Rudy files for 2008 Presidential race!!

[au9596 0]

COOL!

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani Files Candidacy Statement for 2008 Race

Monday , February 05, 2007

ADVERTISEMENT

WASHINGTON —

Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor whose popularity soared after his response to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, moved closer to a full-fledged campaign for the Republican presidential nomination on Monday.

In a sign that he's serious about running for the White House, the two-term mayor was filing a so-called "statement of candidacy" with the Federal Election Commission. In the process, he was eliminating the phrase "testing the waters" from earlier paperwork establishing his exploratory committee, said an official close to Giuliani's campaign.

The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting any disclosure by Giuliani.

• Watch an exclusive interview with Giuliani on FOX News' Hannity & Colmes tonight at 9 p.m. ET.

Unlike chief GOP rivals Sen. John McCain and Mitt Romney, Giuliani has been somewhat ambiguous about whether or not he would ultimately pursue the Republican nomination.

• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's You Decide 2008 center.

He took the initial step in November of creating a committee to explore a candidacy but added the caveat that he was simply "testing the waters" — a provision that allows truly uncertain candidates to move forward without any commitment to seek a top spot on the ticket or the need to identify donors. At the time, Giuliani also did not file an official statement declaring that he was a presidential candidate.

The steps Monday put Giuliani on the same level, legally, as McCain and Romney, the other two top-tier GOP candidates who have formed regular exploratory committees and filed statements of candidacy.

[au9596 0]

I watched him being interviewed on FOX last night by Hannity and I liked what he had to say. Hannity did not ask the easy questions. He directly asked his stance on the pressing social issues that the extreme conservative base will want answered.

[Tigermike 3,040]

It will be interesting. I like Rudy. We will see how he does.

Do any of you think Rudy & McCain would entertain a president/VP ticket?

[Captain Liger 0]

Can't be any worse than what the left is going to throw up.

[otterinbham 0]

It all boils down to leadership.

No other candidate has come even close to actually guiding a government through a bona fide crisis the way Giuliani has, from fishing New York out of the crapper to dealing with 9/11.

You may say he doesn't pass a couple of neo-conservative litmus tests, but there's no denying that when it's hitting the fan, Rudy is the guy you want in your foxhole. That's why he's going to make a strong run at things, and that's why he's a much better candidate than all of the Dems and McCain.

[AUChizad 0]

It will be interesting. I like Rudy. We will see how he does.

Do any of you think Rudy & McCain would entertain a president/VP ticket?

I hope so.

That would be the world-beater ticket.

I don't like to pigeon hole myself as a Republican, but I will admit I definitely lean further right than left.

Democrats just don't get it.

McCain and Giuliani both were heralded by liberals and Hollywood types (I'm thinking Daily Show & SNL) as being guys they respected, with very moderate ideas. They were the "cool Republicans". That is, of course, until they emerged as presidential frontrunners. Now they never liked them all along.

With Bush's approval ratings being as dismal as they are, this would be the Democrats' perfect opportunity to sweep up the average moderate voters.

What do they do with this opportunity? Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama?

You're digging your own grave, Dems.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

I will state again, that despite my own personally held beliefs, I would support Rudy despite his position on certain social issues that get the far right in a twist. Right now, I think there are FAR bigger issues in this country that need to be addressed before we talk about gun control, gay marriage, flag burning, and abortion. Immigration and the international rise of Islamic fundamentalism come immediately to mind. Rudy could be in favor of interspecies marriage and I would still vote for him if he promised to close the borders to anyone without a proper visa and to take the fight to the Islamofascists. I think many conservative Americans feel the same way. My daughter's classmate having two mommies is a lot less likely to affect her life than her or someone she knows being raped or killed by a convicted felon illegal immigrant who has been deported six separate times and keeps crossing back over and winding up in Houston (actually, he killed a cop).

So yeah, I'd support Rudy, social positions be dammed. In fact, I would say that whomever we elect had better leave the social issues crap to the states and even to Congress, and focus on the big picture items that affect the entire country in a meaningful way, like national security.

[otterinbham 0]

I will state again, that despite my own personally held beliefs, I would support Rudy despite his position on certain social issues that get the far right in a twist. Right now, I think there are FAR bigger issues in this country that need to be addressed before we talk about gun control, gay marriage, flag burning, and abortion. Immigration and the international rise of Islamic fundamentalism come immediately to mind. Rudy could be in favor of interspecies marriage and I would still vote for him if he promised to close the borders to anyone without a proper visa and to take the fight to the Islamofascists. I think many conservative Americans feel the same way. My daughter's classmate having two mommies is a lot less likely to affect her life than her or someone she knows being raped or killed by a convicted felon illegal immigrant who has been deported six separate times and keeps crossing back over and winding up in Houston (actually, he killed a cop).

So yeah, I'd support Rudy, social positions be dammed. In fact, I would say that whomever we elect had better leave the social issues crap to the states and even to Congress, and focus on the big picture items that affect the entire country in a meaningful way, like national security.

Well said. Now explain that to some of the far-right freaks out there.

[Tigermike 3,040]

I will state again, that despite my own personally held beliefs, I would support Rudy despite his position on certain social issues that get the far right in a twist. Right now, I think there are FAR bigger issues in this country that need to be addressed before we talk about gun control, gay marriage, flag burning, and abortion. Immigration and the international rise of Islamic fundamentalism come immediately to mind. Rudy could be in favor of interspecies marriage and I would still vote for him if he promised to close the borders to anyone without a proper visa and to take the fight to the Islamofascists. I think many conservative Americans feel the same way. My daughter's classmate having two mommies is a lot less likely to affect her life than her or someone she knows being raped or killed by a convicted felon illegal immigrant who has been deported six separate times and keeps crossing back over and winding up in Houston (actually, he killed a cop).

So yeah, I'd support Rudy, social positions be dammed. In fact, I would say that whomever we elect had better leave the social issues crap to the states and even to Congress, and focus on the big picture items that affect the entire country in a meaningful way, like national security.

Well said. Now explain that to some of the far-right freaks out there.

You might want to try explaining that to some of the far-left freaks out there as well.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

There is no explanation needed. After they get into office they are told what to do and they don't like it they can end up like JFK. So, it doesn't matter who gets selected. It does seem that the elites would prefer to have a Dem in office so they can get some of the money we owe them through higher income taxes. Get the picture. I have about given up on the whole system, as it is obvious that politicans have no interest in doing what the people want.

[CCTAU 3,335]

I will state again, that despite my own personally held beliefs, I would support Rudy despite his position on certain social issues that get the far right in a twist. Right now, I think there are FAR bigger issues in this country that need to be addressed before we talk about gun control, gay marriage, flag burning, and abortion. Immigration and the international rise of Islamic fundamentalism come immediately to mind. Rudy could be in favor of interspecies marriage and I would still vote for him if he promised to close the borders to anyone without a proper visa and to take the fight to the Islamofascists. I think many conservative Americans feel the same way. My daughter's classmate having two mommies is a lot less likely to affect her life than her or someone she knows being raped or killed by a convicted felon illegal immigrant who has been deported six separate times and keeps crossing back over and winding up in Houston (actually, he killed a cop).

So yeah, I'd support Rudy, social positions be dammed. In fact, I would say that whomever we elect had better leave the social issues crap to the states and even to Congress, and focus on the big picture items that affect the entire country in a meaningful way, like national security.

Stay the hell away from my guns or you will never get my vote. I tend to think that gun control is just as important as illegal immigration. I mean illegal immigranta are killing Americans to the tune of 12 a day. Take my guns and even I might be a victim to one of these criminals.

[GalensGhost 0]

I will campaign for Rudy. Every day.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Stay the hell away from my guns or you will never get my vote. I tend to think that gun control is just as important as illegal immigration. I mean illegal immigranta are killing Americans to the tune of 12 a day. Take my guns and even I might be a victim to one of these criminals.

Honey, you and I both know that no one will ever be able to come in and take away anyone's guns. Any restrictions on sales right now are fairly justifiable, IMO, but no one will ever completely disarm the American public. Even if a presidential candidate was 100% opposed to ANY gun ownership, no way would his position become reality as long as there is an NRA and a Congress that would have to pass a law doing so. That's why I think this is a non-issue in terms of deciding whether or not to vote for someone for President.