Soapbox

It's a grey Gotham Monday, and we've hit the first challenge to the notion that Rudy Giuliani has been transformed from divisive authoritarian to unifying leader. We understand the need that many people have -- having watched him rise beautifully to the desperate occaision -- to see him continue overseeing this city that feels suddenly, horribly insecure.

We've never been term-limits fans here: it's always seemed like an overly artificial restraint on the basic idea of electing whomever we like. But given that it's there, we're not sure we agree with the sudden chorus that says we need his firm hand to remain on the tiller because we've come to depend on it, to see his grave, doggedly calm face on the screen, patiently holding a press conference -- Rudy, patient with the press, patient with what even we recognize are dumb-ass questions, questions the Giuliani of a year ago would have cut off at the knees.

We're rambling here, but everyone we know has a tendency to do that lately. Our point, sort of: nobody's inspired by the candidates running for mayor, left and right. But is a massive upheaval in NY election law a good idea right now? Do we need him that badly? Instead of clinging desperately to what Giuliani has been to us, could we, instead, use what we've seen in him as an example of how to lead ourselves once he's gone?