Rudy Giuliani's weasel words on Gun Control.

People, of course, can have honest changes of opinion. But the fact of the matter is that each such instance must be judged individually -- does the candidate show genuine remorse? Was the change of heart genuine? In Rudy's case, the problem is that the Times article portrays him as a person who is prone to fits of tyrannical rage, foaming at the mouth when callers called his radio show to discuss city issues, for instance. The fact of the matter is that like George Bush, Rudy Giuliani is a person who can't handle dissent. His propensity for tyranny shows that his flip-flops are no mere changes of heart, but as part of a crass political calculation to sacrifice his principles and to suck up to the base in order to win the White House.

Giuliani is losing to Clinton and Edwards in pro-gun strongholds like Arkansas and Oklahoma. And keep in mind that the Republican Party has a five-part purity test for its candidates:

--Pro-Gun
--Anti-abortion
--Anti-gay
--Anti-immigrant
--Anti-tax.

Anybody who does not meet five out of these five criteria is not fit to run for President; there are gatekeepers for the Republican Party like Dobson and Norquist and the NRA who ensure that nobody who flunks the GOP Purity Test will get nominated. And it seems like rank and file people are happier with someone like Clinton who is up-front and honest about her support for gun control than they are with people who engage in weasel words of the type that Giuliani is engaged in.

The same dynamic that hurt the Democrats in 2002 and 2004 is now hurting the Republican Party in 2008 -- candidates who do not come out and be honest about where they stand on the issues, but who crawl on eggshells to prove that they were pro-gun before they were against it. Feingold and Durbin, for instance, two candidates who never made any secret about their opposition to the IWR, were easily reelected, while people like Daschle, Clelland, and Carnahan, who voted for the IWR and then tried to turn around and criticise it, were defeated. And now, Rudy is using weasel words and dishonestly describing the reasons why he changed his views on gun control.

First of all, Rudy is distancing himself from a lawsuit that he himself filed against the gun industry along with the Brady Center and was rapped on the knuckles by his own successor, Michael Bloomberg.

Henigan also expressed skepticism about Giuliani's claim that his change of heart on the lawsuit was somehow linked to the September 2001 terrorist attacks. "That's an obvious non-sequitur. It seems far-fetched that we should have weaker federal gun laws because of 9/11. We should be trying to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists."

As mayor of New York, Giuliani was one of the strongest advocates in the country for tighter gun control measures. In a 1995 interview with Charlie Rose, he compared the NRA to "extremists" and described the organization's "defense of assault weapons" as "a terrible, terrible mistake." See video here. Two years later, after a Palestinian opened fire on tourists at the top of the Empire State Building, Giuliani called for tighter gun control laws. He said it was "insane" that the gunman, Ali Abu Kamal, had been able to walk into a gun shop in Florida and buy a Beretta. He continued to speak out in favor of gun control legislation years after 9/11.

And so much so that, from the New York Times, he threw fits of tyrannical rage at anyone who dared suggest otherwise:

"Now the reason why the N.R.A. has lost all credibility is statements like that," he said. "By definition these are attack weapons. They are used for offense. It really is absolutely astounding that the N.R.A. continues to have influence in areas in which they make no sense at all."

In 1994, Mr. Giuliani applauded President Bill Clinton for banning assault rifles and urged Congress to enact physical and written tests and stringent background checks for prospective handgun owners.

And suggest that they get professional help:

"Why don’t you seek counseling somewhere, Bob? I think you could use some help. I can see the direction we’re going in — there are people so upset and so disturbed that they use radios for these sick little attacks on people," Mr. Giuliani said. "I hope you take this in the right spirit, Bob."You should go to a hospital. You should see a psychiatrist."

The Post is not convinced by his 9/11 explination; they give him three Pinocchio Noses for his weasel words and evasion.

And Huckabee delivers a sucker punch to the mayor by highlighting his flip-flopping while seeming to support his switch; from the PolitiFact link:

"One thing I have to admire about Rudy, and he was I think courageous to go to the NRA, because his past positions -- he's sued gun manufacturers. He was supportive of Brady. He was supportive of things like assault weapon bans, which really is a misnomer, because it's really ridiculous to call a semiautomatic weapon an assault weapon."

What this means is that Rudy Giuliani is someone who will say anything to get elected. If that means coming out against the NRA to get elected as New York City's mayor, that means that he will do that. But if that means that he must come out in favor of the NRA so that he can earn the approval of the Republican Party gatekeepers, then he will turn 180 degrees the other way.

And the NRA is not fooled by this flip-flop act any more than Emperor Dobson was fooled by Fred Thompson's claim that he was anti-abortion when he had lobbied for a pro-choice firm at one time. The NRA spokesman in the Post piece did not endorse Giuliani and gave a noncommittal response when asked about his deathbed conversion.

Giuliani has already run afoul of the anti-immigrant gatekeepers for turning New York into a sanctuary city and Emperor Dobson for being pro-choice and pro-gay. The last thing that his campaign needs is to run afoul of the NRA.