Judging from reader e-mail, righties are pleased with Rudy’s New York Times ad. And I’m a bit of a nattering nabob of negativity for lamenting that his advertising money is going to the New York Times.

Steven:

I don’t think it’s a mistake for Rudy Giuliani to run a pro-Petraeus ad in The New York Times, even if the liberal-biased Times receives money from Giuliani’s campaign. For far too long, President Bush has been ignoring all the lies and distortions written about him in the MSM press (he “doesn’t read newspapers”), but the fact is, many people (swing voters) believe what they read in newspapers, if it is not rebutted in detail by the Administration or Republicans in Congress. Since Giuliani has ample experience in confronting the liberal press as mayor of a Democrat-dominated city, if he was elected President, he would be much more effective than Bush has been at maintaining his own popular support by forcefully rebutting liberal spin, and attracting popular support for other Republican candidates and members of Congress. Any Republican President will always face a hostile press, which must be actively fought from the bully pulpit, not ignored.

Frieda:

I have been sitting on the sidelines not committing to any Republican candidate. Rudy’s move helped me to decide. Rudy once again showed his originality, leadership and guts to go after Hillary. For the first time this year, I went to their site and contributed to his campaign.
Remember he was the first politician to call Arafat a terrorist when that word was not in fashion?

Christian:

First: Although he had to give money to the New York Times, it was best that he publish his response there so that those who saw MoveOn’s message would see a response (not that many readers of the Times care about balance, but at least it’s there. I hope that he got a discount.) Second: Earlier this week NRO had an article by Deroy Murdock lamenting sloppy grammar in the writing and speech of Americans. Unfortunately, he did not mention my pet peeve which is the use of who and whom (fortunately Laura Ingraham does so in her latest book). Guess what is in large font on Rudy’s ad-”Who should America listen to.” It should be “Whom should American listen to” and, if we’re being really picky, “To whom should America listen?”

Kevin:

I don’t get any of my news from the cable news shows and I’ve stopped reading the editorial section of my local paper, the Dallas Morning News. I get the majority of my news from the internet (Drudge, NRO, Hugh Hewitt, LGF, to name a few). I was very upset with the GOP and the stupid immigration bill that Bush and McCain (and Giuliani for that matter) tried to shove down the throats of Americans. And it was obvious that the GOP base was upset too. This week changed that. Regardless of how much the GOP base disagrees with their views on immigration and abortion, Giuliani and McCain scored major points for their defense of Petreaus, their attacks on the Democrats and more specifically, Hillary. For the GOP to win the election in 2008, the War has to be THE issue of the election. The GOP base may not like their views on abortion and immigration, but I’m sure it would rather have either one of them as Commander in Chief during this time of War, than Hillary or Obama.
As for Romney and Thompson, they need to step up to the plate. They came across as amateurs with their spat over the website. While McCain and Giuliani are fighting to make sure America wins the War, Romney and Thompson are acting like children fighting over sandbox.

I guess when calculating the value of the ad in relation to the money sent to the New York Times, we ought to take into consideration the significant amount of coverage it’s generating…