When George W. Bush took office, he and his wife quickly set about reversing what they saw as a glaring wrong committed by the Clintons. They restored a sense of "tradition" to the role of first lady. In other words, Mrs. Bush would steer clear of important policy decisions, and present a genteel, non-threatening presence to the American public. Gone were the much decried days of "two for the price of one," in which the first spouse was suddenly catapulted into a leadership position on front-burner issues such as health-care reform.What so rankled many voters, liberal and conservative alike, was the fact that while the nation took pains to scrutinize the candidates for president, it believed it need not do the same for their wives. Who was being elected, after all?
Well, "two for the price of one" has come a long way in six years, and it's not just Hillary who's singing the idea's praises.
...Rudy Giuliani said that if elected president, he would have no problem allowing his wife Judith Giuliani to sit in on cabinet meetings, "If she wanted to. If they were relevant to something that she was interested in. I mean that would be something that I'd be very, very comfortable with," he said.Update and more, after the jump.So just who is thrice-married Judith G.? The always reliable Wikipedia, paints the following portrait of Rudy's Judy:
-Got married to a medical supplies salesman at Vegas's famous Chapel of the Bells (marriage #1).
-Was re-married to a wallpaper salesman 5 days after her first divorce was finalized.
-Is a Roman Catholic.
-Her specialty is infectious diseases.
-Took up with Giuliani sometime while he was still married to Donna Hannover.
What does it all mean? Who knows. But one wonders how the twofer suggestion will play with those Republicans who so reviled Mrs. Clinton for the active role she played in her husband's administration.
UPDATE: I guess Rudy has reconsidered.
Late Friday, the Giuliani campaign issued a statement in which the former New York City mayor suggested that would not be the case. "Obviously, she [Judy] will not be a Cabinet memeber or attend most Cabinet meetings, if any. But she will pursue a campaign to educate Americans on preventing illness and promoting overall health."
There, there Judy. Take Laura's lead and teach the nation how to floss.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 11)
1. We are electing a President, not a first lady. Whether Guilliani's wife married three times or slept around is of little import. Shy he chose her is more to the point.
J Fiedoral at 10:43AM on Mar 30th 2007
2. She may take some of the heat off Rudy for all those drag queen videos at http://www.solidpolitics.com
Bill at 6:09PM on Mar 29th 2007
3. UNFORTUNATELY I THINK THEY ARE BOTH SOCIAL LOSERS.
I think it is sad in this beautiful country of
ours, this is what we have to choose from. I
include the Clinton's in the above captioned description.
STEVE at 6:26PM on Mar 29th 2007
4. Some of the nicest people I know have been married three times.
Besides in the Clinton area wife and child slept up stairs. As Clinton got his nob polished. Then zipped his pants and went to church holding his wifes hand.
Lillian at 6:50PM on Mar 29th 2007
5. So far, I haven't seen any worthwhile applcants for the Presidentcy in 2008. I am well satisfied with the one we have. I think the present members of Congress should all resign and retire. That is, except for one or two that are trying to get some work done. People talk about the bad job our President is doing. What about those Democrats that are constantly trying to get him fired? They are the ones who need to be replaced. As for electing a worthwhile President, why not elect Chet Edwards.
Cecil W. Clark at 6:51PM on Mar 29th 2007
6. Sitting in on meetings of interest isn't exactly the same as writing policy. However, most happily married men are going to trust their wives more than most of the other pols that surround the President. Lokk at Clinton, yes, and also Nancy.
Steve Bonomo at 7:03PM on Mar 29th 2007
7.
I want a President in 2008 who has real experience handling a national or state crisis, and Rudy definitely has the experience. I'll be voting for him if he gets the nomination. I do not care how many times a person has been married or any details of their personal affairs. Too many people try to put moral constraints on candidates. Most of us have been through difficult personal relationships. Many Americans have been married more than once.
He is a great debater and will be able to counter the nasty campaign which I'm certain will be run by the liberals. I also want a President who will not buckle when the Democrats do pass bills which will undermine America. KEEP UP THE CLIMB RUDY - YOU HAVE GREAT POTENTIAL. He proves he is a liberated man when he talks about his wife, and this aspect definitely gets my attention. I don't want a MCP for my President.
sallyacohen at 7:18PM on Mar 29th 2007
8. If Judith is a Roman Catholic, I'd like to know
how she has managed to have two divorces and a
third marriage and still call herself a Roman Catholic. She's a homewrecker. And Rudy is a man
who betrayed his wife and abandoned his children.
If these people are being touted as pro-family,
then they're part of an arrogant Republican Party
who think that the people of the U.S. are so
dumb that they will believe anything.
But they will keep repeating the word "character"
to describe Rudy until the American public is
sufficiently mesmerized that they believe it.
Eva at 7:26PM on Mar 29th 2007
9. I worry that we would end up with the same, Co-president, nonsense as with the Clintons. that was one of the original titles she asked for instead of First Lady and it was laughed down,,,the wife should not sit in on cabinet meetings, we vote the president into office, not the spouse, they have their own social duties, etc. they should not be included in the running of the govt
Ann at 7:39PM on Mar 29th 2007
10. if he comes to my town, i'll keep my dog locked up!
jmcdonald at 9:07PM on Mar 29th 2007
11.
rudy giuliani and his current wife are the best hope for a democratic victory. i voted twice for the man for mayor, i am a republican who is a strong supporter of the party but i will never vote for him again.
many people seem to have this picture of giuliani as the savior of new york after 911. obviously he did a good job of getting infront of the cameras and reassuring the citizens of ny and the nation that things would one day be better but for that does he deserve a free pass to the white house?
before 911 giuliani was dead in the water politically. all the controversey that he had been ducking had finally caught up with him. his hand picked police commishoner was just starting to get investigated for wrong doing. bernard kerik, who never rose above the rank of detective was handed one of the most important jobs in the city. now why would rudy appoint such an under qualified person to such a vital position? remeber a man by the name of bill bratton? he was bernies predecessor and the reason for most if not all of the sudden crime reductions in nyc. at first rudy and bill seemed to be on the same map but when polls for bratton started to out shine giuliani, bill got his walking papers. sounds like rudys marriage to donna hanover. bernie kerik was picked so rudy would never be outshined again. now his hand picked stooge is gonna do some time after pleading guilty to a felony.
i'm suppose to be commenting on judy nathan but i think her personal life speaks for itself. two prior marriages and a adulterous affair where impressionable childrens emotions where at stake. now for those who say these two are guilty of no more then the average person, that may be true but when you aspire to the greatest political position in the world, these are the things that cost you elections.
the surface has only begun to be scratched for most of you. many people don't know that this is rudys 3rd marriage as well. his 1st marriage was to his 2nd cousin, thats freakin weird.
when i see these two together they seem to be genuinely in love so i don't question that but i also see two selfish people of low moral fiber. we've already had eight years of the clintons do we need or want the same?
ron ny at 7:44PM on Mar 29th 2007
12. I believe Judith's support will most certainly add to Rudy's success as a president. She is intelligent, attractive, and obviously cares about important domestic issues. Thumbs up, Judith.
Carolyn Devonshire at 7:48PM on Mar 29th 2007
13. It's difficult for me to understand how Judith
Nathan could have been divorced twice and have been married three times and still call herself a Roman Catholic. She's a homewrecker. And Rudy is a man who betrayed a second wife and abandoned his
children.
If the Republican Party considers this couple
pro-family, then something is wrong with their
base. Evidently the leaders of the Republican
Party feel that if they say something often
enough, the people of the U.S. will come to believe it. As for the neverending use of the
word "character" to describe Rudy, it's obvious
that the American people are being slipped a
Mickey Finn.
Eva at 8:09PM on Mar 29th 2007
14. Two-for-the-price-of-one certainly still applies. As much as I am loathe to admit it, a lot of lay men Americans will see that he has a fairly promiscuous wife and they will look poorly upon that. Instead, they'll stick with what they know.
Jamie at 8:23PM on Mar 29th 2007
15. A "HO" for first lady, he tried to have his wife and kids thrown out of the mayors manion to move her in. She has no self-respect nor does he. We need integrity in the White House not a HO, espically after George!
Cheri at 8:32PM on Mar 29th 2007