On August 30, John Hawkins fired the entire conservative "litmus" arsenal at the former mayor of New York. Interspersing occasional compliments in an attempt to give the article some semblance of objectivity, Mr. Hawkins spelled out, at least to his own satisfaction, why Mr. Giuliani is completely unacceptable as the Republican standard bearer in 2008.

I will not endeavor to rebut the details of the article. It is all pretty much old hat, predictable, and focuses mostly on issues I have already relegated to one of the fringes of American politics. The article in its entirety can be found at:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16762

I will just limit myself to saying that ideologues tend to deal in inflexible absolutes while pragmatists force themselves to deal with realities. Moreover, as Mayor it would have and should have been Giuliani's obligation and not merely his choice, to support those individuals who best met or supported the interests of his constituency. A Mayor's job is executive and as such he is more or less the sheepherder of his flock. Were he to place its safety or well-being secondary to some official, conventional party line would amount to betrayal of his trust. Making the transition to the national level, it would be the hope rather than the fear that such an individual would apply himself likewise to represent and protect the interests of the greater flock.

The bit about keeping the pants on, was just National Enquirer stuff. Except for intimate liasons potentially threathening national security as may have been the case with JFK, our presidents' activities in the bedroom have rarely had any bearing on their performance as Chief Executives.

I would have been more interested in hearing how Mr. Hawkins felt Giuliani harmonized, or failed to do so, with the eleven points outlined by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Those maybe found at:

http://www.newt.org/backpage.asp?art=3547

Though the "American Eleven" that the former speaker refers to are the points and issues that, if endorsed, should help Republican fortunes in the upcoming elections, with only slight modification they will very likely be the same ones that will play a crucial role in 2008. It would not be presumptive to say that a face to face meeting between Newt and Rudy on some reputable talk show where their agreement or disagreement on the truly important, mainstream issues can come to light, would prove to be a lot more enlightening than Mr. Hawkins' transparent attempt to demonize the former mayor. All that we learn from Mr. Hawkins is which side his toast is buttered on. That is not really what should interest Americans.

In a previous article I wrote about the center, looking for it, representing it. If it does not coincide with the more vocal and strident voices in our main political parties, this should be their curse, not ours.