Don't Ask, Don't Tell | Military | News | Republican Party | Rudy Giuliani

Watch: Rudy Giuliani Says GOP Should 'Ease Up' on Gay Rights, Thinks 'DADT' Can Be Repealed Now


Rudy Giuliani told Wolf Blitzer today that he thinks it would be politically wise for Republicans to stop demonizing gays and says 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is ready to go, now:

"My feeling about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was, in the middle of the height of the Iraq war, not a good time to do it. We’re not in the middle of the height of the Iraq war. Afghanistan is a different kind of thing. You could probably accomplish it now. It’s eventually going to happen and it seems to me that it gets my party out of this anti-gay, feeling that we’re being unfair to people who are gay."


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Go to hell Rudi.

    Posted by: Tralfaz | Nov 3, 2010 7:52:34 PM

  2. Hopefully some day both parties will realize GLBT people are equal. If republicans would become pro-gay marriage, stop with the bible thumping--I would certainly vote for them. Sadly I doubt that will change anytime soon- leaving many of us only one choice at the polls. Democrats- the lesser of 2 evils.

    Posted by: BigBlonde | Nov 3, 2010 7:58:02 PM

  3. But he is missing an important point, his party raises MILLIONS by being anti-gay. It's where the money is, so why would they give it up?

    Posted by: Joe | Nov 3, 2010 7:59:09 PM

  4. This guy has no shame. So he really believes we're gullible enough (well, some are) to believe that the reason his position now on DADT is different than it was in 2008 is because "[w'e're not in the middle of the height of the Iraq war"?! More like you're not in the middle of the height of your efforts to woo Republican primary voters for the 2008 nomination. That's what's really changed.

    Giuliani couldn't move fast enough to the right on gay issues in his efforts to secure the 2008 Republican nomination. Recall that (much like McCain) he distance himself from prior, more "moderate" positions on gay issues in that campaign by saying that (i) he would have vetoed the New Hampshire civil unions bill (yes, civil unions!) had he been Gov of New Hampshire and (ii) he'd be open to supporting an anti-gay amendment to the federal constitution in the future if enough state courts started ruling that marriage equality is required by state constitutions.

    Posted by: Patric | Nov 3, 2010 8:06:13 PM

  5. No way is the party going to give it up. He's a former NYC mayor who lived with a gay couple and has dressed in drag publicly on many occasions. I don't like him a bit---he strikes me as the worst kind of political opportunist, as well as a bit evil---so even though his qualified support for gay rights has always struck me as suspect, it's a hell of a lot better than most GOP politicians.

    Course, he's not in office and wasn't running for it, so his words hardly mean a thing. Similarly, does anyone care what Newt Gingrich thinks, among countless other examples? If you can't affect legislation, your opinions are generally ignored.

    Posted by: Paul R | Nov 3, 2010 8:10:46 PM

  6. One of the most craven and disgusting politicians we have in the country. A noun, a verb, and 9/11.

    Posted by: Brian in Texas | Nov 3, 2010 8:22:28 PM

  7. "it gets my party out of this anti-gay, feeling that we’re being unfair to people who are gay."

    Ummm... not just a feeling, blowhard, it's fact.

    Separate but equal... ain't.

    Posted by: pete | Nov 3, 2010 8:32:40 PM

  8. I can't disagree with anything said above about RG, but this is the most intelligent thing I've heard him say in six years (at least).

    I think he is on to something. Now, right now, is the time for a Repub Party turn-about on gay issues. As a matter of political strategy.

    But let them produce something, show me something, then I could get behind their effort.

    Not only that, but a Repub move towards gays would force the Dems to move even more rather than have the issue stolen. They could slip it right out from under Obama.

    Posted by: Show Me | Nov 3, 2010 8:39:17 PM

  9. Seems a little illogical to me -- what's so different about Iraq and Afghanistan that he thinks we could repeal it during one war and not now that we're refocusing on the other?

    Seems to me he should just be honest about it: He wants the Republicans to do something about this because it will otherwise become a political liability for the GOP.

    Posted by: Ryan | Nov 3, 2010 8:42:20 PM

  10. This shell of a man disgusts me to no end. Is it any wonder that he waits until the day AFTER an important midterm election season for Republicans to say "Ease up on gay rights?" Holy crap, how stupid does this republican whore think people are? He is a craven little opportunist, and his appetite for attention disgusts me.

    Posted by: Seoul Brother | Nov 3, 2010 8:53:16 PM

  11. Easy. The difference is they just won an election, he isn't running for anything, and it's suddenly time to put the whip down and stop beating us as scape goats for the religious right. They have a new darling, the Tea Party, to court. Notice how little these guys ran on "family values."

    In 2012, they are going to have a tough fight on their hands. 60-seat transfer of power means 60 seats of freshmen, vulnerable representatives. Many are out of the blue tea party people with no political experience at all.

    In my district, my representative has never faced real opposition. He didn't have a war chest, it was never needed. Suddenly in the past week Freedom Works (Carl Rove's group) poured tons of money in out of the blue. My people barely had time to respond, but we beat them back, narrowly.

    I had a chance to help volunteer a little with the campaign at the last minute, and this close call made me resolve to get involved in 2012 - today. I had a chance to meet my representative today. What an amazing, down to earth, normal guy!

    The anti-gay stuff from the Republicans will only last until it serves them no longer. Juliani is probably just stating the truth that we are no longer useful as a whipping boy to them.

    Not a change of heart, just heartless politics that doesn't care who it destroys for their own aims.

    Posted by: Craig | Nov 3, 2010 8:55:44 PM

  12. three words: Uganda Rick Warren

    Posted by: New Jersey Boi | Nov 3, 2010 9:14:08 PM

  13. Sorry, Rudy, but you've been out of touch for too long. The vast majority of the new electees are rabid homophobes who are chomping at the bit to smite the homosexuals. They just (wisely) didn't mention much about it in the campaign focusing on the economy/teabagger message. But trust me, it won't take long for the masks to come off.

    Posted by: niles | Nov 3, 2010 9:15:35 PM

  14. .....they'll have the fags and then the Jews and then the Jehovah Witnesses in the gas chambers before you can count to ten.....these people are bigoted and ignorant religious zealots blinded by a belief in some fantasmogorical God thing so reality doesn't count to them.

    Posted by: DavidW | Nov 3, 2010 9:24:17 PM

  15. It's not a "feeling" Rudy. The GOP is anti-gay, period. Fuck off.

    Posted by: B-rod | Nov 3, 2010 9:30:15 PM

  16. Yeah, right. You treated us like lepers in 2008 and now suddenly we're your new best friends. We've all seen how you treat your gay best friends, Rudy. You know, the ones who opened their homes to you during your divorce. The ones who stood by you during your time of need and who defended you even when you couldn't be bothered to shop up at their wedding. You had your shot at the big leagues. Now you're a washed up has-been whose opinion matter to no-one.

    Posted by: Loki7329 | Nov 3, 2010 10:13:58 PM

  17. The problem with voting for the Democrats as the "lesser of two evils" is that you're still choosing evil, and choosing a party that will not do anything for gay rights because they know we have no choice.

    We won't vote for the greater evil, so why should the party expend the political capital necessary to make progress?

    This is why I support withdrawing from politics completely, and focusing on changing the culture. This will make the Republican Party's position on gay rights politically untenable (as it already is becoming), which will hopefully allow the party to try and woo gay voters. If it can accomplish that, then the Democrats will suddenly risk losing their plush urban gay donors.

    Which is what this is all about, anyways. The size of the gay vote is insignificant, especially in liberal urban areas where Democrats hold office. We're significant with our dollars -- which go to the party, which then go to moderate and conservative Democrats in swing districts who use homophobia as a political tool. Yep! I'm sorry! So stop giving them money. Get the hell out of politics and do something where you can make an impact.

    Posted by: Balbo | Nov 4, 2010 12:03:31 AM

  18. which means, rudy giuliani will not be running for the republican nomination again! Or at least if he does, he'll lose miserably again.

    Posted by: Mike C. | Nov 4, 2010 12:12:32 AM

  19. "One of the most craven and disgusting politicians we have in the country. A noun, a verb, and 9/11." - I can't add to what Brian in Texas said above.

    Posted by: Queer Equality Revolution | Nov 4, 2010 12:46:56 AM

  20. ...His administration brought NYC's murder rate down from 2000 a year to 400-500. He made the city much more livable to the point the city's population climbed to the now highest level in it's history at 8.4 million, all drastic changes for the better compared to the bad old days from the late 60's, 70's and 80's. I remember the late 80's and although I personally had a great time as a young kid, everything around me was a disaster and crime and general decay was out of control. It's unfortunate liberal rule, while paying more attention to gay rights issues, has never delivered in my lifetime on quality of life issues the way Giuliani did in NYC.

    ...2000 murders dropped to under 500 under his watch.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Nov 4, 2010 1:11:24 AM

  21. william j. bratton and the introduction of compstat is by far more responsible for the decrease in the murder rate in NYC, and crimes in general, than anything that giuliani did directly, aside from appoint him...which was clearly hit or miss with giuliani as he also appointed that train wreck bernie kerik (that's how involved he was in those decisions). This man is a joke politically, and a pandering hypocrite. He's not even bucking the trend of his own party here, as he's not a viable political candidate, and moreso, isn't an elected official anymore. And no one in his party is going to listen to his effete, wink wink smiling pleas for sanity, and he knows it. Boooring.

    Posted by: TANK | Nov 4, 2010 2:23:06 AM

  22. In fact, positioning himself as a moderate republican (on social issues, anyway...and it is very safe for him to come out against DADT given public attitude) largely serves his personal life. He doesn't hang out with teapartiers or young earth creationists, and has no interest in being a pariah in the circles he travels and wants to continue to travel in...not to deny or minimize that he has his eye on running in 2012, and that his massive ego has probably convinced him that he has a wad of spit's shot in hell of being nominated...but rudy likes to be liked, and no one likes rudy more than rudy like himself.

    Posted by: TANK | Nov 4, 2010 2:32:45 AM

  23. Republicans being pro gay means an actual realistic choice during election....Wouldn;t that be something

    Posted by: kevin dement | Nov 4, 2010 4:11:23 AM

  24. True Tank, but he was ultimately responsible for a lot of real improvements in the city, including hiring and retaining Bratton, another guy with a big ego. That these two big egos managed to get along and accomplish something positive says something.

    Your description of his lifestyle and political influence is also accurate.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Nov 4, 2010 5:48:56 AM

  25. . . . he said to an audience of zero.

    Posted by: justiceontherocks | Nov 4, 2010 6:22:10 AM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Gay Vancouver Couple of 30 Years Win $50 Million Lottery« «