Rudy on target

Rudy Giuliani is the man to beat in 2008.  This campaign add attacks single most important issue that we face.  Brilliantly using Hillary Clinton's own words Giuliani demonstrates that there is no Democrat in the field who can be trusted to lead our country in this perilous time.

The ad also points up a significant disadvantage Republicans face.  Republican campaign messages are subject to campaign finance law, while the likes of the New York Times and MoveOn.org run a non-stop public relations campaign on the Democrats' behalf.

Via Power Line.

Comments

[Teresa]

You know - Rudy is impressing the hell out of me by going after the Dems on this stuff and not just shrugging it off. I like that. Too many Republicans don't do anything - maybe they'll shake their head and say "that's wrong, you shouldn't do that". Rudy hits 'em where they live. Making the NYT give him the same deal they gave Moveon... telling the world that Hillary isn't tough enough to stand up to special interests. (although I still say she didn't stand up to them because she's on their side...)

It's early days yet, but I must admit to being very impressed with him over the last few days since the entire Moveon thing has popped up.

[Tom Bowler]

I've been impressed by the field of Republican presidential candidates because of their willingness to campaign on a promise to win in Iraq. Naturally, I leave Ron Paul out of that company, as well as Newt Gingrich, who seems to think breaking with the president is the ticket to electoral success. If that's Newt's position I don't wish him electoral success.

[Ozzie]

You say "there is no Democrat in the field who can be trusted to lead our country in this perilous time."
Is that supposed to mean that Bush and future Bush-supporting candidates are doing a good job of leading our country? Republicans have placed our country in the worst possible circumstances as concerns national security and anti-American sentiment around the world. An international survey asked respondents what they considered to be the worst threat to world peace. Their answer: George W. Bush. Instead of going after the people who attacked us on 9/11, we went off on a wild goose chase in Iraq, an oil-rich Arab country that was opposed to Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda because they threatened his secular dictatorship. We allocated 5% of our military power to going after the real enemy, Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, and 95% to the invasion of Iraq. If that's the way you want to continue to be lead in these perilous times, by leaders gradually destroying our country's image and security, then by all means vote for loudmouth nitwits like Guillliani. That will surely lead to our fall.

[Ozzie]

Pardon my typos: "to be led" and "Giuliani"

[Tom Bowler]

...an oil-rich Arab country that was opposed to Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda because they threatened his secular dictatorship...

Your information is incorrect. Saddam and his boys harbored and supported Islamic terrorists because they had a common enemy in the United States. Our country has never had a good image with western European countries, and the notion that our security is being destroyed is speculation supported by only by other speculation. Besides, if there is anything destroying our security it would be the New York Times by revealing terrorist surveilance methods.