_who_does_what_and_to_whom_? *
Did someone turn off the restroom light swich when you were a kid and leave you lost for hours?
Are you still in the dark?
"Good Beaureacrats" of the kind you describe you are letting other [ ] interests run the middle class into the ground.
Like BOTTINI? ,how 'bout SULLIVAN?, and SEDWICK?
How about CLIFTON, GOULD and LEAVEY? Maybe you should meet them all some day.
They're the best 'Beaureaucrats' I know.
^^^^^^^/l^^^^^'^^^/l^^^
. . ______/ l__________/ l
<' ' ' ' o . . . . .................(
' VVVVV' ')))))____>-''''''\l
' . vvvv_ - - - \/
Your personal vendetta, sir, against a respected member of this community is offensive to me. You seem to be following Achance from thread to thread and, instead of respectfully disagreeing with him, dropping hints that you know him to be personally corrupt.
If you wish to say this, have the guts to say it clearly and then substantiate it.. If you are willing and able to do neither, show the decency to withdraw your comment.
I am not a moderator here, but be sure that someone who is will soon notice your behaviour and deal with it.
For the record, Achance is perfectly capable of dealing with insects such as you on his own. But I want you to know that I (and no doubt others here) are personally offended by your behaviour too.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
This one is my "burden" from old times here. It's best to ignore him, but unfortunately, he doesn't go gently.
In Vino Veritas
[Take your vendetta elsewhere, chump. Blam. – NS]
"ogni persona progetta la sua propria vita, la libertà gli dà l'alimentazione effettuare i suoi propri disegni e l'alimentazione dà la libertà per interferire con i disegni di altri."
~Eric Berne
will get you banned here, John. This isn't the Anchorage Daily News blog; a certain level of intelligence, sanity, and decorum is required, so you really should go away peaceably.
In Vino Veritas
Don't your blog buddies deserve to know ?
"ogni persona progetta la sua propria vita, la libertà gli dà l'alimentazione effettuare i suoi propri disegni e l'alimentazione dà la libertà per interferire con i disegni di altri."
...I'm afraid that we have to insist that even volunteer ones spell properly.
Moe
PS: ASCII art. How... quaint. Your .sig file did support embedded images, you know.
Note tense.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
You make a solid argument, one that probably would have persuaded me, had Rudy only embraced a pro-choice/anti-Roe position.
But I want to address your argument here:
I'm not going to criticize his womanizing or his shady friends, and unless you've had money and power and lived in a politically influential city, you're not qualified to question them either. I'm amazed that some think his being divorced is disqualifying: fifty percent of marriages end in divorce, fifty percent in death; you pick it. America isn't Smalltown, USA anymore; I'm not convinced it ever was.
I don't know that anybody thinks divorce qua, all on its own, is disqualifying. Reagan was divorced. Fred is divorced. No, we think that Rudy's dishonorable treatment of his wife, the mother of his children, and indeed those children as well, disqualifies him. It calls into question his character, in what is for many men a particularly impressive way. Nothing so quickly destroys my respect for a man than the swaggering cravenness of one who tyrannizes women and children, who casts them about on the whims of his ambition.
That said, good post.
______________
And the Lord upon the Golden Horn is laughing in the sun.
Two responses:
I spent most of my career in positions where I was inextricably associated with with the Governor's policies, even though I was only a part of an Administration in the last few years before I retired. Most of those administration had policies in some or another area that I thought were just plain dumb, wrong, and even in some cases illegal. I did what I think any successful political manager must do; unless it truly was a matter of conscience AND something on my plate, I just didn't think about it much. In the one case where it was on my plate AND was illegal, I quit my job. As a prosecutor, RGs job was to uphold the law as the Courts interpreted the law - period. He didn't get to make laws or interpret them. As mayor, he had no power over federal law, and had he taken an anti-Roe position he would never have been mayor of that very liberal, or at least Democrat controlled, city. And finally, he and I are about the same age and many, dare I say most, men our age have been through several iterations of our views on lots of things, especially things like abortion.
As to the divorce and perceived bad behavior, there's usually two sides to those stories and that is particularly the case where the man is politically prominent. You'd be amazed at what you learn about yourself from an ex-wife to be's friends and allies. Since most modern divorces start with the complaint for divorce, domestic violence writ, and allegation of molestation of all minor children being filed all at the same time, I don't believe much of anything that comes out in a contentious divorce. That said, even if he did behave badly, there've been lots of political leaders with very messy private lives and stellar public lives. And when you are in a contentious position, e.g., prosecuting mobsters or being a reform-minded mayor, your personal life is always under attack. I just wish I'd done half of the things the rumor mill attributed to me over the years - or which were whispered in my wife's ear.
In Vino Veritas
[Rudy] and I are about the same age and many, dare I say most, men our age have been through several iterations of our views on lots of things, especially things like abortion.
Fair enough. Had he gone through an "iteration" on abortion about a year ago, coming out decisively against Roe, even if he maintain a pro-choice view, he might be cruising to the GOP nomination right now. For instance, many of us simply cannot trust his "strict constructionist judges" pledge: if you support Roe v. Wade, which even most Liberal legal scholars recognize as a jurisprudential disgrace, then "strict constructionist" carries a decidedly different connotation, doesn't it?
It is true that there is another side to every domestic dispute, but I think enough of Rudy's behavior toward his wife and children is a matter of public record for me to feel of my judgment that he comported himself like a cruel, classless despot.
____________
And the Lord upon the Golden Horn is laughing in the sun.
As a prosecutor, RGs job was to uphold the law as the Courts interpreted the law - period. He didn't get to make laws or interpret them. As mayor, he had no power over federal law, and had he taken an anti-Roe position he would never have been mayor of that very liberal, or at least Democrat controlled, city.
Which is exactly why if Giuliani had reversed course on abortion--or even on Roe v. Wade--I could see myself supporting him. I don't expect conservative politicians in big liberal areas to take the same positions as they would if running nationally. But Giuliani never reversed course. Apparently he really believes in Roe and in abortion, or else he cares more about appearing consistent than he does about the unborn. And on that me and him have to part ways.
And I really dislike the idea that we can't criticize horrible moral failings by the powerful unless we've been in their shoes.
Look, maybe its tough being Mayor of DC, but Marion Barry is still a whoring crack-hound loser. Maybe its tough being President, but Bill Clinton is still a lying slimejob lecher. And maybe its tough being Mayor of NYC but Giuliani still acted like scum to his wife and kids.
I can overlook that if I have to. But I'm not going to excuse it. Principles are more important than politicians.
-White Goodman