Barack Obama, in an interview Monday with ABC News’ Jake Tapper:

“It is my firm belief that we can track terrorists, we can crack down on threats against the United States, but we can do so within the constraints of our Constitution. And there has been no evidence on their part that we can’t.

“And, you know, let’s take the example of Guantanamo. What we know is that, in previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated.

“And the fact that the administration has not tried to do that has created a situation where not only have we never actually put many of these folks on trial, but we have destroyed our credibility when it comes to rule of law all around the world, and given a huge boost to terrorist recruitment in countries that say, “Look, this is how the United States treats Muslims.”"

In a conference call this morning, members of the McCain campaign jumped at the opportunity to expose the first-term Illinois senator’s position as a dangerous one steeped in naivete. Randy Scheunemann, the McCain campaign’s director of foreign policy and national security, warned that “Senator Obama is a perfect manifestation of a September 10th mindset.”

“Barack Obama’s belief that we should treat terrorists as nothing more than common criminals demonstrates a stunning and alarming misunderstanding of the threat we face from radical Islamic extremism. Obama holds up the prosecution of the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 as a model for his administration, when in fact this failed approach of treating terrorism simply as a matter of law enforcement rather than a clear and present danger to the United States contributed to the tragedy of September 11th. This is change that will take us back to the failed policies of the past and every American should find this mindset troubling,” said Scheunemann.

James Woolsey, former CIA director during the Clinton administration, said Obama is advocating “an extremely dangerous and extremely naïve approach toward terrorism.” Woolsey noted that Obama “is suggesting that we do everything through the law enforcement system,” which, he argued, “is exactly what failed in the 1990s,” when the Clinton administration “proceeded with 100% law enforcement focus.” The former CIA director pointed out that terrorists such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Osama bin Laden were indicted, but still went on to succeed in bombing the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S.S. Cole, and the attacks of September 11, in which nearly 3,000 Americans were killed.

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman asserted that the 9/11 Commission’s investigations, of which he was a member, “certainly made clear that the way the criminal justice system as applied to the perpetrators of the 1993 bombing was a material cause of the greater tragedy of 9/11 because it was treated as a law enforcement issue.”

Evidence was withheld from CIA director George Tenet until after the conclusion of the trials, Lehman said, arguing that Tenet told him that if he had seen the evidence “he would have linked some of the perpetrators of the ‘93 bombing to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. In fact they were relatives.”

Lehman added that the price of opening the U.S. criminal justice system to enemy combatants in Guantanamo would also be cost prohibitive, as American taxpayers had to foot the expense of over $100 million to prosecute the seven defendants in the 1993 case. Obama’s comments, Lehman said, indicate “a very deep, first, ignorance of the facts and a very, very dangerous policy.”

Scheunemann predicted, “I have no doubt that we’ll hear in the course of the day that the Obama campaign will say we’re practicing the ‘politics of fear.’ And the reality is that what Senator Obama’s statement reflects last night is that he’s advocating a policy of delusion that ignores the failed approach of the 1990s that allowed Al Qaeda to thrive and prosper unmolested and that policy clearly made America less safe and more vulnerable.”

In a question posed toward the end of the conference call by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard, Hayes asked if, in the campaign’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision, that it meant Osama bin Laden would also be entitled to Habeas Corpus rights if he, too, was captured and imprisoned at Guantanamo.

The McCain campaign’s answer was yes; perhaps providing an effective talking point to illustrate the perilous consequences of the controversial 5-4 decision by the Court.

Schuenemann wrapped up with a dig at Obama, reminding the Democratic nominee, “They are very dangerous people … they include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed,” referring to the detainees at Guantanamo. “These aren’t just your run of the mill drug dealers that are picked up on the South Side of Chicago … the only conclusion we can reach is if Senator Obama did receive that 3:00 a.m. phone call that was so often talked about in the primaries, I guess his response would be to call the lawyers in the Justice Department.” Mitt Romney, if you recall, was roundly ridiculed for saying during a debate last October, “You sit down with your attorneys and (have them) tell you what you have to do.” The Wall Street Journal warned then-candidate Romney, “deferring to lawyers to tell a president when he can and cannot use force to defend the country is not the proper understanding of executive power under the Constitution, and it is dangerous if it is the first instinct of a Commander in Chief.”

This afternoon, the McCain campaign released the following statement by former New York City mayor/potential running mate Rudy Giuliani:

“Throughout this campaign, I have been very concerned that the Democrats want to take a step back to the failed policies that treated terrorism solely as a law enforcement matter rather than a clear and present danger. Barack Obama appears to believe that terrorists should be treated like criminals — a belief that underscores his fundamental lack of judgment regarding our national security. In a post-9/11 world, we need to remain on offense against the terrorist threat which seeks to destroy our very way of life. We need a leader like John McCain who has the experience and judgment necessary to protect the American people.”

Update: Scheunemann’s prediction, sure enough, has come to fruition.

Barack Obama has responded:

“Let’s think about this: these are the same guys who helped engineer the distraction of the war in Iraq at a time when we could have pinned down the people who actually committed 9-11.” He said his statements about Guantanamo were intended to suggest that suspects have a right to be heard, not freed, and accused McCain of playing political games on national security.

“What they’re trying to do is what they’ve done every election cycle, which is to use terrorism as a club to make the American people afraid,” Obama said.

Reminded that the Republican playbook worked in the 2004 presidential race, Obama countered: “Well, it’s 2008.”

“I’m looking forward to having a robust argument about this issue,” he said. “I don’t shy away from it. The way these issues have been framed have done a great disservice to America. They have not made us safer.”

Update II: Bill Sammon of the DC Examiner is reporting:

Barack Obama’s foreign policy advisers said Tuesday that Osama bin Laden, if captured, should be allowed to appeal his case to U.S. civilian courts, a privilege opposed by John McCain.

Responding to questions from The Examiner, Sen. John Kerry and former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke said bin Laden would benefit from last week’s Supreme Court decision giving terrorism suspects habeas corpus, the right to appeal their military detention to civilian courts.

“If he were to be brought back,” Clarke said of bin Laden, “the Supreme Court ruling holds on the right of habeas corpus.”

Kerry, who applauded the Supreme Court ruling, said it will be carried out by whichever candidate wins the presidency.

“The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that they have those rights,” he said. “If John McCain were president, he would have to give them those rights.”

Randy Scheunemann, McCain’s senior foreign policy adviser, said those rights should not be extended to bin Laden or the hundreds of terrorism suspects being held by the U.S. military at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

“The individuals we hold at Guantanamo are very, very dangerous people,” Scheunemann said. “To give them full access to the federal courts and the criminal justice system is fraught with danger, moving forward, and likely to make America less safe, unlike Senator Obama’s claim of supporting the decision that it made America safer.”

I’ve been having fun just posting random thoughts lately, but I figured I should actually be serious for a few minutes.

When it comes to John McCain’s selection of his VP nominee, I have been doing some thinking, and have come to some conclusions. Personally, I would like to see Bobby Jindal as his VP, for no other reasons than the fact that he’s brilliant, conservative, and he brings some youthful excitement to the ticket. He’s also succeeded at taking over one of the most politically radioactive jobs in the country and has maintained his support. However, there are some concerns about him that I understand that make many uneasy, and would not be upset if McCain went in another direction.

Putting aside my own personal preferences, I think John McCain should seriously consider Rudy Giuliani for his running mate. Mark Twain once said, “There are lies, and there are statistics,” and that’s basically how I feel about the VP polls that we are seeing, which are really nothing more than name recognition points, at this juncture. The plus to having Rudy on the ticket is that he would not only add needed traction in states such as Pennsylvania, but also because he balances McCain’s weaknesses possibly better than any other. One of Giuliani’s strengths during the primary was on economic policy, exactly where McCain has had some problems with groups like the CFG. The problem with picking Rudy would be the fact that while McCain should do well among social conservatives, they don’t exactly trust him yet. I don’t know how well they would respond to a McCain/Giuliani ticket.

Mitt Romney would also balance the ticket quite well. While he still seems to invoke the passions of many of those who didn’t support him during the primary, I think he would bring the ability to raise money that McCain has been lacking. Romney is not without his weaknesses, and there are a lot of folks who don’t trust him, but he’s not an unknown quantity and McCain is strong in areas where Romney has had trouble in the past, such as gun control and his past position on abortion. Plus, Romney would balance McCain’s weaknesses with his strength in economic areas and his support among social conservatives.

There are other candidates who I think would fit well with McCain. Tim Pawlenty seems to be a candidate who many on the right would feel comfortable with, Rob Portman has an impressive resume, and there are probably others who I’ve forgotten to mention.

Personally, I am open, but not yet sold on the idea of Sarah Palin, which seems to be the latest trend in political circles. I think she could be a solid pick, but I don’t support ideas that seem like a gimmick to win votes, and please note that I’m not trying to belittle her or her resume in that regard. I just have yet to make up my mind about her. I have serious reservations about picking a woman, if it is nothing more than a blatant attempt to try and pick off disgruntled Clinton supporters. If that is the case for all the excitement surrounding the idea of her as a possible VP pick, then it is not much better than the other infamous gimmick that has been floated around the internet, the idea of Joe Lieberman as McCain’s running mate.

People can usually see through gimmicks, and the idea of picking Lieberman is nothing more than a gimmick to win votes, much like the democrats floating around the idea of picking Chuck Hagel. Neither brings anything to their ticket except the votes of those who can’t see it for the joke that it is. Palin, on the other hand, may turn out to be a great choice, but I don’t support the idea of picking a woman (or a man, for that matter) that would be nothing more than a blatant attempt to win votes when there are better candidates available. I’m not saying that Palin is not the best candidate, but I would like to see how the idea sells and what she brings to the table besides her gender before I decide. I could vote for a McCain/Palin ticket. On the other hand, I see no benefit of adding Lieberman to the ticket and would not support it. If it’s a certain former governor from AR, then I’d probably end up with a Bob Barr bumper sticker on my car.

From the roundtable discussion on Sunday morning’s This Week:

George Will: [Hillary Clinton's] supporters are going to be rallied by, among other things, John McCain. Probably a substantial majority of Americans do not know that John McCain is pro-life.

George Stephanopoulos: Big time. Yes.

George Will: And when they start advertising that, the Hillary Clinton cohort is going to rally around Obama.

George Stephanopoulos: I think that’s exactly true, and the Obama campaign is counting on that.

Hence the reason McCain’s real VP short list, to the chagrin of single-issue pro-life voters, probably looks something like this:

• Rudy Giuliani
• Joe Lieberman
• Tom Ridge
• Mike Bloomberg

Considering Rudy Giuliani is the only of these four to support the following restrictions on abortion:

• Partial Birth Abortion Ban
• Parental Notification
• Hyde Amendment
• Mexico City Policy

…and has said that strict constructionist judges could overturn Roe on the grounds that “it was wrongly decided.”

The question becomes: Does Giuliani thread the needle for McCain, sufficiently assuaging the concerns of pro-choice women who presently support Hillary Clinton, but are leery of Barack Obama, and would be receptive to voting Republican in November, provided the GOP ticket didn’t commit to taking away a woman’s existing right to choose…while, simultaneously, satisfying social conservatives who are terrified by the thought of Obama having several Supreme Court nominations that would put the overturn of Roe permanently out of reach?

To pro-life Republicans who’d prefer not to have a pro-choice vice president, which of these prospective running mates is the lesser of four evils?

Click here to watch the roundtable discussion in full. The excerpted segment begins with 7:02 remaining in the video.

Rudy Giuliani’s brash “New Yawk persona”, his image as “a tough guy in the Big Apple”, may well have been a liability on the national stage during the GOP primary season. But, from Broadway to Broad Street, from Boca Raton to Little Havana, Hizzoner remains a very strong asset to Senator McCain. With Barack Obama’s struggles among white working class voters, Catholics, Cubans and Jews likely to linger into the fall, Giuliani is uniquely positioned to help the Arizona senator secure not only New York transplant-filled Florida, but more significantly, the elusive northeastern swing states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania; that, if won, would almost certainly ensure electoral victory for McCain in November.

Mediabistro’s TVNewser is reporting:

What is a presidential candidate to do when he’s no longer running? Try hosting a TV show!

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani will guest host America’s Nightly Scoreboard tonight on Fox Business Network. The program airs live at 7pm ET and is replayed at 10pm ET. David Asman is the usual host for America’s Nightly Scoreboard.

We hear the guest hosting job will just be for tonight’s show.

Right now, articulating McCain’s position on health care, and displaying his in depth understanding of the issue. 

The importance of the Northeast to Sen. McCain’s presidential prospects combined with LJ’s post below detailing the senator’s efforts to convince his money men to pay off Rudy’s campaign debts have caused my political spider sense to kick in. Could Sen. McCain be planning to offer his friend and onetime rival Rudy Giuliani the Number Two spot on the ticket? It’s certainly a reasonable selection in a race against Obama. Consider the following arguments in favor of a Giuliani selection:

1) Rudy failed in the primaries because social conservatives distrusted him on abortion while independents and centrists were turned off by Giuliani’s bellicosity on Iraq and laissez faire economics during a year when voters wanted politicians to feel their pain. But because the vice president has no constitutional authority to sign or veto legislation or to commit troops to war, Rudy’s policy liabilities become non-issues if he were to take the Number Two spot on the ticket. This is especially true given Giuliani’s age (he’ll be 72 in 2016, meaning that Vice President Rudy would likely never become the GOP standard bearer).

2) Rudy would most definitely fit the bill as a veep ready to take the reins of the presidency at a moment’s notice should the unthinkable befall President McCain while in office. He’s also a personal friend of Sen. McCain and someone who McCain can trust and who would not have his own agenda while in office.

3) As a white ethnic with a working class Catholic background from the Northeast, Rudy could help bring into the fold Hillary-supporting Democrats and independents in states like New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania who don’t want to vote for Barack Obama in the fall. Rudy could do so by reaching out to these voters on a cultural level. His very presence on the ticket would send the message that a McCain presidency would be friendly to all sorts of Northeastern voters, from fiscally conservative, socially tolerant metropolitan voters to gritty, politically moderate white ethnic working class voters in places like Brooklyn and Philly.

4) Rudy’s heterodoxies on issues like abortion would help create the perception that McCain is running something other than a base campaign and deviating from traditional Republicanism, which would benefit the senator in a year when most independents have a negative view of Republicans. This is the same effect that a Tim Pawlenty, who often irks pro-growth conservatives, would have on the ticket. Basically, any such veep selection represents a “Sister Souljah” moment for McCain, which he needs in a year like this, like it or not.

5) Rudy’s hapless campaign, for all its faults, did establish the Mayor as a supply-sider, which would help McCain shore up an element of the base that distrusts him due to his votes on the Bush tax cuts earlier this decade.

All in all, a McCain/Giuliani ticket would make a lot of sense given Obama’s weakness among Northeastern voters and white ethnic working class voters. These voters seem at present to be more open to McCain than they were to President Bush in 2000 and 2004, but it may take a cultural intermediary like Rudy to close the deal and assure these voters that McCain isn’t going to be Bush’s third term.

Reports Jon Martin:

On Friday McCain manager Rick Davis sent an email to the senator’s top fundraisers requesting that they help Hizzoner retire the debt he incurred from his lackluster campaign.

“While this is an unusual request, it is extremely important for the McCain campaign and the party,” Davis wrote in a message to the campaign’s finance leadership team. “We need to help Mayor Giuliani retire his debt as soon as possible so we can move forward with everyone spending 100% of their time helping to get John McCain in the White House. The time Rudy Giuliani has to spend raising money to pay down his debt is time he could be spending raising money and reaching out to voters for us.”

Giuliani, who raised far less money than his campaign had planned on and never contributed any of his cash to the race, reported to the FEC last month that his former campaign had $4 million in cash but $3.1 million in debt.

In the email, Davis directs the McCain donors to make their contribution to Rudy’s website — which is being kept up exclusively for purposes of retiring his debt.

While Billy Crystal was filling in for Johnny Damon in today’s Grapefruit League game against Pittsburgh, fellow lifelong Yankee fan and former New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani, was also stepping into the batter’s box, pinch hitting for John McCain in Pennsylvania.

NBC/National Journal’s Matthew Berger reports:

With McCain called back to Washington to vote in the Senate, Rudy Giuliani pitched in and headlined a $1,000-a-plate luncheon for the Arizona senator, and said he believed the Republicans can win Pennsylvania. (Watch Video)

“I would consider this for John a very doable state, a state he could win” Giuliani told reporters after the luncheon. “Someone like John McCain that has outreach to independent and to Democratic voters, this is a perfect state for him.” (Indeed, a recent Pennsylvania poll shows McCain leading both Clinton and Obama in the Keystone State.)

Asked about the potential of a McCain-Giuliani ticket, or even a McCain-Romney ticket, Giuliani demurred. “The choice of vice president is up to John McCain,” he said. “I’m sure he’ll make a very good choice. I’m not going to comment on that at all.”

No stranger to New York controversies, Giuliani said his thoughts were with the Spitzer family. “I feel great sadness for the governor and for his family and for his children,” he said. “He made a decision he believed was the right one, and I just pray for them.”

Although he didn’t rule it out, Giuliani said he wasn’t thinking about running for governor himself in 2010. “I’m not considering running for anything right now,” he said. “I’m just back in my law firm, back in business, getting used to my private life, and it’s quite enjoyable. So I’m not thinking about running for anything right now.”

Rudy Giuliani and Tom Ridge will be joining McCain at his Philadelphia fundraiser tonight, per the McCain campaign.

Jerry Gleason of The Patriot-News reports:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain will run strong in Pennsylvania against either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, former New York Gov. Rudy Giuliani said today at the West Shore Country Club.

Giuliani was substituting for McCain, who canceled his appearance at the $1,000-a-plate campaign fundraiser due to a Senate vote on extending the 2001 tax cuts that are due to expire in 2010 and a possible vote on eliminating earmarks. McCain also canceled his planned Harrisburg factory tour.

Earmarks are funds provided by the Congress for pet projects or programs that circumvent the normal allocation process and are considered wasteful, pork-barrel spending.

“No one is more vigilant on doing away them than John McCain,” Giuliani said. “Eliminating them will control spending and make it more accountable.”

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani talks to the local press, Thursday, on behalf of the U.S. Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign at the West Shore Country Club in East Pennsboro Twp.

Giuliani said current polling indicates that McCain would run ahead of either Clinton or Obama in Pennsylvania.

“This is a good state for John McCain. It’s a state he can win,” he said.

“There are a lot of reasons to vote for him. The fact that he will be strong for the economy and national security are the over-riding ones.”

Giuliani said he wouldn’t speculate on McCain’s choice of a running mate.

“The choice of a vice president is up to John McCain,” he said. “You don’t run for it, you don’t speculate on who it will be.

“There are a lot of good choices.”

How to be a gracious loser:

Of course, as we have noted here on several occasions — Mitt Romney seems to be following the Ronald Reagan 1976 playbook. His CPAC speech has been compared to Reagan’s ‘76 convention speech — and now — his endorsement is being compared to Reagan’s support of Ford …

But while Ronald Reagan’s loss — and his re-birth in ‘80 — is a fairly recent model to use as a comparison, the archetype is almost as old as time. As Jung would put it, this entire narrative has long been a part of our “collective unconscious.”

In essence, whether he’s doing it consciously. or not, Mitt Romney is seeking to tap into a mythological narrative called the “Hero’s Journey.”

If you’ve read Arthur or the Odyssey — or have seen Star Wars or Rocky — you are familiar with the idea. Before reaching the “promised land,” a hero must first endure his “wilderness years.” This is essentially a right of passage or initiation (I’ve written that Mitt Romney finally passed his “Initiation” into the conservative movement.)

Of course, the last stage of the “Hero’s Journey” is when the hero reaches his destiny and in a sense, rises from the dead. If you’re a movie fan, this is the part when Rocky finally wins or when Han Solo and Luke Skywalker are given their awards. Or if you like politics, it’s the day Reagan wins after everyone thought he was finished in ‘76.

In Mitt Romney’s scenario, he becomes the Republican standard-bearer, and ultimately is elected president.

(I should add, Rudy has been a spectacularly gracious loser as well)

How not to be:

Mike Huckabee is rapidly showing all the nasty characteristics that I warned everybody about. See here, his response to Mitt Romney’s gracious endorsement of John McCain. Huck whines that Romney “attacked” him — ignoring that all of Romney’s negative ads, etc., were absolutely 100% issue-based — while trying to play the martyr who never made a personal attack on Romney. Of course, Huck is the guy who repeatedly did attack Romney in personal terms, especially raising questions about Romney’s religion. The crack about Mormons believing weird things about Satan, etc., remains the lowest blow of any campaign this year. Gimme a break.

I have no love for Huckabee, I won’t deny it, but I could have if he had shown perhaps an inkling of gentlemanship these last week. He could have kept running without attacking Romney, yet he shows no signs of stopping. Mitt’s out, no longer a threat and all Huckabee can do is lob bombs at Romney- back handed and front handed. Last night on O’Reilly, Huckabee made the laughable assertion that it’s ironic that the two candidate who are left in the race are the ones who ran the most civil campaigns! Is he nuts? I think the civility awards would actually go to Ron Paul who has been fair to every candidate and Rudy Giuliani.

I am not sure what specific action of Huckabee shows him to be a person of good character. I am not saying (at east here) that he is not but what shows that he is? As a matter of fact, I can’t think of one scenario in which he has shown the ability to work for the common good. I would love to be proven wrong, but so far all I have seen is a guy who remains in the race so he can continue kicking around the guy who dropped out for the good of the party.

I never considered supporting Rudy Giuliani for President this time. He didn’t match up closely enough with me ideologically to support in a multi-candidate primary, no matter how electable he would have been in a general election. On social issues like abortion, he was too liberal for me. On some other issues, he was too conservative. I agree with John McCain and disagreed with Rudy on waterboarding. I also disagreed with him on some civil liberties issues like wiretapping and things of that nature. I also thought Rudy’s abrasiveness would have made it difficult to negotiate and build alliances with foreign countries. I did agree with Rudy on most fiscal issues and thought he did a good job as Mayor of New York.

Despite my differences with Rudy, I think more of him now than I did at the beginning of the campaign. He has his bad points, but he has his good qualities too. He gave a nice concession speech in Florida, something Hillary did not have in her heart to do in South Carolina. He said he ran an uplifting campaign, and he did. He ran the most positive campaign of all Republicans. His attacks were restricted to the Democrats. He was, and is, a team player. Even with candidates from much different backgrounds and belief systems than his, he would look to find good qualities. He once said he thought Mike Huckabee had a positive attitude. I hope Rudy continues to be a player in the Republican party and perhaps part of President McCain’s administration. But Rudy will never be President. Though people lament his strategy of bypassing early states, the failure was deeper than that. In our two-party system, a man like Rudy Giuliani simply cannot get elected President. He is too conservative to win a Democratic nomination and too liberal to win a Republican nomination.

Best wishes for the rest of your life Rudy. You ran an uplifting campaign and deserve a lot of credit.

Dear Aron,

Over the past year, as I traveled around the country, people from all walks of life welcomed me into their homes and communities with open arms. From house parties to parades to town halls and rallies, I have shared in some wonderful moments with you all and for that I am eternally grateful.

Thank you for sharing your concerns with me. Thank you for working with me to provide our children with a brighter and more prosperous future. Thank you for your support and trust and faith. And thank you for being a part of this wonderful journey.

A New York Republican named Teddy Roosevelt once said “aggressive fighting for the right is the noblest sport the world affords.” Like most Americans, I love competition. I don’t back down from a principled fight.

But there must always be a larger purpose.

Elections are about more than just a candidate. Elections are about fighting for a cause larger than ourselves. They are about identifying the great challenges of our time and proposing new solutions. Most of all, they are about handing our nation to the next generation better than it was handed to us.

Although we were unsuccessful in our endeavor, the fight to strengthen America goes on. Our nation’s next President must understand and make a commitment to keep us on offense in the Terrorists’ War on Us. He must understand that stimulating our economy requires cutting taxes, because you make better decisions with your money than Washington bureaucrats. He must be committed to ending illegal immigration and securing our borders. And he must use free-market principles to make health care more affordable for all Americans.

I believe John McCain is that man. He is the right leader to move us forward, unite our party and transform Washington. I hope that you will join me in supporting him to be the next President of the United States.

As I look forward to the road ahead, I am optimistic because I believe America’s best days are still to come. Our country has a bright future, but we must work together to ensure that our shared prosperity creates new and better opportunities for us all.

Best Wishes,

Rudy Giuliani

Senator John McCain’s acceptance speech following Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s endorsement:

“I thank you Rudy and I am deeply honored. I am deeply honored by your friendship, which has been for many years. I, like all Americans, will never forget the defining moment of recent American history - the tragedy of 9/11. And I saw Rudy Giuliani unite this nation in a way that made us all proud. And all of us were recommitted to defeating the terrible evil that attacked New York City on September 11th. I had the honor of spending time with him in New York City as he not only restored the spirits and the courage and the commitment of the people of New York City, but of the people of the United States of America.

All life is full of anecdotes. My favorite anecdote was in the World Series of that year when Rudy came with me to Phoenix, Arizona - a packed stadium of 40-some thousand rabid Diamondback fans. On the Jumbotron was the face of Rudy Giuliani. Every one of those fans stood and applauded and cheered and cheered and cheered because this man is a national hero. And I’m honored by his friendship. And I’m honored to know a person who played such a great role in uniting the United States of America after one of its greatest tragedies was inflicted on it.

So, I want to say, I not only thank him for his friendship. I want to thank him for his leadership of America. I want to thank him as we wage this struggle to secure the presidency of the United States. It will be a clear choice this November and I believe that my life has prepared me - a life of service and a life of dedication to lead this nation in the transcendent challenge of the 21st Century: the great threat, and the evil of radical Islamic extremism which threatens everything we stand for and believe in. And my strong right arm, and my partner, and my friend in this effort will be the former mayor of New York City, an American hero - Rudy Giuliani. I am deeply honored. Thank you very much.”

So, what was the first question McCain was asked by the media following his speech?

“Could this be the Republican ticket this fall?”

McCain tried to deflect the reporter’s question with self-deprecating humor, quipping “You know, my ego is rather massive, but not quite so large as to be thinking about that likelihood at this time.”

UPDATE (1/31/08): Just Like Matthau and Lemmon
In a joint appearance on The Tonight Show with John McCain, Rudy Giuliani leaves the door open for a run as McCain’s vice president.

“The responsibility of leadership doesn’t end with a single campaign, it goes on and you continue to fight for it.”-Rudy Giuliani

Hizzoner has officially withdrawn from the 2008 presidential race and has thrown his full support behind his good friend, Sen. John McCain:

“This is a man who is prepared to be president,” Giuliani said of his “old friend.”Giuliani said McCain gives the Republican Party the best chance to hold onto the presidency.

“I am very proud to endorse my friend and fellow Republican — a hero — John McCain,” Giuliani said at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley California, two hours before the Republican presidential candidates were to face each other in their final debate before the Super Tuesday contests next week.

Giuliani described McCain as “the other best candidate.”

“I made it clear before I had to make this decision [to drop out] that had I not run, I’d be supporting John McCain,” Giuliani told reporters on a flight to Burbank, California, for the debate.

With the California debate only about an hour from commencing, rumors are swirling of another big endorsement (no pun intended):

Meanwhile, two Republican sources told CNN that California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is in discussions about endorsing McCain.

One of the sources said, “you can safely describe the conversations as progressing and productive.” The second source described the endorsement as “more than expected” and said the conversations were aimed at arranging a Thursday announcement.

Race42008 is please to present the following editorial from longtime reader MetroRepublican.
__________________________________________________________________________________

The conventional wisdom was that Rudy Giuliani could only win the nomination in a split field. That belief was dead wrong.

Occasional polls in 2007 asked respondents about 2-man matchups in the GOP primaries. Rudy Giuliani always beat John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson in these 2-man matchups by healthy margins.

I have no doubt if this nomination had been a 2-man race with Rudy and any other candidate, Rudy would be the favorite among Republicans.

Even in a split field, if we had held a national primary on January 3, Rudy would be our nominee.

The only reason our best, and most favored, candidate is not our nominee is a combination of three main factors: (1) The bad draw Rudy got in the earliest states and how well they happened to match up with his competitors, (2) A weird dynamic that came about in a largely 3-way race with McCain and Romney, (3) The behavior of the MSM with regard to Rudy’s campaign.

1. Bad Draw

IA: Populist, Evangelical state with pacifist tendencies. Rudy’s a secular capitalist hawk, the exact opposite. Enter Huckabee. [Wow, TLG and I think alike almost to the word.]

NH: Great state for Rudy! Except it has a love affair with McCain, often called the President of NH. And Mitt Romney’s in the race — and no Massachusetts politician has ever failed to win the NH primary. Combine this with the weird 3-way dynamic Rudy has with these (see below), and the state is simply unwinnable for him, as Rudy proved with throwing a few million at it.

MI: The other state McCain’s got a history with, plus Romney’s home state. Combine this with the weird 3-way dynamic. Are you seeing how bad this draw was?

NV: When you combine the caucus + Mormon factor, Mitt would have to dominate this, as I said months before the results came in.

SC: The most military-friendly state in the union, with McCain running strong. The second most Evangelical state in the union, with Huckabee running strong.

Are you seeing how incredibly unlucky Rudy’s draw was, given how these states perfectly matched up with his opponents?

(more…)

Race42008 presents the following guest editorial from longtime reader Alex Knepper, aka “ThatLibertarianGuy”.
__________________________________________________________________________________________

As it stands, it looks as though the Race 4 2008 has ended on the Republican side. John McCain has the nomination virtually locked up, having defeated Mitt Romney head-on even as Rudy Giuliani siphoned off national security voters and moderates, all of whom will flock to McCain on Super Tuesday, handing him the nomination.

As the regulars on this site know, I have been supporting Mayor Giuliani in the comments section since May and have been there to defend him whenever someone attacked. The man who served in the #3 spot in Ronald Reagan’s Justice Department, busted the mafia as a New York prosecutor, governed as arguably the most successful big-city mayor in the history of the country, and will go down in history as a heroic figure on 9/11 would have been a strong conservative candidate for the GOP and would have fundamentally shifted the Republican Party in a capitalist, America-first direction.

But that dream is over. The Giuliani campaign ended with a thud and the mayor finishes as the least successful candidate of the former top six. But why, exactly, did this happen? There are a few key reasons:

1) The Incredible Failure of the Field to Sink John McCain
“When your opponent is drowning, you throw him an anchor,” the old political saying goes. Now, we all can recall the McCain Death Watch of Summer 2007. But what’s remarkable — and absolutely inexplicable — is that all of his opponents, moreso than McCain himself, seemed intent on raising him from the dead!

Throughout the debates, the major Republican contenders, figuring McCain permanently politically unviable, tripped all over themselves to praise McCain profusely — presumably in order to make themselves look good by praising an American hero.

That backfired.

It’s not an accident that McCain remained viable enough to be ‘risen from the dead’: he was never dead. No ‘former frontrunner’ is “dead” six months out from the first votes cast, as we now see all too clearly. McCain invested his time and resources wisely and successfully reclaimed his mantle as the heir to the nomination. But it didn’t have to be that way, if only the rest of the field had sunk McCain when it had its chance.

(more…)

UPDATE: NBC News and the National Journal are reporting that its official: Rudy will drop out tomorrow and endorse McCain.

As reported by The Page

Can you feel the suspense? Are you junkies just a teeennnyyy bit nervous???

Which candidate will take home the trophy??? I was bored, so here are the nominees for Best Picture:

Good luck to all the candidates…

Per Amspec Blog:

In today’s Wall Street Journal, the column by our friend John Fund contains this enlightening revelation: More recently, Mr. McCain has told conservatives he would be happy to appoint the likes of Chief Justice John Roberts to the Supreme Court. But he indicated he might draw the line on a Samuel Alito, because “he wore his conservatism on his sleeve.”

Wow. This supports every single thing I and so many other critics of McCain’s “Gang of 14″ deal have been saying: It indicated not an interest in fighting for conservative judges, but a capitulation. There is absolutely no reason to believe that a president John McCain would EVER appoint conservative judges. The best we could expect from him — the BEST — would be along the lines of O’Connor and Kennedy. And that would be all up and down the federal courts, not just at the Supreme Court. To not be looking for and demanding judges/justices like Alito is to shoot the finger at every conservative in the country — or, worse, the political equivalent of subjecting us to waterboarding.

But what can you expect from the same senator, McCain, who said as recently as 1999 (to the San Fran Chronicle editorial board) that “in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X-number of women to undergo illegal and dangerous abortions.”

Seeing as how there are numerous pro-abort liberals who nevertheless acknowledge that Roe, as constitutional law/legal reasoning, is utter nonsense, this window into McCain’s real views shows a man with absolutely no understanding or even concern about the Constitution.

On the other hand, I have been trying to work out a theory, which I haven’t quite been able to finish putting together in full, that Rudy Giuliani would OPERATIONALLY be more pro-life than McCain or even Huckabee. It’s sort of the “only Nixon could go to China” thing: With a highly partisan Democratic Senate, only Giuliani could appoint an originalist without the originalist AUTOMATICALLY being blocked/filibustered on the grounds that the president obviously was looking for an anti-Roe justice.

It is also true that Giuliani has proved to be a man of his word on public policy: What he says he will do, he does. In that light, it is more believable coming from him than it would be from another pro-choicer when he says he would veto any relevant bills that try to drop the Hyde Amendment or Mexico City language (i.e., the two key pro-life statutory matters handled by the president and Congress). He would actively promote parental notification, oppose partial-birth abortion, and work particularly hard to promote adoption.

While we are on the subject of McCain vs. Giuliani (meaning I have gotten off subject, because originally this was just a post alerting readers about just how godawful McCain is on the subject of judges), it is also worth noting that Giuliani is equally as strong on defense as McCain — actually, stronger, considering that Rudy doesn’t want to let jihadist terrorists have access to our domestic courts, but McCain does — and that he is far, far better on economics. He’s both a tax cutter and a spending cutter, succeeding at both endeavors even in liberal New York City. There, of course, he also cut crime, fought smut, took stands against Arafat and Castro at public events, helped break some corrupt union influence, promoted school choice, eliminated racial quotas, and (as prosecutor) broke the back of the mob.

McCain? He merely pounds his chest and boasts about his war record and his moral superiority, all while blocking energy exploration and trying to kill the American pharmaceutical companies (he called the “the enemy”) that develop so many life-saving drugs for all of us. Plus, he joins his “beloved” (HIS word!) Sen. Lindsey Graham to smear a Republican judicial nominee, Jim Haynes of the Pentagon, who was given the ABA’s highest rating and who is the very model of a qualified, wise, thoughtful, brilliant, and yes, judicious lawyer — all on behalf of a purely private vendetta of Graham’s, the same Graham who called opponents of illegal immigration “bigots” and who follows McCain like a lovesick puppy.

Oh… and McCain lies about Romney’s record, as well as lying about his own.And now we learn McCain would “draw the line” against choosing another judge like Samuel Alito.

So why would ANY conservative ever vote for this guy?

UPDATE from Hillyer: McCain Lies Again

2nd UPDATE: Gang of 14

In today’s NRO, David Frum says the time is now for Rudy Giuliani:

This is a difficult hour for the United States. It’s not just the strain of war. On domestic issues, too, discontent runs strong. The incomes of ordinary Americans have stagnated over the past six years. Health-care and energy costs have surged. In many cities, gang violence has surged. Over two-thirds of Americans now describe the country as “on the wrong track” - astonishing for a non-recession year.

In this difficult hour, the Bush administration seems to have lost its way - and its nerve. On issues ranging from the reconstruction of New Orleans to the Iranian bomb, the administration seems paralyzed, crippled almost as much by a lack of positive ideas as by the president’s record-scraping personal unpopularity.

Historically, Americans have trusted Republicans as the party of prudence and sound management. Iraq, Katrina, earmarks, and airport body searches of Eagle Scouts and wheelchair-bound grandmas have corroded that reputation. As a party, we are now widely perceived as uncaring, improvident, corrupt, and incompetent. Republican identification has sharply slumped, and Democrats enjoy large advantages in almost every way pollsters can measure. The conditions are all in place for an epochal Republican disaster in 2008. Unless something happens to change the game radically, we are looking at a real possibility of a big Democratic presidential win combined with gains in both houses of Congress, an outcome that has not occurred since 1964.

Democrats are beginning to talk of a new government health-care monopoly paid for by canceling the Bush tax cuts. These are not pleasant facts, but they are facts all the same. They present us as conservatives and Republicans with the toughest challenges we have faced in years.

How can we hold the line on government while addressing America’s genuine health-care needs? How can we sustain the competitiveness of the American economy against a Democratic Congress quivering to impose new taxes and new regulations? How can we win a war on terror that the congressional majority seems already to have written off as lost? Rudy Giuliani is the answer to these challenges.

No living elected official has solved more public problems with more outstanding success than Rudy Giuliani. If there is one person Americans associate with competence in government, it is Rudy. As the primary race has warmed up, some have tried to diminish the mayor’s accomplishments. But in fact, the closer you look, the more amazing they become. Yes, the crime rate for the whole country declined in the 1990s. But New York, with a little less than 3 percent of the nation’s population, accounted for 15 percent of the nation’s decline in homicides. Much of the improvement in former high-crime zones like Chicago, Washington, and Miami occurred precisely because New York’s success inspired other mayors to follow where Giuliani had led.

It is not just crime. Giuliani restored civility to New York’s public spaces, reformed welfare, broke the grip of organized crime on trash collection and food wholesaling, restored academic standards in the city university system, chased the sex industry off the streets, held the line on taxes, and set in motion one of the greatest property booms in city history.

In 1963, President Kennedy challenged those who suggested that Communism could out-compete freedom: “Let them come to Berlin.” Today, Republicans can challenge those who assert that liberals can out-manage conservatives: “Let them come to New York.” Giuliani achieved his success by combining a fierce commitment to core values with an impressive flexibility in his methods. He listened to advice, tried experiments, built on what worked, discarded what did not work. He showed that a leader can be strong without being rigid.

Giuliani’s accomplishment was put to the ultimate test on 9/11. Compare what happened in New York that day with what happened in New Orleans four years later. The mayor did not panic. Public order was consistently maintained. There was no looting, no lawbreaking, no criminal activity. An evacuation of about half a million people from lower Manhattan proceeded smoothly and safely. The local economy recovered almost immediately. The disaster zone has not only recovered, but erupted into new life.

Giuliani’s record is the best possible reply to Democratic criticisms of Republican governance. It is also the best hope to recover lost supporters. Giuliani’s urban ethnic background resonates in key states like Florida and New Jersey, where local polling suggests he does best among the leading Republicans in head-to-head matchups against Hillary Clinton. Romney, Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee are candidates of many excellences. But they cannot possibly hope to win in a year like 2008. Rudy Giuliani can do more than hope.

(more…)

National Review’s Jim Geraghty: “I think this Rudy web video is awesome, and every candidate, except McCain, should be doing their own version dealing with the New York Times editors’ endorsement.”

As we’re less than 24 hours before primary day in Florida, let’s pause for some pragmatic reflection –

Both John McCain and Mitt Romney, the reputed Republican frontrunners, are running hard for the coveted GOP nomination. But what will they win with that nomination? They will inherit a divided party, that they themselves have had a hand in dividing. On top of this, every poll indicates that the GOP brand is toxic this election.

Running as a conventional Republican won’t be worth spit. We need a candidate who transcends the usual partisan appeal, who’s appeal is his personal reputation as a leader; someone who can reach out to the vast middle-ground of independents. The “base” of the GOP isn’t going to elect the next president. The appeal needs to be beyond “the base.”

This could be a “change” election, which will 1) rid our political culture of the Clintons once and for all; 2) revitalize conservatism around its classic principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, and the expansion of liberty; and thereby 3) remake the GOP into a contender on the national scene again. Does anyone seriously think Mitt Romney or John McCain can accomplish that? Rudy’s the only one who can, and will, if given the opportunity.

Rudy has run the most substantive campaign, the most positive campaign, the most optimistic campaign of those in the field. He is the most conservative candidate on the broadest range of issues (fiscal policy, the economy, health care reform, government reform, tax reform, education reform, judicial philosophy, federalism, national security), and is the most accomplished conservative in the field….And yet Republicans appear willing to kick him to the curb, if we’re to believe the sloppy polling that has been done so far this year, and the biased bloviating of pundits on Faux News Channel.

Absent Rudy, the only thing that can revitalize conservatism and the GOP is a cleansing defeat, of Goldwateresque proportions. I could live with a cleansing defeat if it were to anyone other than Hillary. I cannot stomach seeing the Clintons’ with their bloated narcissitic personality disorders back in the Oval Office. But that’s what we’ll get with Willard, and most likely McCain.

With Mike Huckabee down and Fred Thompson out in Florida, Tuesday’s Sunshine State primary promises a three-way brawl among Rudolph Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney. Voters there, and beyond, should regard these three candidates like lamps in a traffic signal.

– Romney is the red light. The former Massachusetts governor’s tax-and-spend record should stop Republican voters in their tracks. Romney presents himself as a corporate super-mechanic who can lift the hood and make a stalled sedan NASCAR-ready. Too bad Romney left his state in the repair bay after four years of parts and labor.

Rather than reinvigorate Massachusetts with broad-based tax relief — as did his Republican gubernatorial predecessors, William Weld and Paul Cellucci — Romney launched a tax-hike binge reminiscent of Daddy Bush’s 1990 “read my lips” raid on America’s wallets.

Romney enacted 126 brand-new or increased fees, having requested 70, totaling $473 million. Thus, Massachusetts residents pay more for marriage licenses, gun registrations, blindness certificates, home-deed registries, power-meter inspections and even milk-dealer permits. Romney also signed 19 tax increases worth $519 million. Romney taxed gasoline, corporate trusts, nonprofit organizations, online software, sales catalogs, securities companies and more.

Romney also saddled Massachusetts with a government-run health-insurance scheme. Those who have ignored its individual-coverage mandate now face $219 in tax penalties, which could soar this year to $912. The Pacific Research Institute’s Sally Pipes calculates that RomneyCare cost taxpayers $619 million in 2007 — 31 percent above projections.

All this bought economic stasis. Manufacturing employment fell 14 percent under Romney, twice the national figure, ranking Massachusetts 48th among the states. As Romney left office, 124,100 fewer employees were working, versus February 2001, before Massachusetts entered recession. As Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom has admitted: “Did we recover all the jobs that were lost? No.”

– This race’s yellow light is McCain. Call him “Bob Dole 2.0″ — a beloved war hero and veteran Beltway insider with an uneven tax record. The Arizona senator voted to extend President Bush’s tax cuts and now wants them permanent. Yet, he rejected them in 2001 and 2003. According to Senate records, McCain cast 52 substantive and procedural votes for higher taxes. He backed Internet-access taxes, the “death tax,” a surtax on incomes above $1 million and $755.67 billion in tobacco taxes. He also spurned lower taxes on incomes and capital gains, and repeatedly voted to delay and shrivel other tax cuts.

On spending, however, McCain is delightfully parsimonious. He fought 2003’s $558 billion Medicare drug entitlement and is one of Congress’ loudest voices against extravagant, idiotic federal boondoggles.

– The green light is Giuliani. New York’s former mayor is a stalwart fiscal conservative who recently proposed America’s largest tax cut — ever.

As mayor, Giuliani pitched 64 tax cuts, and then charmed, scared or otherwise persuaded an overwhelmingly Democratic City Council to enact 23 of them totaling $9.8 billion. The top tax rate dropped 20.6 percent (vs. Romney’s 0 percent reduction). Also, the overall tax burden (tax revenue’s share of personal income) fell 17.1 percent under Giuliani, while it rose 10.8 percent under Romney.

On Giuliani’s watch, real, per-capita spending declined 0.9 percent. He shrank Gotham’s government and produced a $2.9 billion budget surplus, largely through spending reductions and higher revenues generated by accelerated economic growth that his tax cuts triggered.

Likewise, Giuliani unleashed an employment machine. He helped private-sector payrolls soar 15.2 percent (vs. Romney’s 0.5 percent) — great news for 411,600 job seekers. Moving 58 percent of public-assistance recipients from welfare to work also benefited taxpayers. More important, this strengthened the character of the 643,348 people who underwent this transformation.

Giuliani’s proposed optional, one-page tax return collapses today’s six rates (up to 35 percent) into three: 10 percent, 15 percent and 30 percent. This significantly would lower everyone’s taxes. A family of four earning $80,000 would enjoy a 24 percent tax cut of $2,207. Single Americans making $35,000 would save 13 percent on their taxes.

Giuliani also would index and eventually excise the alternative minimum tax and electrify the economy by chopping corporate taxes from 35 percent to 25 percent, and capital gains taxes from 15 percent to 10 percent.

How swiftly will America travel the road ahead? GOP voters will help decide — by lighting that path red, yellow or green.

___________________________________________________________________________________

New York commentator Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.