I’m not a Rudy fan, and would not vote for him. I don’t see that he has much of a moral base, and I’ve read too much about the bad ways he treats people (which speaks to his character). His ego is astronomical, and he doesn’t tolerate anyone else taking even a portion of his spotlight. Plus, he’s playing the fear card, straight from the Karl Rove Handbook. I detest that.

And I see him continuing and even expanding the imperial presidency which George Bush spawned–a presidency which is not accountable to Congress, views itself as above any checks and balances, that does what it wants in the world without getting anyone else’s approval. And that, to me, is dangerous for our country. George Bush has left us without friends in the world who would come to our aid should we need it. In that way, it endangers our national security.

So that’s how I felt until I read the “Old Habits,” an article about Giuliani in the January 7 New Yorker magazine. The New Yorker has written some fabulous, in-depth articles about the various candidates, all of which provide new light. This article focused on Rudy’s record as mayor, the good and the bad. While he did a lot of good, he left mountains of scorched earth.

He mistreated people. He left few friends. He picked fights out of pure capriciousness. He let his ego run amuck. The city’s largest policeman’s union and the largest firefighter’s union won’t endorse Rudy. “Rudy Giuliani is not the individual he portrays himself to be,” said the head of of the city’s fire officers’ union.

“Rudy was a good mayor in the sense of delivering services,” says former mayor Ed Koch. “He was not a great mayor, because he didn’t respect people.”

Jerome Hauer, who set up Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management, said this: “From my perspective, Rudy would be a very dangerous President. And I think people need to be very frightened of him. When you look at the way he picked battles unnecessarily as mayor, imagine if he’s got nuclear weapons at his disposal.”

I finally got around to reading Mitt Romney’s December “Faith in America” speech, in which he talked about religion. It’s very good, and I fully respect what he said. Christianity is kind of the “dominant” religion of the US, and when you’re “in charge,” you don’t need to ask many philosophical questions about your place in the scheme of things. But as a Mormon, a minority religion, Romney has had to defend his faith and think deeply about religious issues as they affect citizenship.

Here are a few excerpts. Nothing earth-shaking, but good stuff. Good stuff for us evangelicals, who became addicted to political power when the Moral Majority came to power (though I think we’re getting over it).

Let me assure you that no authorites of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.

There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it.

Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.

No candidate should become a spokesman for his faith.

I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life’s blessings.

The establishment of state religions in Europe did no favor to Europe’s churches. And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away.

Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me.

There are a few points which invite quibbling. One is his line, “Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom.” I agree with the first part, but not the second. Religion has often thrived–or, at least, shined with the most genuine of light–when officially banned. But I suppose it makes sense in the context of the Mormon religion; Brigham Young and Company migrated west to find a place where they could freely practice this new religion.

A few thoughts, lame-brained yet spoken with delusionally convincing authority, from the political world.

• Two questions floating around with reckless abandon: Is the country ready for a woman president? Is the country ready for a black president? My answer to both: yes. However…is Hillary that woman? Probably not. Is Obama that black? I think the country could elect him. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Alan Keyes were most definitely not the black that the country was ready for, but Obama could be.
• Morning Joe has become my favorite, uh, news show. Unfortunately, I can only catch about 45 minutes of it, and then only if I’m willing to sacrifice the extra sleep. Love Mika and Willy. Reporter David Shuster, a regular, is hilarious.
• In fact, MSNBC now dominates my news-watching. I like Hardball, when there’s not too much yelling. I like Keith Olberman, the anti-O’Reilly. Tucker is interesting. Abrams not so much. MSNBC’s big strength is the ability to draw star-power from the NBC stable–Brokaw, Russert, David Gregory, Brian Williams.
• Keith Olberman is an acquired taste. He is unabashed in his disdain for the Bush administration, which is okay with me. He’s also an incredible wordsmith, the most literate of the TV commentators. And he is wickedly funny, delivering much of the show with a sly twinkle. But I totally understand if you can’t stomach Olberman.
• Who will be the nominees? I suspect Obama for the Democrats. Once Edwards drops out, the majority of his votes will probably swing to Obama, rather than Hillary. Maybe not. The question is: will Edwards drop out soon enough for it to matter? On the Republican side, I’m hoping for McCain, but Romney or Guiliani could be that person. Maybe even Huckabee.
• I thought Hillary did fine on Meet the Press this Sunday. I was impressed with her answers, for the most part. She’s definitely a policy wonk–knows her stuff.