As an antidote to increasing sunshine-for-Giuliani stories like this, we have this very real storm cloud on Rudy's horizon. Here's Richard Land, a biggie in the Southern Baptist Convention:

"I mean, this is divorce on steroids," Land said. "To publicly humiliate your wife in that way, and your children. That's rough. I think that's going to be an awfully hard sell, even if he weren't pro-choice and pro-gun control."

Giuliani married his longtime companion, Judith Nathan, in 2003. They had dated publicly while Giuliani was married to Hanover. His first marriage ended in an annulment.

...

Southern Baptists have been among the most vocal of conservative Christian groups in support of the Bush administration. But they and other evangelicals are struggling to find a consensus presidential candidate who embraces their stands against gay marriage and abortion.

This, along with the gun control issue, is the real Giuliani problem. It goes to character and it goes right to Evangelical values. I do not believe the problem is insurmountable, but it is the biggest Giuliani faces.

Rudy Giuliani's name has been floating around as a likely 2008 presidential contender, and he and John McCain are the two front-runners for the Republicans.

Personally, whenever I hear this, I am slightly mystified. I do not think Giuliani would be able to win the Republican primary. His positions on social issues make him liberal, not even moderate, and has had a number of controversies in his personal life that will be sure to surface in a presidential run.

Giuliani is pro-choice, for affirmative action, for increasing gay rights, against partial-birth abortions, against prayer in school and for more gun control. One of those issues alone wouldn't be enough to make him lose, but the aggregate effect, I think, will be that he will be unable to gain broad support from the Republican base.

That sound you heard was Rudy Giuliani's chances in the primaries imploding:

TALLAHASSEE, Florida (CNN) -- Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani told CNN Wednesday he supports public funding for some abortions, a position he advocated as mayor and one that will likely put the GOP presidential candidate at odds with social conservatives in his party.

I'm no legal scholar, yet I've read some very compelling opinions as to the courts decisions on Roe v. Wade. Others out there can argue the case better than I.

I'll instead comment on the political ramifications. Giuliani has said in the past that he would appoint conservative and anti-abortion justices to SCOTUS. How can Rudy square these two positions? Short answer: he can't.

Abortion is a major issue to Conservatives -- both religious and not. Pro-abortion types have convinced themselves that a "fetus" is not a baby. Many Americans believe that a life begins at conception and thus a "group of cells," as liberals are wont to say, is in fact a baby.

That said, this may have a serious adverse effect on Giuliani in the primary. He will need the southern states to prevail and this isn't going to help him. The abortion issue is not as big come the general, but in the primaries -- when it's only Republicans voting -- this is going to have a huge effect.

Fred Thompson (who seems to have liberals a bit worried) must be warming up his campaigning shoes as we speak.

Rudy Giuliani made it official and FOX News gets the exclusive first interview tonight on Hannity and Colmes.

The media will play up the fact that Rudy is a social liberal for the most part and that he will suffer for it during the primaries. Don't buy into it. The Republican "base" is not only evangelicals and fundamentalists, like they are often portrayed. The new "base" is people like me, those of us who know that the number one issue is the war against militant Islam and also that the Democrats will not fight it with the resolve needed. We will support the candidate who knows what this battle means regardless of his views on gay rights, abortion or if he is moderate-to-liberal on other social issues. Giuliani is that guy.

The media has largely missed that thenabt Republicans are also lapsed Christians and secularists who are quite moderate on racial and social issues. We will not support Mitt Romney or Sam Brownback but will support Rudy because he's a known commodity. He led New York City through trying times and left the city infinitely better than what he inherited. He can do the same for our nation. He turned down money from a Saudi prince because he knew it was dirty money (could you see someone like Hillary turning it down?)

Welcome aboard Rudy. You would have whooped Hillary in the Senate race in 2000 if not for prostate cancer, now you get the chance to do it on a national scale.

Actually its been this way since the middle of January, but seems more important now that Giuliani has more or less made it official. Rasmussen has Rudy Giuliani in the lead among Republicans in primary, polling at 27%. He's followed by John McCain with 19%, Newt Gingrich with 13%, Mitt Romney at 9% and Mike Huckabee at 4%.

Giuliani is actually down 2 points from last week, while McCain is holding steady. Interesting tidbit about how the public views John McCain's ideology:

Over the past month, ideological perceptions of John McCain have shifted somewhat. Today, 28% of American voters view the Arizona Senator as politically conservative. That's up from 16% in December. However, that shift is not helping McCain in the GOP competition because most of the change has come from Democrats and unaffiliated voters who are now more likely to see McCain as politically conservative than moderate.

In fact, while a plurality of Democrats and unaffiliated voters see McCain as conservative, a majority of Republicans see the Senator as politically moderate.

McCain's really trying hard to burnish his conservative credentials, but many of us have viewed him as a populist more than anything else, except on Iraq. He enjoyed his mutual love affair with the press so much that he didn't realize what damage he was doing to the core conservative support that he would need in any future presidential race, especially in the primary. They now view him as an opportunist, not a true conservative.

McCain is only now realizing that the media loved him because they were able to use him to get at and bash Bush. He's living to regret his association with strange bedfellows from 2000 till 2006.

On Saturday, Rudy Giuliani addressed a New Hampshire Republican crowd in Manchester. Here's the report...

Call it a case of strange bedfellows. On Friday, Rudy Giuliani will take the stage at the NRA's annual convention and try to convince the organization he's their man. Meanwhile:

...even as the former New York mayor strives to burnish his Second Amendment credentials at the gathering in Washington, a panel of federal judges in his home town will be hearing arguments on the lawsuit that Giuliani filed seven years ago aimed at punishing the nation's manufacturers for violent crimes involving firearms.

Don't get me wrong, I'm on Giuliani's side on the issue of guns. In 1995, Rudy went on Charlie Rose and declared that the NRA goes,

"overboard. The extremists on the left and the extremists on the right have essentially the same tactic," he said, adding later that "the NRA's, in essence, defense of assault weapons, and their unwillingness to deal with some of the realities here that we face in our cities is a terrible, terrible mistake."

Amen. And I applaud America's Mayor for teaming up with then president, Bill Clinton, to push through the assault weapons ban. Clearly, tougher legislation is needed to close up all the loopholes. Let's see what proposals Giuliani puts forth in front of the NRA crowd.

The image of Mayor Rudy Giuliani striding down the streets of New York after 9/11 has endured. America's Mayor rallied the city to return to normalcy as fast as possible. He stood resolute against further terrorism and rallied the city's services (fire, police, emergency response) to serve the residents. At least that's the image.

It was bound to happen. A few months ago the Giuliani's campaign private playbook was lost stolen and leaked. In it, Giuliani himself questioned the viability of his campaign due to personal history and business dealings. Now someone has started to take the cover off his record as mayor. A new book, 'Grand Illusion,' portrays a mayor preoccupied with his power, refusing to fund the communication services the fire and police units needed to coordinate, rushing to return Wall Street and people to a danger zone. 80 percent of rescue workers have health issues connected to their work and many have been abandoned by the government they served.

Rudy the mayor could have taken steps early in his administration to improve and coordinate emergency response. He didn't take them. He did turn down recommendations to locate the emergency command center in a safer location but chose to locate it within walking distance of City Hall (complete with a humidor and monogrammed towels). Today the firefighters have turned against America's Mayor, even making a video explaining why.

The book doesn't include much about his business dealings or his associations. Bernie Kerik (the corrupt police commissioner who had to withdraw as a nominee to head homeland security). When the whole history of America's Mayor is told he may need a emergency response team. Unfortunately, their radios may not work too well. Watch the video, read the book. These firefighters deserve our respect and support.

. . . hard. He's red hot. He's steamed. He wants everybody to know that what Hillary Clinton said to General Patraeus is way, way out of bounds. She's no better than MoveOn.org and their terrible puns. But, precisely, what part of Clinton's oratory was it at yesterday's Armed Services Committee testimony that crossed the line?

"The reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief."

There you have it. A sentiment echoed by practically every other Democrat in Congress, and more than a couple Republicans, has sent Rudy Giuliani over the edge, causing him to proclaim,

"It is time for Americans to really insist that American politicians move away from character assassination and this is exactly what they attempted to do with General Patraeus."

Right. Rudy's above petty partisanship. He'd never call the credibility of another person or party into question for his own political gain. He'd never say something inflamatory like,

"If any Republican is elected president--and I think obviously I would be the best at this--we will remain on the offensive and will anticipate what [the terrorists] will do and try to stop them before they do it,"

Oh wait. He did say that. You see, the way he sees it, every Republican is inherently better at protecting the country than every Democrat. And he bases this on the performance of none other than George W. Bush. Call me a character assassin if you must, but there's something that requires the willing suspension of disbelief.

Rudy Giuliani was in Manchester, New Hampshire, on Saturday to give a speech at a Republican state committee meeting. (My cartoon on the speech is here.) How would Granite State GOP members respond?

Based on interviews with people at the Palace Theater (which hosted the event), it seems New Hampshire Republicans have a favorable reaction to Giuliani as American hero, but a less favorable reaction to Giuliani as liberal-social-position-holder.

"I think Giuliani is an excellent leader, but what is he leading us to?" former state representative Gary Hopper asked. Citing the Second Amendment, he added, "Conservative Republicans believe the Constitution is absolutely necessary to keep power in the hands of the people. If Giuliani doesn't understand that, he should never become Commander-in-Chief."

Although he has yet to file as a candidate, Rudy Giuliani consistently ranks at the top of every poll measuring the appeal of potential Republican presidential candidates. That has caused some consternation on the Right, as Giuliani is quite liberal in his social views.

But aside from Sam Brownback, there is not a social conservative among the suspected Republican primary candidates that would fully satisfy Focus on the Family. And there's a lot more for conservatives, like myself, to worry about in 2008 other than if the new president is going to be a pro-life activist. Like electability.

For what it's worth, I think that Giuliani would be neutral on social issues from the White House, other than supporting conservative choices for the Supreme Court. In that case, any conservative judge worth appointing to the highest court in the land is probably going to be pro-life anyway. But it's probably a given that Giuliani won't be crafting any anti-abortion legislation with Mitch McConnell anytime soon.

The hits just keep coming for Rudy Giuliani (HT to Ohio's RightAngleBlog) and at a time when he desperately needs to repair the damage he did to himself, it's now surfacing that he continuously contributed money to Planned Parenthood throughout the nineties, according to The Politico.

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani in his campaign appearances this year has stated that he personally abhors abortion, even though he supports keeping a legal right to choose. But records show that in the '90s he contributed money at least six times to Planned Parenthood, one of the country's leading abortion rights groups and its top provider of abortions.

Federal tax returns made public by the former New York mayor show that he and his then-wife, Donna Hanover, made personal donations to national, state and city chapters of Planned Parenthood totaling $900 in 1993, 1994, 1998 and 1999.

The returns have been on the public record for years, but the detail about Giuliani's support for Planned Parenthood -- along with e-mailed copies of the returns -- was provided to The Politico by aides to a rival campaign, who insisted on not being identified.

Hmmmm... "Aides to a rival campaign"? Either John McCain or Mitt Romney as both of them have the wherewithal to conduct opposition research like this. It's a good one and they released it just at the right time for maximum damage to Giuliani, so my hat is off in admiration of whoever is behind this.
%Gallery-2793%

David Hill writes today that Giuliani has the stronger appeal to movement conservatives:

An alternative tack for conservatives might be to accept the reality of current poll numbers, decide to align with either McCain or Giuliani, and then strike the best political deal possible with the moderate that seems most open to conservative goals. This scenario would acknowledge that the real goal is to block a Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama presidency.

...

Here's the truth. Rudy Giuliani has impressive numbers in the polls, better numbers than McCain earns in some end-of-year polls. In particular, Giuliani performs well in general election match-ups. But his numbers are strong inside the GOP coalition, too. Beyond the numbers, Rudy has star power that generates intense support. He's taken tough stands conservatives appreciate. As mayor, Giuliani demonstrated the courage to be politically incorrect - fighting homeless panhandlers. And Rudy projects a Reagan-like affability that disarms ideological opponents. His patriotism is purer than McCain's. Who knows? Perhaps Giuliani might bargain with the right. He's a transactional politician who might welcome the entreaty and concede more than even McCain would.

Of course I don't mind a bit that this has been my analysis from the moment the GOP lost the election. 2008 for the GOP will be all about preserving at least one wing of the electorate, and it will be especially helpful that the candidate can be a fiery speaker who has broad appeal across all walks of life.

From the NYT today, it appears that Romney and Giuliani have decided on different strategies to deal with the wide gulf on social issues.

Romney, who has been inconveniently caught on tape supporting abortion, is apparently now a full-fledged social conservative:

Mr. Romney made no mention of his past support of abortion rights and gay rights, instead presenting himself as someone who fought efforts in Massachusetts to permit gay marriage, unrestricted abortion and stem cell research.

"I stood at the center of the battlefield on every major social issue," he said. "I fought to preserve our traditional values, and to protect the sanctity of human life. I vetoed bills. I filed new bills. I enforced a law that banned out-of-state same-sex couples from coming to Massachusetts to get married."

The strategy is apparently to have Romney appear as a Giuliani alternate, but one that is more acceptable to social conservatives. It's not going to work. As much as social conservatives would like a pro-life candidate, they would also like an electable one. And as much as Romneys newfound positions help him with the GOP, they hurt his electable by making him seem like a (forgive me) John Kerry opportunist. Not good.

Giuliani's strategy is much, much better:

OK, it's a simple gotcha, even by mainstream media standards. Delivering a speech at Pat Robertson's Regent University, Rudy Giuliani came out swinging, essentially accusing Bill Clinton of ignoring terrorism back in the 1990's, and thereby making the 9/11 attacks all the more possible.

"Islamic terrorists killed more than 500 Americans before Sept. 11. Many people think the first attack was on Sept. 11, 2001. It was not. It was in 1993," said the former mayor.

and

"The United States government, then President Clinton, did not respond," Giuliani said. "(Osama) bin Laden declared war on us. We didn't hear it."

Certainly, there is some truth to the mayor's statements, though Richard Pearle, among others would beg to differ. And given that our current president ignored a memo titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike U.S." I think it's fair to say that many of us were asleep at the wheel at one time or another before 9/11. No, what is so glaringly offensive about Giuliani's remarks, is the crass, politically-motivated departure from his earlier remarks on blaming his new-found rival's husband.