March 30, 2007, - 11:33 am

UH-OH: Another Hillary in the Making?

By
As I’ve said before, I like Rudy Giuliani for a host of reasons. But he also has a ton of drawbacks (like his previous position on illegal aliens, which I hope he’s changed, but we’ll see).
Tonight, Baba Wawa interviews Rudy and his wife, Judith Nathan Giuliani. And excerpts are being promoted by ABC. One of them is troubling and evokes visions of the first Hillary Rodham Cankles admiministration, when a man named Bill was on the ballot in her place.
Giuliani tells Wawa that if he’s elected he’d be open to his wife, Judith, attending Cabinet meetings on issues in which she’s interested.


Whoa! That is NOT what we want. We’ve had enough of Hillary playing President when her husband was elected, enough of her secret health care policy confabs. It reminds me of Slick Willie’s “You get two for the price of one” slogan. Sorry, but if I wanted a bargain, I’d go to Filene’s Basement or TJ Maxx, not the polling booth in a Presidential election.
And I have the same rejoinder for this unwelcome news about Mrs. Giuliani that I always had about Hillary:
She was NOT on my ballot.
Not sure why Rudy thinks this is good news to any of our ears. But here’s a newsflash about the First Lady . . . any First Lady:
She’s not the President. She’s not on the ballot. She should have no say in any policy or even the appearance thereof.
The First Lady’s issues should be:

White House drapes, White House china, State Dinner menus, ball gown fashions, haircuts with Christophe, workout wear, the color pink, pastel clothing, silk, ribbons, bows, flowers, smiling teas with ugly wives of foreign leaders, meeting snot-nosed kids trying to find eggs on the front lawn, giving awards to women who rescued cats from cancer and psoriasis, and breast cancer awareness.

In that order and without other issues seeping into the fray.
Please, Mr. Giuliani. Another Hillary Rodham Cankles administration, we don’t need.




Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


9 Responses

I saw the excerpt this AM with Mr/Mrs Giuliani and the speech impedimented, mush-mouth Walters. I was leaning a bit towards Giuliani until he begun his pandering rhetoric of late. Now I am looking for a real candidate. I have to rethink Thompson. Just maybe there is someone out there not only with credentials but the backbone to use them. Any background you can supply on Thompson will be good to have.

Happiness Pursuer on March 30, 2007 at 12:14 pm

I like Thompson, too, but he won’t run. He’s old and not very telegenic (I know he was an actor – and not all actors are telegenic).
I don’t have a problem with Judith Nathan because there is nothing in her background to suggest that she’s a militant radical as Hillary was. I’m sure Nancy Reagan was informed/sat in on cabinet meetings, as well.
Hillary had a very militant political past going back to the 1960’s. She defended the Black Panthers and was aligned with other radical causes. It was obvious that she stuck with her rapist hubby in order to obtain the reins of power.
Judy Nathan, on the other hand, doesn’t have a militant past. She met Rudy before Rudy was “America’s Mayor” (post 9/11) so there is nothing to suggest she dated him only for political power.
Rudy may have said that to cater to the woman voter, or, if Rudy does consult Judy in his current business dealings, it would certainly come out in the campaign.
Don’t worry about Rudy and Judy, they’re not the Clinton team of “Vote For One, Get Two”.

Thee_Bruno on March 30, 2007 at 12:33 pm

Rudy and Judy. It does have a certain ring to it. Ronnie and Nancy did have a close relationship and it worked out for the country. Thompson is at his best as President when he is given a script. Rudy writes his own scripts. Fortunately or otherwise there is mucho (a little south of the border lingo) time before 11/08. We need not only a president with vision and one not too beholden to the party bosses, but one who knows how to pick his cabinet and staff. I’d feel better if Rudy was sitting up nights brushing up on history, while his campaign gurus were busy mapping out a winning strategy. Don’t count Fred out, entirely. He seems to care about this country.

Happiness Pursuer on March 30, 2007 at 1:16 pm

I’m with Debbie on this one – NO MORE 2-FERS! This is a deal breaker for me. Kind of reminds you of the days of John Lennon inviting Yoko to attend rehearsals – it broke up the Beatles for God’s sake (not that I cared, but I do care about spouses at Cabinet meetings).
And Thee-Bruno – come on now. Fred is only 65 years old. That’s hardly wet behind the ears in politics. We Boomers call it “Seasoned”. He may not be pretty, but I love listening to him speak. Now if he only believes and acts on his current rhetoric, he’s got my vote.

Sioux on March 30, 2007 at 1:56 pm

x

spiffo on March 30, 2007 at 3:33 pm

He agreed to an interview with that old lefty hag? Sad.

spiffo on March 30, 2007 at 3:35 pm

Don’t get me wrong. I like Thompson. I wish he’d get the nomination and beat the LIB to the White House. Thompson’s politics and policies are Conservative and he DOES care for this country.
It’s just that too many times, the candidate is chosen for what he looks like, rather than what he says. For example; during the 1960 presidential campaign when Nixon debated Kennedy, those who saw the debate gave it to Kennedy…those who listened on radio, gave it to Nixon.
Run Fred, run!

Thee_Bruno on March 30, 2007 at 6:40 pm

Who else brings their wife to work? wtf?

davidlanham on April 1, 2007 at 12:10 am

“White House drapes, White House china, State Dinner menus, ball gown fashions, haircuts with Christophe, workout wear, the color pink, pastel clothing, silk, ribbons, bows, flowers, smiling teas with ugly wives of foreign leaders, meeting snot-nosed kids trying to find eggs on the front lawn, giving awards to women who rescued cats from cancer and psoriasis, and breast cancer awareness.”
Imigane Bill Clinton doing this. what a joke!!
The biggest recipient of a hillary presidency is Conan Obrien!!! He will make millions making fun of her

Will on April 1, 2007 at 7:37 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field