The Jaker

Mostly rational politics, with occasional rants about how a few crazy Republicans are ruining the country.

Support The Jaker

Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Why Not Rudy?
With all the talk about Bernard Kerik, it occurred to me this morning that nothing has been said (at least that I've read) about the possibility of Rudy Giuliani being nominated as Sec of Homeland Security. Why is that? After all, it was Rudy that was the "comforting", "on-the-ball" manager in the wake of 9/11, not the guy standing (mostly) silently next to him. And obviously Rudy would have more political skill and be better able to navigate the Washington scene.

So my thought was - has he told GWB that he's gunning for the Prez nomination in 2008? That's the only thing I can think of - otherwise it seems like the perfect job for him. Perhaps he's happy to make money - he recently started an investment bank. But I don't think that's the whole story. I think Rudy really believes it's his job if he wants it. Time will tell.
posted by CB @ 8:40 AM  
  • At 9:57 AM, Blogger Jessica said…

    Even if Guiliani did tell Bush that he plans to run for Prez in 2008, why would that necessarily make him not want the Homeland Security position? If Guiliani wants to run in 2008, I would think this would be an ideal position for him - he gains White House experience, would have a high profile, high exposure position that would keep him actively in the political limelight. And in four years, I bet security and terrorism will still be key issues in the next election, and this way he can say he has the best experience possible with respect to knowing how to protect our country.

    If he wants to run in '08, this position seems ideal, not really an impediment. Otherwise what does he really gain by staying in the private sector where people can make the arguement that he dropped out of public service for six years?

  • At 10:02 AM, Blogger CB said…

    The problem I see, Jess, is that it would be incredibly irresponsible to run for office while an active Secretary tasked with running the country (ESPECIALLY of Homeland Security), and even more irresponsible for Bush to appoint someone that was planning to leave in 2 years to pursue office.

    Giuliani does not need exposure or the limelight. He'd almost be better not having a chance to piss people off. And that position is like a closer in baseball - people only notice when you fail. Bad news for any pres candidate, methinks.

  • At 11:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think that clearly the candidates with the most experience in international affairs and covert operations should be put in charge of Homeland security.

    PA governors and others in the mainstream are good political appointments. However, an obscure military man or intelligence agent with years of experience and knowledge of terrorist organization seems like they'd have a better chance of putting together a plan to keep America safe. Politicians with a working knowledge of international relations are obviously better than someone who's qualifications are "cracks good jokes about the opposition", but isn't this a position where the government should consider more than polling numbers?

    Give me someone who has fought a terrorist or infiltrated the terrorist ranks. Experience. Not in washington or in dealing with the destruction of terrorism, but experience in dealing with the operations of terrorists or knowledge of the planning of terrorist actions. Experience that would give America a chance at prevention.

Post a Comment
<< Home

Recent Posts
Contact Me
Email me
Template by

Free Blogger Templates