Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Rudy's Prebuttal Strategy

No image is more important to former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's chances at the Republican nomination (and the presidency) than the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Giuliani rose to national prominence -- and became America's Mayor -- thanks to his performance in the aftermath of those attacks, presenting himself and the city as bent but not broken, still resilient and hopeful despite the best attempts of the terrorists.

It's an image that Giuliani carries with him everyday on the campaign trail and smartly so. He remains extremely popular among not just Republicans but also Independents and Democrats, largely due to his connection to Sept. 11, 2001.

So, it's not terribly surprising that when his actions around and after that fateful day are attacked, Giuliani comes out with both guns a-blazing.

Witness a new video being sent out by the International Association of Fire Fighters to their members nationwide. (washingtonpost.com's Ed O'Keefe got a sneak peek at the video; check it out on our Channel '08 blog.)

And, here's the full video:

Speaking on the video, IAFF president Harold Schaitbarger says that "Rudy Giuilani has used the horrible events of September 11, 2001 to create a carefully crafted persona. The fact is, what Rudy portrays is not a full picture of the decisions made that led, in our view, to the unnecessary deaths of our FDNY members, and the attempt to stop the dignified recovery of those lost."

WOW. Sublety goes right out the window.

Before the video was even publicly released, Giuliani's campaign had issued a detailed pre-buttal -- called a "research briefing" by the campaign -- of it. The essence of Giulian's beef with IAFF is that it is a partisan organization with a history of supporting Democrats for president.

"International Association of Partisan Politics" blares the release from the Giuliani campaign. It also features a quote from a Lee Ielpi, a retired member of the New York Fire Department, who casts the comments by Schaitbarger as totally divorced from the opinion of Giuliani held by the average firefighter. "Rank and file firefighters know the difference between politics and leadership," says Ielpi.

The decision by the Giuliani campaign to get out in front of the story reflects the post-Swift Boats, post-Macaca world of campaign politics. In previous campaigns, responding to a web-based video would have been considered poor form; it would have almost insured the video would get more attention than it might have gotten on its own.

But, in the new viral world of politics, a link is a link. Giuliani's campaign knows that if the video catches on in the world of YouTube and Drudge it could get out of control very quickly. By seeking to discredit the messenger before the video even hits the Internet, the Giuliani campaign hopes it can deaden the impact before it has a chance to grow.

The next 48 hours will show whether their strategy worked.

By Chris Cillizza  |  July 11, 2007; 2:14 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Parsing the Polls: Understanding Independents
Next: Assessing Sen. David Vitter's Political Future

Comments

sabwer ekomcrhix bkovfluxc guyxeabz yrdpk cbvpu qzampjcwh [URL]http://www.bfycego.yoxicznh.com[/URL] jykqxh otxh

Posted by: egzxwsltp ryws | July 25, 2007 7:34 AM | Report abuse

sabwer ekomcrhix bkovfluxc guyxeabz yrdpk cbvpu qzampjcwh [URL]http://www.bfycego.yoxicznh.com[/URL] jykqxh otxh

Posted by: egzxwsltp ryws | July 25, 2007 7:33 AM | Report abuse

qcgvtz ftzwl rbsz xowlahmzb ahcj juecfyz iunm [URL=http://www.clxpghoky.tnvoezuc.com]nflzw ocnjifrs[/URL]

Posted by: xmfan cysew | July 25, 2007 7:31 AM | Report abuse

qcgvtz ftzwl rbsz xowlahmzb ahcj juecfyz iunm [URL=http://www.clxpghoky.tnvoezuc.com]nflzw ocnjifrs[/URL]

Posted by: xmfan cysew | July 25, 2007 7:30 AM | Report abuse

dlqhfc bxdqpe znlyau jsynpbz brpsy tpacihyku xlipmt

Posted by: tzlqnywim crmvtwx | July 25, 2007 7:25 AM | Report abuse

How can the FDNY attack a man of such impeccable credentials?

His Penn campaign mgr busted for bribery
His La campaign mgr confesses to prostitution
His SC campaign mgr arrested for distrib cocaine
His close friend and ex-NYC police chief doing time for public corruption
He's anti trad family, pro disposable wife (married 3x), pro abortion, gay rights advocate
He's anti sovereignty, pro merger Can-USA-Mex, pro gov seizure of 100s thousands sq miles of land for largest private FOREIGN OWNED TOLL HIWAY in world
Tied to mob
No foreign policy experience

Such recommendations, and they dare complain about a few fallen comrades?

Posted by: Johnsona | July 15, 2007 8:39 AM | Report abuse

How dare the FDNY attack a man of such impeccable character?

His Penn campaign mgr busted for bribery
His La campaign mgr confesses to prostitution
His SC campaign mgr arrested for distrib cocaine
His close friend and ex-NYC police chief doing time for public corruption
He's anti trad family, pro disposable wife (married 3x), pro abortion, gay rights advocate
He's anti sovereignty, pro merger Can-USA-Mex, pro gov seizure of 100s thousands sq miles of land for largest private foreign owned toll highway in world
Tied to the mob
No foreign policy experience

Such recommendations, how dare they complain about a few fallen comrades?

Posted by: Johnsona | July 15, 2007 8:32 AM | Report abuse

In addition to all this, is the kind of guy who would announce to his wife that he was leaving her at a press conference the kind of personality we want as a president????

Rudy was lucky to become so famous--he doesn't have what it takes to be a president--in any way. Let's hope the public realizes it.

Posted by: Mama | July 13, 2007 11:14 PM | Report abuse

Razorback-"It was recklessly created by Rudy himself when he was out in the street in the debris while he and the fire fighters and police rushed towards disaster in a way that inspired the whole country."

I hate to break this to you, but the fireman and policemen were racing towards the scene. Rudy was racing from it. One other thing, the only reason he had to run from the scene was because he rejected the advice of others and decided to put his command post at the site of a previous terror attack.

Posted by: squid696 | July 12, 2007 6:12 PM | Report abuse

"It's an image that Giuliani carries with him everyday on the campaign trail and smartly so." Yes, those dresses he wears sure make him look smartly.

Posted by: Roket | July 12, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Colin - I'll try to say something about all of your points.

I don't know about your Pelosi claim, but I'm not willing to assume that this guy will *eventually* be punished. This guy couldn't work at McDonalds after what he's done. Shouldn't we expect that our public leaders should at least pass a background check from Wendy's?

I admit I'm not as well versed in the netroots as you. But they are, by your own admission, the extreme left wing of the party, which still doesn't disprove dem. hypocrisy in general terms.

Vitter is a hypocrit, sure. But don't try to give Clinton a pass. His crime wasn't the affair, but the lying about it, and the obstructing of the investigation - which I believe Vitter spoke out about.

I agree with you, the honorable thing would be to step down.

Posted by: Mike | July 12, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

You know, in reaction to this, one of you fine journalists at the Post could make a break with recent history and, instead of fretting about the "subtlety" of the video or the kind of spin that the Giuliani campaign is putting on it, find out if these charges being made are actually true.

I know, I talk crazy. We do that outside the Beltway, y'know.

Posted by: John R | July 12, 2007 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Digby nails it, as usual.

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Metaphor Reporting

by digby


I realize that the WaPo's Chris Cilliza is writing a blog and not writing for the paper, but I think it's still worth looking at how he approaches the Rudy Giuliani/NYC Firefighters stand-off to get an idea of how these sorts of things are seen by the DC press corps.

Here's part of what Cilizza wrote yesterday:


Giuliani's campaign knows that if the video catches on in the world of YouTube and Drudge it could get out of control very quickly. By seeking to discredit the messenger before the video even hits the Internet, the Giuliani campaign hopes it can deaden the impact before it has a chance to grow.

The next 48 hours will show whether their strategy worked.


Really? That's all it takes?

Again, I recognize that Cilizza is observing the political aspect of the thing and is not actually required to delve into the substance of the matter in every post. (I would hope that someone in the press corps is, however.) But the way he frames it automatically puts it into the category of a Swift Boat smear, which could be completely wrong. (The fact that it's being put out in a viral video is meaningless --- the Swift Boaters put theirs on TV and then got a ton of free air time. The method isn't important.) Ultimately, it's the quality of the charges, and Cilizza has already made the firefighters' charges suspect by putting it in this context.

Most importantly, he's framed the whole issue as one of how well the campaign "pre-butted" the charge, rather than if the charge is actually true. And this one isn't hard to evaluate on the merits. It didn't happen on the Mekong delta 35 years ago --- it happened in NY city six years ago. There's no reason that this should be accepted as a meaningful "test" for Giuliani, certainly not by the press, whose job it is to gather the facts and tell us what they are.

But for some reason, the media has come to habitually weigh the prospective competence and leadership qualities of candidates on the basis of how well they thwart smears. This stands in for real questions of leadership and competence, even in the case of Giuliani, whose entire rationale for running rests on his leadership and competence on 9/11 --- and which is being attacked specifically in this ad. There is no need to substitute his campaign's response for the real thing.

In the larger sense, this is another example of the impulse on the part of political journalists to find metaphors when reality is staring them in the face. I don't know if it's a tick or if they simply don't see that they are missing the point. In this case, it is crystal clear. How Giuliani responds to a viral video is meaningless. How he responds to fetid, poisonous air and the recovery of dead bodies after a terrorist attack isn't. There's no need to go looking for hints of whether he'll be a good president by looking at his campaign operation's competence at rebutting charges. Just go to New York and do some reporting.


.
digby 7/12/2007 12:00:00 PM Comment (0) | Trackback (0)

Posted by: Needles | July 12, 2007 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Judging by the overwhelming number of negative comments directed toward the Republicans and Neocons,like Vitter, Bush and especially Guilani, the trend lines clearly indicate an impending disaster come next elections almost equal as payback for the many disasters that the past 6 years have brought to America.

The unrecognized value of Rudy's grandstanding is to be a stage from which people can be reminded of the irregularities associated with 911: the lack of an honest investigation, demands of the 911 Truth Movement, the firefighters view, and the unhealthy fate of the clean-up crews.

Thanks Rudy, you're accomplishing more that you could ever realize.

Posted by: Don | July 12, 2007 1:34 PM | Report abuse

drindl, someone calling him/herself rpirie said that RG tried to squeeze the widow's fund for his own benefit [5:33p last evening]. Is this true? Do you have a source? rpirie never replied to my question.

lylepink, at 5:34p last night one of the anons posted that Alcee Hastings is a national co-chair for HRC, or some such.
Do you know anything about this? Be forewarned, I despise Alcee Hastings, think he is lower than dirt itself, and would not want any candidate to associate with him.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | July 12, 2007 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Thanks drindl.

The fact that Giuliani put the city terrorism emergency response center on the 23rd floor of the WTC, after the WTC was truck-bombed already, is appalling.

This suggests he is the LEAST likely candidate to protect us from a terrorist attack.

Posted by: Golgi | July 12, 2007 12:06 PM | Report abuse

and if so please state a source.

Posted by: DCWill | July 12, 2007 11:58 AM | Report abuse

reason: are you trying to say that romney organized this attack on Giuliani?

Posted by: DCWill | July 12, 2007 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Is it true that Giuliani put the city terrorism emergency response center on the 23rd floor of the WTC? After the WTC was truck-bombed already?

That would be incredibly dumb. I have a hard time believing that any mayor would do something so dumb. Is it true?'

Yes Golgi, it is. As I have mentioned, I was in NY then. It's one of the many questions and irregularities around Guiliani's behavior on 9/11 which the press largely ignores. It's not surprising, however. Remember that one of rudy's main advisors, was and still is, Bernie Kerik, a man not known for, shall we say, superior judgement.

But then, neither was Rudy, before the 'liberal' press annointed him king.

Posted by: drindl | July 12, 2007 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Mike -- I signed a petition calling for Jefferson to resign, so I agree with you that he shouldn't be in Congress. I've read reports that Pelosi TRIED to get him to resign instead of running for reelection, but he's thus far refused. Given that he's already been stripped of ANY legislative power and WILL eventually go to jail, I actually feel relatively confident that his punishment is going to fit the crime. Assuming that happens, what exactly is the issue?

Also, the netroots, which you seem to be equating with republicans who bomb abortion clincis (which, I might add, means they're murdering people), raised several hundred thousand dollars for Jefferson's primary opponent -- all in small donations -- which I think tends to show we're talking about a substantial group of people. They've also spearheaded efforts to force him to resign, including calling for Jefferson's resignation. Again, I'd invite you to do a little research so you can see how extensive those efforts have been.

Finally, I would simply note that the Vitter situation actually is somewhat unique here in that this guy ran as the protector of "conservative family values" even while he was making frequent trips to multiple brothels. Heck, his web site STILL has a section raging against "hollywood values." That's pretty cynical stuff, at the very least, don't you think? Given that Vitter himself called for Clinton's impeachment over an affair, how can he not resign himself?

Oh, and in case you're wondering I WAS against impeaching Clinton but thought Censure was appropriate and called for. I simmilarly don't think Vitter's offenses warrant REMOVAL from the Senate, but think voluntary resignation would be the honorable thing for him to do. Do you disagree?

Posted by: Colin | July 12, 2007 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Is it true that Giuliani put the city terrorism emergency response center on the 23rd floor of the WTC? After the WTC was truck-bombed already?

That would be incredibly dumb. I have a hard time believing that any mayor would do something so dumb. Is it true?

Posted by: Golgi | July 12, 2007 10:08 AM | Report abuse

To reiterate what Razorback pointed out:

Mr. Cillizza, you need to distinguish between Dr. Ron Paul's attack on foreign policy, and Mr. Giuliani's mangled interpretation. Here is Ron Paul's response to this facile attempt at muddling the issue:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF3NtEWj6ws

Posted by: Javier | July 12, 2007 9:33 AM | Report abuse

'WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Al Qaeda is the strongest it has been since the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a new U.S. government analysis concludes, according to a senior government official who has seen it.

Despite a campaign of military action and counterterrorism operations, al Qaeda has regained its strength and found safe haven in the tribal areas of Pakistan, the report says, according to counterterrorism officials familiar with the report.'

Thanks to the incompetent moron president and his greedy VP we are tied down in Iraq instead of dealing with the perpetrators of 9/11. I hope all you morons who voted for these oil company wh*res are happy now.

When the next attack comes, you have only yourselves to blame.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2007 9:00 AM | Report abuse

"Rudy is a democrat anyway, so isn't it a case of the Dems eating their own...again. They couldn't run a one car funeral without running out of gas at the same time they getting lost."

The structure and lack of clarity of this statement confirms for me once again the wisdom of supporting a Democrat in every election on the ballot next fall.

Why should anyone vote Republican. They getting lost.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2007 8:57 AM | Report abuse

'Rudy is a democrat anyway' -- god you wingers are morons. I guess that's why he's running as a republican, eh?

stupid, stupid, stupid people.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2007 8:56 AM | Report abuse

That's a brilliant post, Newark, with only one minor flaw: Rudy is not a Democrat. You can tell because he's running for president as a Republican. It's an easy mistake to make.

Posted by: Blarg | July 12, 2007 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Oh these repugs. All they want to do is tax, tax, tax, Can't talk about any other solutions to climate changes but higher taxes. Can't you be a little more c reative?

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2007 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Rudy is a democrat anyway, so isn't it a case of the Dems eating their own...again. They couldn't run a one car funeral without running out of gas at the same time they getting lost.

Posted by: Newark | July 12, 2007 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Rudy is a democrat anyway, so isn't it a case of the Dems eating their own...again. They couldn't run a one car funeral without running out of gas at the same time they getting lost.

Posted by: Newark | July 12, 2007 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Rudy is a democrat anyway, so ien't it a case of the Dems eating their own...again. They couldn't run a one car funeral without running out of gas at the same time they getting lost.

Posted by: Newark | July 12, 2007 8:40 AM | Report abuse

I just wish everyone in the media would stop referring to Guliani as "America's mayor"!!! He's certainly not my mayor and was not on 911 either. He managed to perform well on and immediately after 911 but that was more a case of getting out of the way and letting the pros do their jobs. I'll admit he was a genius for taking credit for all of their work though.

Posted by: Mike in Reston | July 12, 2007 8:33 AM | Report abuse

At the end of the day, if you are willing to vote for Rudy on the basis of that day and the fact that he was the Mayor of NY, then nothing will probably stop you.

This is a man with a long career as a prosecutor, with a pretty long career as a Mayor of a major city, with a personal life that is certainly worthy of a look, and who happened to be Mayor of NYC on a disastrous day. If you aren't willing to think about all of those things (and more) as you choose the leader of our country, well then you're one of millions who advertisers love. Go buy some pills that promise to make you taller and better looking !

Personally, I like Rudy. I think he has views on some social issues which are much more reflective of reality than they are of the extremes of either of the major parties. He was a hell of a prosecutor. Do I give him credit for stamping out NY crime? To some extent, I think he made good choices that helped. Do I view him as America's Mayor? No, I'm sorry I don't. I think he performed admirably under the circumstances, I think he probably wishes he could have had the Pre- 911 period back and he might have made some different investments in the city's security... but that's leaning heavily on hindsight.

Remember, Bush seemed like a hero and a great president when he spoke into the bull horn with the firefighters. What we've learned unequivocably is that he is not, and that not even 911 spurred him to make good decisions and appoint good people to handle future catastrophes (ie. Katrina).

We need a President who's made a habit of making good decisions.

Posted by: Rick | July 12, 2007 6:46 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Linda | July 12, 2007 1:03 AM | Report abuse

www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=vaCYEEO-58I

He Is a FRAUD!!!!

Posted by: Linda | July 12, 2007 1:01 AM | Report abuse

This brings to mind the loss of our football team in a plane crash on 14 Nov 70. "We are Marshall" is the movie made here and released 22 Dec 06. Many thought it would take years to field a team, and we did it the next September. A total of 75 lives were lost that day and almost all the team players and coaches. A few were not on the charted flight bringing them home from an away game. For a city of some 50,000 this was a great loss to us, and if memory serves me well, it was the worst loss of life in Sports History.

Posted by: lylepink | July 12, 2007 12:54 AM | Report abuse

Colin--- thanks for the discussion...

...just because "the most liberal" groups ran against him doesn't mean he wasn't accepted by his mainstream dems. In fact, it kind of strengthens the point.

That's kind of like saying that pro-lifers who bomb abortion clinics not liking a republican is proof that the party isn't happy with him. It's just not reasonable.

Moreover, the extreme faction of your party probably just smelled blood and thought they had a chance at a seat if there wouldn't be an incumbant. Seriously man, you haven't proven anything with your "main point".

And members of the black community and the party were the ones speaking out for him, for the so-called blessing he had been to New Orleans, and what a shame it was to lose this guy. Normal dems (if such a thing exists), not leftists. Probably the same folks who would have defended Clinton's purjuries, lies, and affairs.

I never defended Vitter, but I guarantee there's a reason we don't know all the names in that little black book. I guarantee there are dems in that book, and what's more, you guys will defend them.

Finally, you never responded to this - giving up your seat on a committee is a LAME punishment for such a high crime. Are you kidding me? The last thing we need are more congressmen conducting illegal business deals for bribes. This isn't some 3rd world, corrupt nation. He should never serve in public office in any capacity again. Period. And the fact that Nancy stretch face isn't demanding that he resign from congress completely is appauling. Disagree with that?

I don't think Vitter should be in the Senate, and I used to like the guy. But then again, that's always been my point. What's wrong for me is wrong. But for your party, it's not about right/wrong, it's about maintaining power.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 11:26 PM | Report abuse

So the democrats are being blamed for this video before all of the facts are in. This is the Republican primary, which Rudy's numbers have been falling for months within now. Although, in many states he still has an edge. Who in the Republican primary race wants to be known as the "CEO"...Mitt Romney. Bob Perry, billionare of Texas and cheif funder of the Swift Boat Veteran's for Truth, is backing Romney. If all financial's were revealed, I'm guessing Bob Perry is donating to this effort to help the campaign of Romney. He has a history of forming these groups to bash an individual. People believe McCain has self-destructed, although I think that's wrong and McCain is still in to win, time will tell. The target is now Guiliani, and he's a fairly easy target to bring him down within conservative circles. Fred Thompson will be next. Closet homosexual, fake/political marriage, support of censorship in campaign finance, lobbying for abortion rights to George H. W. Bush adm. and more. It's coming. Romney has the money and is able to raise more, as well as donate to himself if need be from his personal money. He also has a great ground organization in the Mormon church, which is basically free for Romney. He has spent on early advertising in New Hampshire and Iowa already, and there is plenty more where that came from. Plus, he has Bob Perry who will put countless dollars into private organizations designed to make Romney's opposition look bad and Romney good. At the end of this thing, I believe the Republican nomination will be Romney vs. McCain. Gulani has been falling since April, and I think that will continue from here on out.

Posted by: reason | July 11, 2007 11:24 PM | Report abuse

While the U.S. government and media keep focusing on defense policies, September 11 and the war in Iraq, 1.2 billion people in the world continue surviving on less than $1 dollar a day. I would like see Rudy Guliani be more supportive of more international affairs that affect our place in this world. We should not forget the commitment made towards the U.N. Millennium Goals (a pact of ending extreme world hunger by the year 2025) in 2000. While the U.S. government and media keep focusing on defense policies and the war in Iraq, 1.2 billion people in the world continue surviving on less than $1 dollar a day. According to The Borgen Project, an annual $19 billion dollars is needed to eliminate half of the extreme poverty affecting the world by the year 2015. To my sense, it is almost unacceptable to have spent so far more than $340 billion in Iraq only, when we have more than war immunities to change the world and eliminate poverty.

Posted by: aileench | July 11, 2007 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Will Rudy get the backing of the Bush and GOP mover-doers if Fred Thompson jumps in?.... even though Nixon thought Fred was dumb. Many said the same of Reagan, a reassuring comparison for Reaganites.

Fred's candidacy could be a bigger hurdle for Rudy than the fire fighters video, or the awkward snubbing by his kids, or the fact that he is much more liberal than the GOP base.

Rudy's resume is much too thin, his ego is much too big and his persona much too NY for midwestern Trumanites... Rudy, a Dewey for his times.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | July 11, 2007 11:01 PM | Report abuse

I hear that F&B. And dana milbank (olberman) was in yale skull and bones. I don't get it.

"All U.S. presidents since 1989 have been Yale graduates, namely George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton (who attended the University's Law School along with his wife, New York Senator Hillary Clinton), and George W. Bush, and Vice President Dick Cheney, (although he did not graduate). Many of the 2004 presidential candidates attended Yale: Bush, John Kerry, Howard Dean, and Joe Lieberman.

Other Yale-educated presidents were William Howard Taft (B.A.) and Gerald Ford (LL.B). Alumni also include several Supreme Court justices, including current Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito."

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_and_bones"

Posted by: rufus | July 11, 2007 10:10 PM | Report abuse

Mike -- If you think Jefferson voluntarily resigned, without presure from Pelosi, you're out of your mind. The Black Caucus was PISSED at Pelosi for insisting that he step down. The Hill had an article on the topic, although I can't find a link to it now.

More important, you didn't even address my primary point -- which was that the MOST LIBERAL segment of the party actively campaigned against Jefferson. Do a search of Daily Kos or MYDD with Jefferson's name. The liberal netroots raised TONS of money with the goal of throwing Jefferson out. Which sort of disproves your point completely, doesn't it?

Posted by: Colin | July 11, 2007 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Did Bush commit ANOTHER felony by refusing to let Miers speak???? read:

Invoking a privilege is one thing, but telling a person not to show up in response to a subpoena -- if only to actually invoke the privilege -- is quite another. It's not just worse, it's a felony under federal criminal law. See for yourself.

18 U.S.C. Sec. 1505 : ... Whoever corruptly ... influences, obstructs, or impedes ... the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress ... [s]hall be fined under this title, [or] imprisoned not more than 5 years ... or both.

18 U.S.C. Sec. 1515(b): As used in section 1505, the term "corruptly" means acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including ... withholding, [or] concealing ... information.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/015273.php

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 9:34 PM | Report abuse

I'm surprised they even let a GOP scumbag like Cilliza on Countdown.

I most loved when he started to say that the firefighter video "might become a PROBLEM for Rudy's campaign", but amended from PROBLEM to "some questions he has to answer" or something like that. Nice catch. Can't make America's Mayor look bad, oh no.

Look at that. A GOP idiot covering for another GOP idiot. Go figure.

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Shame on you Chris for your myopic view of the Paul/Guiliani exchange during the recent GOP debate on May 15th (I just watched you on MSNBC). Immediately after the debate Dr. Paul challenged Mr Giuliani to a debate concerning the issue as to why were were attacked on 911 - a challenge which was never accepted. However, just six days later, Giuliani goes on Hannity's America spews more of the same rhetoric:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,274278,00.html

Perhaps if Mr Giuliani remianed a member of the 911 Commission he would have been aware of the "Blowback" reasoning expounded by Middle East experts such as Michael Scheuer, the former Central Intelligence Agency specialist on bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

The topic of foreign policy is too important to be limited to such a short discourse (and not a one-sided discourse with Sean Hannity). Mr. Giuliani claimed Dr. Paul's statement was absurd, but did not elaborate as to why it was; the American people deserve better than that.

Posted by: Buzz | July 11, 2007 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Please take back your misrepresentation of Ron Paul's comments during the Fox Presidential Debates. Tonight on Countdown you said Ron Paul suggested the U.S. "invited" the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Ron Paul never suggested that. What he did do was have the courage to suggest we, as a country, should ask WHY they attacked us. Please, we need you in the media to help bring us back to the art of truthful inquiry - recognizing the world is a complex, nuanced place.

Posted by: Kerry Prichett | July 11, 2007 9:00 PM | Report abuse

More bad news Paul. Your blog is so marginal that you have to post garbage on here to promote it.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Rudy isn't my mayor and I'm an American who lived in NYC.

Posted by: Greg in LA | July 11, 2007 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Never get into a nationally publicized fight (i.e: calling them "partisan hacks") with firefighters. That's just bad news all around.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: paul | July 11, 2007 7:30 PM | Report abuse

I know there is only one real Rufus, I recognize the writing style and the sillyness.

I jsut with some of the liberals had enough sence to recognize that none of the other right wingers on her is quite like me.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 7:21 PM | Report abuse

You flatter me. Tell the truth for once razor. Stop making a mockery of this website. Tell the truth for once. There is only one rufus. I only saw people using that name once falsly, and I called them on it.

Do I scare you. I know you elderly gop'ers are scared of your own shadow, peeking out the wondows at the neighbors. This is just an anonymous website. Don't be scared.

Posted by: rufus | July 11, 2007 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Rudy Giuliani: Urban Legend

"The Urban Legend of 'America's Mayor' needs to be balanced by the truth."

-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

Deputy Chief Jim Riches, FDNY:

"He's not the hero of 9/11."

-------------------------------------

Rosaleen Tallon, sister of Sean Patrick Tallon, Ladder 10, FDNY:

"He didn't do what was needed."

-------------------------------------

Al Regenhard, Detective Sergeant, NYPD (ret.):

"Giuliani told the 9/11 Commission that some fire fighters got killed because they ignored the order to evacuate. That's despicable."

-------------------------------------

Alexander Santora, Chief of Safety, FDNY (ret.):

"Put the onus where it belongs...[he] hasn't done that."

-------------------------------------

Steve Cassidy, President UFA Local 94, FDNY:

"We could never, never support Rudy Giuliani for president."

-------------------------------------

Jack McDonnell, President, UFOA Local 854, FDNY:

"Effective leadership never existed."

-------------------------------------

Eddie Brown, Trustee, UFA Local 94, FDNY:

"It makes me upset to hear him called a hero."

-------------------------------------

Pete Gorman, Former President, UFOA Local 854, FDNY:

"Rudy Giuliani is no friend of fire fighters."

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 7:18 PM | Report abuse

You liberals could learn from Rufus. His goofy silly liberal is no more rational then the angry mean liberals, but Rufus is amusing.

If Rufus would have been on Air America instead of the mean angry types, it would not have gone bankrupt.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Please identify which of the rufus club is posting right now.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Giuliani is a JERK (remember that one NYers???)

http://www.rudy-urbanlegend.com/

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 7:15 PM | Report abuse

lOOKS LIKE PLAY TIME in the pig pen. Why not tell the truth once. You are making a mockery of yourself Razor. Your making a pig of yourself :)

Posted by: RUFUS | July 11, 2007 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Loudon Voter, what about the crime of perjury? I suppose that doesn't count. I know you have an excuse for that one, other than the rank obvious double standard.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Loudon Voter says:

"Razorback: Unlike Clinton, this pig Vitter has built his career on public moralizing about sexual matters. So public discussion of his proclivity for banging hookers (a crime, by the way, unlike Clinton getting BJs from Lewinsky) is quite appropriate."

Of course. Its obvious. Fair game for R's but not for D's. How rational.

Does it also follow that someone who moralizes about how they have a superior sense of compassion should also be held to a higher standard when they commit an act that shows a complete lack of compassion towards the 2 people they public profess to have the most compssion for? That would be Bill Clinton moralizing about compassion while treating Hillary and CHelsea like crap?

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 7:04 PM | Report abuse

That last global warming post was mine (obviously).

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Judge, you should talk to your leftist friends in Congress. They like to talk about the problem, but are too gutless to talk about the solution, just like Al Gore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/07/washington/07carbon.html

Many economists like the idea of a carbon tax, saying that it would be simple to administer and could profoundly affect energy choices.

But most Democrats are staunchly opposed, saying that a tax would raise the costs of travel, commuting and heating and cooling homes, and that it would be wildly unpopular at a time when voters are already angry about high energy costs. Republicans, they said, would seize on any such proposal as proof that Democrats were bent on raising taxes and increasing the size of government.

Indeed, many Democrats still cringe at the memory of President Bill Clinton's trying to pass a broad "B.T.U. tax" in 1993 on most forms of energy. The measure passed the House but not the Senate, and more than a few Democrats believe the effort was one reason they lost their majority in the House in 1994.

Now, House and Senate Democrats are writing bills that would require factories and power plants to reduce emissions of heat-trapping gases through a so-called cap-and-trade system of mandatory requirements and tradeable pollution credits.

Most of the proposals would impose mandatory limits on the amount of carbon dioxide that companies would be allowed to produce each year, and those limits would become steadily more rigorous over time. A factory or a power plant that is already below the limit could sell its unused allocations to companies that were over the limit.

They dont want the consequences of a carbon tax, so they will impose the costs on industry, and then try to play the game than when utility costs go up, its a greedy corporation, instead of another leftist tax. Cute politics, but dishonest at best.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Look in the mirror. don't attack me. Stop the "you", I'll stop the "rufus"

"GOP fears for credibility after scandals
Lust, predation, hypocrisy. These behaviors were observed in humans, including Washington politicians, even before Republicans roared to power on Capitol Hill in the 1990s.

But the agony of Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) -- a self-proclaimed social conservative exposed Monday night as a customer of an escort service -- is one more float in a long and flamboyant parade of sexual follies and scandals served up by his generation of congressional Republicans. Previous attractions include former House members Newt Gingrich, Henry Hyde, Bob Barr, Bob Livingston and Mark Foley.

Embarrassment for the GOP was entertainment for many others, as people in Washington and around the nation chortled over the latest stubbed toe for a crowd that took power, and held it, in large measure by decrying the decay of traditional values and by issuing censorious attacks on the personal failings of political rivals.

Beyond the chortling, however, the Vitter scandal is a small piece of a much more significant development: The demoralized state of the social conservative movement on the brink of the 2008 election
"It's the hypocrisy that people can't stand," said Michael Cromartie, a social conservative himself who chaired the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom under President Bush. "It's not the fact that people are frail and given to sinful behavior. It's when they try to pretend to be morally upright and end up being self-righteous because they preach one thing and live another."

The gulf between the professed values of conservative political leaders and the way some actually conduct their lives has sapped energy from a movement that was a powerful engine for the Republican Party over the past three decades."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/4873.html

Posted by: rufus1133 | July 11, 2007 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Razor: when ** posted the comment "People in Philadelphia would swelter through as many as 30 days over 100 degrees each summer. The entire Northeast ski industry except western Maine would likely go out of business. And spruce and hemlock forests -- as well as song birds such as the Baltimore oriole -- would all but disappear from New Jersey to the Canada border."

My reaction was "that's going to cost a lot of money." Any environmental disaster will. There is no free lunch here. Both "doing something" and "doing nothing" are going to be very expensive.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | July 11, 2007 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Vitter is probably walking around with a codpiece now, given his idiotic wife's public proclamations that she is more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | July 11, 2007 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Razorback: Unlike Clinton, this pig Vitter has built his career on public moralizing about sexual matters. So public discussion of his proclivity for banging hookers (a crime, by the way, unlike Clinton getting BJs from Lewinsky) is quite appropriate.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | July 11, 2007 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Hey Sarah,

Aparently you don't understand sarcasm or irony. You just attacked one of your own. Nice.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 6:37 PM | Report abuse

' Not anonymous neocon cowards. Get a life or a nickname tool.'

it's kingofzouk... the one wno used to rail against anon. now he posts exactly the same crap, but anonymously.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Sarah, you are equally hilarious. The kinds of things you said should be private with Clinton you don't seem to think should be private any more.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 6:34 PM | Report abuse

'If no "meaningful action" were to be taken against Clinton, Vitter wrote, "his leadership will only further drain any sense of values left to our political culture."

And indeed it did.'

god you repugs are hilarious. Some republican senator is a wh*re, and you blame Clinton. what laughable morons.

Posted by: Sarah. | July 11, 2007 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Btw, also, when I reply to the email, I always ADD a dash then IMPEACH to the subject line so to use an example from John Kerry's latest email, it looks like:

"RE: Just Off the Senate Floor - IMPEACH! NOW NOW NOW."

Also, I try to CC any email addresses that are on the email since sometimes the 'reply to' email addy doesnt accept replies.

I addressed my posts to Dems. Not anonymous neocon cowards. Get a life or a nickname tool.

Thanks all.

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 6:31 PM | Report abuse

'She wants to go back to the 1990s . . .????

Is she Hillary? She doesn't want to go back to the 1990s. She is against free trade.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 6:28 PM | Report abuse

'She wants to go back to the 1990s . . .'

o god, not the long nightmare of peace and prosperity...

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 6:23 PM | Report abuse

What high crimes?

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 6:22 PM | Report abuse

Can I get the ear of all Dems who post regularly on this board (you know who you are), and anyone else too?????

Ok, I am on several email lists as Im sure most of you are.

Please JOIN ME in a campaign of mine.

I am replying to every single email I receive declaring in simple words something like:

"""""""IMPEACH NOW. NOW NOW NOW.

We MUST impeach the President and Vice President for a long list of High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

No more money until you impeach.""""""""

It takes literally 3 seconds to do that and if we get a bunch of people to do it for every email they get from Dem groups, we'd be heard.

Please consider it.

Thank you.

Comments?

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Under no circumstances should anybody equate Guliani's support in his mayoral elections to support in a national election. The mayor of New York City can't appoint a justice to the Supreme Court. He has no military to command. The mayor of NYC doesn't even have a national guard unit to his name.

The point is, people have a far different mindset for choosing a mayor when compared to choosing a chief executive. He is an unknown entity in many ways, though I think he comes off as too much of a smug, bullying type to gain enough support to win the presidency.

Posted by: JamesCH | July 11, 2007 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Whether this story has legs or not, there are about 20 other examples of shady or unethical behavior that Rudy has engaged in that will/should make him unelectable. Check out a recent Vanity Fair article written by beat reporters who covered the NYC mayor's office during Giuliani's time, or the article written by Wayne Barrett in the Village Voice that talks about Rudy giving his typical anti-terrorism speech to Pat Robertson's wacky bunch. Pat Robertson who claims that everyone he disagrees with is responsible for 9/11. Anyone catch the hypocrisy here?

Unfortunately, nothing is really going to change in this country whether Rudy or Hillary is elected. At least spend a little time looking at Ron Paul. I don't agree with everything he says, but he's got the big things right.

Posted by: AC Green | July 11, 2007 6:15 PM | Report abuse

One of the goals of 190 of the UN members is that the US taxpayer foot the bill for whatever corrupt proposal they come up with.

They hate our country and they hate our values, but they love our money.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 6:13 PM | Report abuse

An admirable Presidential candidate is one concerned with foreign affairs. There are policies in place to help end global poverty. The 191 UN member nations agreed to the Millennium Development Goals. One of the eight goals is the eradication of poverty and includes cutting hunger in half by 2015. The issues need to be further addressed by the presidential candidates in order for them to have a successful platform.

Posted by: Alexis | July 11, 2007 6:08 PM | Report abuse

You look at the list of Republican senators voting for the Webb amendment and they all (except maybe Hagel) have one thing in common - RE-ELECTION!!! Re-election is a scary prospect for a Republican these days...

Posted by: nuttmegger | July 11, 2007 6:03 PM | Report abuse

It is warmer this month than last. If this keeps up we're in trouble. I shall attend a concert to think about it.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 6:03 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats and liberals willingly criticise their fellows for what they see as moral and/or judgemental lapses."

Like they did with Bill Mahher, rosie O donnell, etc. how about that blowhard kennedy- the enviro crusader? moore? carter? Kruggman the liar?? Reid??

all ann coulter has to do is quote one of them and they finally make the news, in twisted form.

you are delusional.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Some idiot says:

"These are some of the conclusions of a two-year study by the public interest group Union of Concerned Scientists of the effects of global warming in the Northeast if current greenhouse gas emission patterns around the world continue unabated. Winters will be on average 8 to 12 degrees warmer by the end of the century, and summers 6 to 14 degrees hotter."

You would think that the idiot poster and the conerned scientists would have the intellecual honesty to state what the cost of fixing this problem is.

Do you support Dingell's proposal to raise gas prices 50 by a carbon tax?

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 5:59 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON - Legislation to lower interest rates on student loans and increase aid to poor people who want to go to college won House approval on Wednesday

We Libs like to set prices for things. when the consequences arrive, in this case, skyrocketing tuition, we will do more of the same and blame it on GOPs. We know how much things cost, we are Libs, We know everything.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:57 PM | Report abuse

This story is nothing more than union complaining about management (The Mayor) because management didn't give them more money. This is the same thing some of the Philadelphia unions tried to do to Rendell when he was ronning for PA governor.

Guiliani's 9/11 "image" was not carefully created by PR flacks. It was recklessly created by Rudy himself when he was out in the street in the debris while he and the fire fighters and police rushed towards disaster in a way that inspired the whole country. You do not need a PR flack to create that, it was real.

Posted by: Razorback | July 11, 2007 5:54 PM | Report abuse

"This triggers an automatic response: the charges are false, rigged, jumped up, jiggered, etc."

Yeah right, because the clintons have such a sterling record of raising money. there is little you could report about them that would raise skepticism in most honest, non-moonbat voters about the criminality of their conduct.

A recent poll found that over 55% of voters expect significant corruption if clinton is elected.

But by all means let's compare this to annoying firefighters in a liberal union who got their funds cut.

Only a true moonbat blind Lib could fall for that one. and they do.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

The 5:33p and 5:34p posts caught my eye. rpirie, I sold my house in 1983 to Robert Pirie - are you he? Where is a source for the story that RG tried to squeeze the widows' fund?

|, say it ain't so...I remember Hastings' impeachment and removal as if it were last week. I wrote to Ms. Pelosi in favor of Jane Harmann and against Hastings as Intelligence Chair because a man who took a bribe as a Federal Judge was never going to get a security clearance from the FBI.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | July 11, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Colin is quite correct. Democrats and liberals willingly criticise their fellows for what they see as moral and/or judgemental lapses. I am not the only Democrat who regularly takes swings at Kennedy for accepting bribe money from hi-tech corporations. Jefferson, Murtha, public employee unions and others have all come under criticism for their misdeads and more than a few liberals have worked to defeat them. I contrast this with the pretty much lock step support of conservatives for their fellow conservatives. For liberals it is apparently all about right and wrong and morality, for conservatives it is about winning at any cost.

Posted by: MikeB | July 11, 2007 5:49 PM | Report abuse

05/31/2007
From Newsmax.com:
Giuliani Blasts Hillary's Tax Increase Plan

"She wants to go back to the 1990s . . . It would hurt our economy. It would hurt this area dramatically. That kind of tax increase would see a decline in your venture capital. It would see a decline in your ability to focus on new technology."

"When, oh when, do we elect a D - any D - to turn back the clock "

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:44 PM | Report abuse

06/02/2007
From Newsmax.com:
Hillary Defends Corporate Jet Use

"Is there anyone out there who would say it's good policy for a U.S. senator and presidential candidate to accept apparently tax-free gifts of almost a million dollars from a corporation -- especially a corporation involved in providing lists of vulnerable elderly people to scam artists?

And it's not like the Clintons couldn't afford to buy an air ticket -- the family income since 2001 has been more than $63 million! So why do they have to freeload from rich friends?

Well, evidently Hillary doesn't think that she should be the one to consider whether it makes ethical sense to have rich pals pay for a U.S. senator's family vacations. That's up to "someone else . . .""

...

"Just yesterday, she actually lectured about the need to control corporate pay to executives -- unless, of course, they're providing freebies to her and her family."

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:40 PM | Report abuse

"When, oh when, do we elect a D - any D - to turn back the clock "

that is so true Judge. no sense dealing with the present.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse


Too bad the "problem" wasn't stopped in February 1993 -- gee, who was Prez then???

Posted by: Tired of it all | July 11, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

If no "meaningful action" were to be taken against Clinton, Vitter wrote, "his leadership will only further drain any sense of values left to our political culture."

And indeed it did.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:36 PM | Report abuse

"the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT said Friday"

This triggers an automatic response: the charges are false, rigged, jumped up, jiggered, etc.

Welcome to morning in Antonio Gonzales' America. I'm sure that the GOP poster is wonderfully proud that their party has turned this once-respected, once vital part of our democracy into political kabuki theater. When, oh when, do we elect a D - any D - to turn back the clock at Justice?

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | July 11, 2007 5:34 PM | Report abuse

06/08/2007
From Captain's Quarters:
The Culture Of Corruption, Presidential Version

In the words of Fark.com:
Hillary taps Alcee Hastings as her national campaign co-chair; his resume boasts a federal bench seat, FBI bribes, perjury charges and 17 impeachment counts. Look out, culture of corruption: The Dems are coming

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:34 PM | Report abuse

has everyone forgotten Giuliani's barefaced attempt to use the fund established by the City for the widows and children of the firemen lost on 9/11 as a parking lot for his cronies and himself at high salaries which was only stopped when the widows went public with their outrage?

Posted by: rpirie | July 11, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

has everyone forgotten Giuliani's barefaced attempt to use the fund established by the City for the widows and children of the firemen lost on 9/11 as a parking lot for his cronies and himself at high salaries which was only stopped when the widows went public with their outrage?

Posted by: rpirie | July 11, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

has everyone forgotten Giuliani's barefaced attempt to use the fund established by the City for the widows and children of the firemen lost on 9/11 as a parking lot for his cronies and himself at high salaries which was only stopped when the widows went public with their outrage?

Posted by: rpirie | July 11, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

06/10/2007
From Newsmax.com:
Hillary Clinton: I Play Pickup Basketball

"Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton loves to tell whoppers. Her latest: she has played "pickup basketball." ...

Among Hillary's more hilarious claims:

She was named after Sir Edmund Hillary. who climbed Mount Everest.

She was a Yankees fan when she lived in Chicago.

She told upstate New Yorkers she had been a "duck hunter."

She claimed on Sept. 11 daughter Chelsea was jogging around the World Trade Center."

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

"Hey Mike -- not sure WHAT you're talking about buddy. First of all, the most LIBERAL wing of the Democratic party, the netroots, actively campaigned against Jefferson this past election cycle, raising a TON of money for the woman who challenged him. Pelosi stripped him of all of his committee assignments. That seems like pretty forceful reaction to me. As far as the GOP rebuking Vitter, all I've heard so far is that "we all make mistakes" (Tom Coburn), and "sometimes people disapoint you" (Rudy).

Help me again with your point?"

Factually incorrect. Pelosi had nothing to do with him losing his committee assignment.

He voluntarily stepped down.

The only thing Pelosi did was RELUCTANTLY ask the ethics committee to create a special sub-committee to look into this. Of course, this only came after extreme pressure from Republicans, and after the Democrats had unanimously voted for him to join the Homeland Security Committee in the first place.

And no, stepping off a committee is not an unbelievably harsh thing to do after taking $500,000 in bribes. He shouldn't be allowed to step another foot in Congress again, and most reasonable people would agree. But not a Democrat.

And I agree with Rudy. Vitter is a bitter disappointment.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

06/21/2007
From Newsmax.com:
Ralph Nader Calls Hillary a 'Coward'

Nadar said "She is a political coward," he said. "She goes around pandering to powerful interest groups on the one hand and flattering general audiences on the other.

"She doesn't even have the minimal political fortitude of her husband."

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

People in Philadelphia would swelter through as many as 30 days over 100 degrees each summer. The entire Northeast ski industry except western Maine would likely go out of business. And spruce and hemlock forests -- as well as song birds such as the Baltimore oriole -- would all but disappear from New Jersey to the Canada border.

These are some of the conclusions of a two-year study by the public interest group Union of Concerned Scientists of the effects of global warming in the Northeast if current greenhouse gas emission patterns around the world continue unabated. Winters will be on average 8 to 12 degrees warmer by the end of the century, and summers 6 to 14 degrees hotter.

Posted by: ** | July 11, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

People in Philadelphia would swelter through as many as 30 days over 100 degrees each summer. The entire Northeast ski industry except western Maine would likely go out of business. And spruce and hemlock forests -- as well as song birds such as the Baltimore oriole -- would all but disappear from New Jersey to the Canada border.

These are some of the conclusions of a two-year study by the public interest group Union of Concerned Scientists of the effects of global warming in the Northeast if current greenhouse gas emission patterns around the world continue unabated. Winters will be on average 8 to 12 degrees warmer by the end of the century, and summers 6 to 14 degrees hotter.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

In preparation for submitting the just released video of Hillary Clinton engaging in various felonies to the California Appellate Court, and reviewing Hillary's protection by California's Anti-SLAPP law in Paul v Clinton et al., election law expert and US Supreme Court/Constitutional Lawyer John Armor, determined on June 14, 2007, after analyzing the video of Hillary Clinton on a conference call with Peter Paul, Stan Lee, et al, that the video captures Hillary engaged in a series of felony violations of the law.

Posted by: only one felony - getting old | July 11, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

he has some sort of perverse obsession with zouk, who refuses to allow him to get away with his lies on an ongoing basis.

Posted by: zouk outs himself LOL | July 11, 2007 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton's Former Campaign Finance Director Indicted
Money - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's former finance director has been indicted on charges of filing fictitious reports that misstated contributions for a Hollywood fund-raising gala for the senator, the Justice Department said Friday

Posted by: biz as usual, its a clinton | July 11, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

The Giulani camp is right to blast the IAFF for their partisanship. Like many of the other dinosaurs in organized labor, Harold Schaitberger fancies himself some kind of king-maker. For any union who remains a member of the AFL-CIO to say they are non-partisan is laughable. They remain, as ever, an ATM for the Democrat party.
Schaitberger cares more about getting his mug on TV and in the newspaper than he does about representing the hard-working rank & file members of the IAFF. Witness the number of times he was practically standing on top of John Kerry at media events during the '04 presidential election. As soon as the IAFF endorsed Kerry, Harold was a regular fixture on stage, always standing just over Kerry's shoulder.
An attack from this guy won't stick. He does not speak for the majority of firefighters or, I dare say, his members.

Posted by: LA | July 11, 2007 5:26 PM | Report abuse


'98 Vitter OpEd Calls For Clinton Impeachment "Because He Is Morally Unfit To Govern"

In considering impeachment, Vitter asserted, Congress had to judge Clinton on moral terms. Decrying the law professors' failure to see this, Vitter observed, "Is that the level of moral relatively [sic] and vacuousness we have come to?" If no "meaningful action" were to be taken against Clinton, Vitter wrote, "his leadership will only further drain any sense of values left to our political culture."

So I'm sure he'll be stepping down now, right? What monstrous hypocrites repugs are...

Posted by: Sarah. | July 11, 2007 5:25 PM | Report abuse

proudtobeGOP writes
"I have a feeling that Palfreys' list has fairly bipartisan representation."

Nah. Most dem's can't afford $300/hr.

Posted by: bsimon | July 11, 2007 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Think about it. More than 70 months after Bush took office, Beltway reporters are still clinging to anonymous Bush aides for the most basic information and granting them anonymity in exchange for providing so-called inside (i.e., fawning) details. This is the box the press corps finds itself trapped in after allowing the Bush White House to re-write the news media rules when the administration first set up shop in 2001.

Posted by: ** | July 11, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

U.S. Senator David Vitter visited a Canal Street brothel several times beginning in the mid-1990s, paying $300 per hour for services at the bordello after he met the madam at a fishing rodeo that included prostitutes and other politicians, according to Jeanette Maier, the "Canal Street Madam" whose operation was shut down by a federal investigators in 2001.

After they met, Maier said Vitter became a regular customer at the Mid-City brothel.

Posted by: teehee | July 11, 2007 5:19 PM | Report abuse

And so it begins. I expect that the Giuliani candidacy will continue to tarnish under such accusations.

Perhaps this ad won't kill his candidacy. Nor will the next one. But he won't last long enough to be nominated.

Posted by: bsimon | July 11, 2007 5:18 PM | Report abuse

U.S. Senator David Vitter visited a Canal Street brothel several times beginning in the mid-1990s, paying $300 per hour for services at the bordello after he met the madam at a fishing rodeo that included prostitutes and other politicians, according to Jeanette Maier, the "Canal Street Madam" whose operation was shut down by a federal investigators in 2001.

After they met, Maier said Vitter became a regular customer at the Mid-City brothel.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:16 PM | Report abuse

"It's hilarious that random Bush-hating outbursts have to infect every conversation a dem is involved in. I'm not sure what the former surgeon general's opinion about G.W.B. has to do with thisi discussion about Rudy..."

That is our old friend ignorant coward, his self-proclaimed mission in life is to find anything, anywhere that smacks of negativity and then rendering his service by posting it here for all to see. He is incapable of independent thought or rationality. he is alive to spout venom and throw insults. he has some sort of perverse obsession with zouk, who refuses to allow him to get away with his lies on an ongoing basis. He is why bloggers in general and Libs in particular are considered completely nuts.

We mostly ignore him and he goes back to Kos after a while, after filling up the page with his "reports" on the world.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Hey Mike -- not sure WHAT you're talking about buddy. First of all, the most LIBERAL wing of the Democratic party, the netroots, actively campaigned against Jefferson this past election cycle, raising a TON of money for the woman who challenged him. Pelosi stripped him of all of his committee assignments. That seems like pretty forceful reaction to me. As far as the GOP rebuking Vitter, all I've heard so far is that "we all make mistakes" (Tom Coburn), and "sometimes people disapoint you" (Rudy).

Help me again with your point?

Posted by: Colin | July 11, 2007 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Advocates of the 2003 tax cuts frequently emphasize that the economy's performance improved around the time that these tax cuts were enacted, and they imply that the tax cuts caused the improvement in the economy. But as nine out of ten prominent economists told the New York Times in a recent informal survey, the economy's improvement was most likely attributable to factors other than the tax cuts.[3]

Asked to name the main reason for stronger growth after 2003, several economists cited "super-low interest rates caused by the Federal Reserve." Others chalked the growth up to the "regular business cycle," with economist Robert Hall of the Hoover Institution pointing out that, "the U.S. economy recovered from every single recession it ever had, so the growth in 2003-2006 was generally part of the normal cyclical recovery."
The 1990s recovery provides a useful comparison. Like the current recovery, the 1990s recovery was initially relatively weak, with investment growth in particular resuming only about eighteen months into the recovery. But in the 1990s, investment growth recommenced without any tax cuts -- and then strengthened modestly following a tax increase. Moreover, overall investment growth during the 1990s business cycle, with its large tax increases in 1990 and 1993, was substantially stronger than during the current business cycle, with its large tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. If major economic developments were generally attributable to tax policy, then the 1990s experience could lead one to conclude that tax increases provide more potent economic stimulus than tax cuts. The more appropriate lesson to draw, however, is probably that weak recoveries tend to return to historical norms, whether taxes are cut, increased, or left unchanged.
There is particular reason to doubt that the capital gains and dividend tax cuts were responsible for the 2003 economic improvement given that these tax cuts were not expected to yield short-run economic gains. For example, conservative economist and Nobel Laureate Gary Becker, a strong supporter of the dividend tax cut, wrote that it "will not yield immediate benefits... Any short-run stimulus from eliminating the dividend tax would be too weak to have a significant benefit to the economy."[4]

Posted by: ** | July 11, 2007 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Since supporters of the capital gains and dividend tax cuts routinely appeal to the economic and revenue growth of the past few years as evidence of these tax cuts' success, one might assume that the recent economic performance has been stronger than typical. In fact, the opposite is the case.

Growth in key indicators such as the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), non-residential investment, wages and salaries, and employment has been below average during the current economic expansion, relative to previous post-World War II expansions. (See Figure 1.) The current recovery has also been weaker overall than the equivalent period of the 1990s, during which there were tax increases rather than tax cuts.

Posted by: ** | July 11, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

With the fourth anniversary of the 2003 capital gains and dividend tax cuts just past and the Office of Management and Budget's Mid-Session Review released today, supporters of making these tax cuts permanent are reiterating their claim that the tax cuts boosted the economy and increased federal revenues. For example, a release from the Senate Republican Policy Committee contends that the tax cuts "contributed to today's strong pro-growth economy" and "have also led to a surge in tax receipts" and that allowing these tax cuts to expire as scheduled would "have devastating consequences for the economy."[1]

Claims like these raise three basic questions. First, has the economic and revenue growth of the past few years really been unusually strong? Second, are there good reasons to think that the capital gains and dividend tax cuts caused whatever economic and revenue growth has occurred, as opposed to just coinciding with it? Third, would extending these tax cuts boost economic and revenue growth on a longer-term basis?

The last four years of data, as well as some important new academic research, suggest that the answer to each of these questions is No.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Whereas Republicans are critical of Republicans and condemn this kind of immoral behavior, Democrats can do nothing but defend their own injustices.

I haven't heard a single conservative voice come to the defense of Sen. Vitter. But what happens when Congressman William Jefferson (of the same state) gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar taking $90,000 worth of bribes? Well, he did so much for the people of Louisiana during Katrina that we should just give him a pass. After all, it would be a shame for such a good public servant to face charges.

Of course Vitter is a scumbag.

That's not a debate.

But to claim 1 bad apple represents the whole is pretty sophomoric, not unlike drindl claiming to represent the entire Democratic party because he went door-to-door a few times.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Republicans Kill Webb's Troop-Protection Amendment
We didn't need any further proof that Congressional Republicans really don't give a damn about the troops or their families but we just got it in the United States Senate anyway.... Senate Republicans succeeded in a filibuster in which they refused to end debate on Virginia Democrat Jim Webb's S. 2012, which would have placed limits on National Guard and reserve deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan as well as mandating more downtime at home before active-duty combat troops are returned to battle.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

As anticipated, Sen. Jim Webb's troop-readiness amendment just failed to overcome a GOP filibuster, garnering 56 votes, just four shy of the needed 60. But Webb did manage to peel off seven GOP votes:

Chuck Hagel (co-sponsor)
Olympia Snowe
Susan Collins
Gordon Smith
John Sununu
John Warner
Norm Coleman

That Warner and Sununu especially joined the Democrats will certainly give the White House pause in advance of the next round of Iraq amendments.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:06 PM | Report abuse

I am zouk, an utter moron who comes here to drool

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:05 PM | Report abuse

bequeath to his successor such a difficult agenda

that tends to happen when you are viciously attacked and take measures to defend the nation. Of course if you do nothing, Dems will cheer you. here is a list of their proposals for the country on the problems that face us:
education - spend more, do nothing
retirement - raise taxes, do nothing
health care - ruin it for everyone
military - do less, then do nothing
environment - spend more, ignore costs, do nothing about science, its settled

If you doubt me look at the record of nothing since they took over congress. that is their legacy and their plan.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 5:04 PM | Report abuse

proud: If Vitter was just some hack banging hookers, the story would blow over quickly. It's the fact that he is a bible-thumping, holier-than-thou blowhard that give it legs.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | July 11, 2007 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Courtesy of Not Very Bright, we found this interesting quote from Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) in today's Washington Post regarding Sen. David Vitter's implication in the DC Madam scandal:

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), approached by a group of reporters outside the lunch, offered an unexpected defense. "All of us have to look at it and say that we could be next," he said in answer to a Vitter question. "We all think that we're not vulnerable to something like that happening, but the fact is this can be a very lonely and isolating place."

LOL -- how many R's will get nailed on this one? Sanctmonious frauds.

Posted by: Steven | July 11, 2007 4:59 PM | Report abuse

"Carmona has thus become the latest in a string (the WP has a good rundown) of officials who have said that political considerations take precedence over scientific facts at the Bush White House."

It's hilarious that random Bush-hating outbursts have to infect every conversation a dem is involved in. I'm not sure what the former surgeon general's opinion about G.W.B. has to do with thisi discussion about Rudy...

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

I am drindl, I don't have to make sense. I make proclamations.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON -- The 44th president will move into the Oval Office with an agenda defined in large part by the 43rd president.

In many ways, it will be George W. Bush's third term.

Among pressing issues left on the table: What's next in Iraq. How to restore America's reputation around the world. Whether to extend tax cuts that expire in 2010. What to do about Medicare's looming shortfall. And how to complete the job of helping the Gulf Coast recover from Hurricane Katrina.

No new president gets a clean slate -- global politics and the economy don't run in neat four-year cycles -- but presidential scholars say the unfinished business Bush will leave for his successor is unprecedented since at least World War II.

"I can't think of a single modern president about to bequeath to his successor such a difficult agenda and such a damaged presidency," says Paul Light of New York University.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

I thought if it was just s*x it was fine and dandy with you Libs? try to find a single moral you can all agree on and stick with. you clearly have problems with deciding what is corrupt and what is not, what is campaign fraud and what is not, what is fundraising (budhist temple doesn't count), what is a vote for war, etc. can you just change your minds on everything at a whim and expect to get away with it? Only with your fellow moonbats. they don't think about right and wrong, only left and right and we all know left is not right.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

As more troops have moved into Baghdad neighborhoods, they continue to face a barrage of attacks and "have been unable to establish security, even for themselves," says the LAT. Iraqis who live in mixed neighborhoods continue to leave their homes on a massive scale.

The LAT points out inside that Bush once again talked about the fight in Iraq as a battle against "the same people that attacked us on September the 11th."

Posted by: he never stops lying | July 11, 2007 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Some Democrats must like Rudy.

Long before 9/11, he was elected mayor in a city where Democrats outnumber Republicans by a substantial amount. Then re-elected.

You can have opinions, but the facts say that a lot of Democrats suppported Rudy with votes - before 9/11.

Posted by: Neil | July 11, 2007 4:53 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON -- As President Bush struggles to maintain support in Congress for his Iraq "surge" strategy, the three leading Republican presidential contenders have been quietly backing away from any commitment to continue the buildup.

Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson have made it clear that their original support for the escalation does not mean they are signed on to keeping the current 160,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, even as they have laid out hawkish positions on other aspects of foreign policy.

Their recent moves underscore the president's growing isolation on Iraq as the GOP begins searching for a post-Bush foreign policy.

Posted by: seeing the light | July 11, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

analysis of the vote showed that Giuliani made modest gains in his share of the African American vote (20% compared to 5% in 1993, while benefitting from lower turnout overall) and Hispanic vote (43% from 37%) while maintaining his solid base of white and Jewish voters from 1993.[55]

going to beat hillary easily. stealing Dem base voters in NY.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

The New York Times leads with Dr. Richard Carmona, the surgeon general from 2002 until 2006, telling Congress that the Bush administration frequently tried to shape his public statements so that they would fit its political goals and prevented him from speaking out about several issues. Carmona has thus become the latest in a string (the WP has a good rundown) of officials who have said that political considerations take precedence over scientific facts at the Bush White House.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

loudon - I think Rudy should relieve him of his duties as regional campaign chairman for the South, even though one of the ladies said "he is a decent guy. He's not a freak." Whatever. I think his wife should dump him too, but that's her decision.

I have a feeling that Palfreys' list has fairly bipartisan representation.


Posted by: proudtobeGOP | July 11, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

ignorant coward: "jeezus ignorant coward, what a childish moron you are."

jeezus ignorant coward, it's pretty funny that you're more upset with some idiotic poster than with a sanctimonious hypocrite like David Vitter who is using his public salary to patronize prostitutes.


Posted by: Not Ignorant Coward | July 11, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Rudy claims he is an "expert" in combating terrorism just by walking the streets of NYC on 9/11. If I extend that analogy I am an expert in car collisions since I was involved in one sometime back.

Posted by: Gan | July 11, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

'there was a lot of anomisity to begin with between him and every department, including police and fire,"

Maybe it came from telling them they don't have unlimited budgets. I can't wait for President Rudy to tell the Libs the same thing.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

That wacky David Vitter,
Loved to do me in the sh....r

Posted by: Vitter's Hooker | July 11, 2007 04:02 PM


jeezus ignorant coward, what a childish moron you are.


Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Giuliani later served two terms as Mayor of New York City (1994-2001)

how can that be if drindl didn't like him. how can someone so despised win a second election. Must be the magic GOP fairy. I wonder if she likes Bush.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Mayor Bloomberg In DC To Fight For Gun Control

Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York City and potential independent candidate for president in 2008, is in the nation's capital fighting for stricter gun control. Bloomberg is working to get illegal guns off the street.

http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/mayor-bloomberg-in-dc-to-fight-for-gun.html

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:41 PM | Report abuse

jeezus zouk, what a childish moron you are.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 4:37 PM | Report abuse

'and they were not prepared for the catastrophic nature of the terrorist attack.'

I WAS THERE. I don't need to be told what it was like. The fact that they were not prepared is the point. New York has had its share of 'events' -- including a couple of fairly catastrophic ones, iike skyscraper fires. Any big city should be prepared for catastrophes-- they happen.

But Guiliani was not. For one thing, he was a bully and there was a lot of anomisity to begin with between him and every department, including police and fire, and he had no respect for them. He fought with everyone.

Posted by: drindl | July 11, 2007 4:33 PM | Report abuse

"The radical Muslim extremists who flew planes into the Twin Towers are responsible for the deaths of innocents. Not the mayor. "


Wrong, it was Bush/chaney/zouk. they conspired to kill americans so they could justify sole source contracts to Halliburton and steal the election. rosie told me so it must be true.

Posted by: typical Dem | July 11, 2007 4:29 PM | Report abuse

So is Rudy questioning the integrity of the people who climbed *up* those towers he's so proud fell on his watch?

Posted by: Okay | July 11, 2007 4:25 PM | Report abuse

hey proudtobeGOP: Care to comment on your boy David Vitter? We all want to see what defense you can mount on his behalf.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | July 11, 2007 4:25 PM | Report abuse

The firefighters say Rudy made mistakes. Rudy disagrees. Who's right?

This should be pretty easy to figure out, right? Just take the claims made by the firefighters and compare them to the facts, and you know who's right. Rudy made some claims also, about the IAFF being partisan. Is he right?

The media always reports these stories the same way: "One side says X, the other side says Y. In our next story..." There's never any context. The two sides are making contradictory claims; one of them must be correct. Why doesn't the media do some real reporting and talk about the facts, instead of hearsay from both sides? It's the Swift Boat Veterans all over again.

Posted by: Blarg | July 11, 2007 4:22 PM | Report abuse

"The police and fire deparmtnet couldn't talk to each other... "

That doesn't mean that even with more radios they could have communicated in a disaster of unparallelled proportions.
Cell phones service was down, the airwaves were scrambled, there was a huge crush of radio traffic, mass confusion citywide, and reports have stated that this MAY have hampered rescue operations. Nothing was working normally, and they were not prepared for the catastrophic nature of the terrorist attack.

It is impossible to say with any certainty that fewer people would have died, let alone many fewer people, if there had been more radios.

The radical Muslim extremists who flew planes into the Twin Towers are responsible for the deaths of innocents. Not the mayor.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | July 11, 2007 4:20 PM | Report abuse

MikeB:

"Their ads...are filled with lies"
Indicate specifically what you're talking about. Where are these lies?

"I hope the State Of New York and taxpayers take note and take a chainsaw to pay and benefit incrases for union members."
Public servants who put themselves at enormous risk to save human lives should have "a chainsaw" taken to their wages because of their political outlook? That would be a pretty striking abuse of power on the part of the state.

Posted by: sdm | July 11, 2007 4:19 PM | Report abuse

You've gone door-to-door, so that justifies your assertion.

It's not about his popularity in absolute terms. There aren't hordes of dems lined up to vote for Rudy.

But that's not CC's point, which you attacked him for.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

That wacky David Vitter,
Loved to do me in the sh....r

Posted by: Vitter's Hooker | July 11, 2007 4:02 PM | Report abuse

'This is an absolutely meritless argument. It is absurd to state that many fewer would have died if they had better or more radios. You don't know that! '

Everyone who was there and followed events closely knows that. The police and fire deparmtnet couldn't talk to each other... it was a debacle.

And why on earth did Rudy establish a command center in the Twin Towers, after it had already been subject to an attack? People questioned that even before 9/11. It wasn't like we weren't aware in NY that another attack was possible.

Posted by: drindl | July 11, 2007 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 3:51 PM | Report abuse

'I'm not sure who died and made you the spokesperson for your party...'

I have worked during elections for years, at the district, state, and national level, in various capacities, for the Dem party, I have gone door to door, I have gone to a million meetings, I have written speeches, ads and strategy, I am on many mailing lists -- I know a few Democrats, okay. And I can tell you that I have never met one who would vote for Guiliani.

But Judge, you may very well be right about nobody outside of NY caring.

Posted by: drindl | July 11, 2007 3:51 PM | Report abuse

drindl says "If it were not for Guiliani's budget cuts, which cost the police and fire deparment good equipment [like radios] that would have meant many fewer people would have died."

This is an absolutely meritless argument. It is absurd to state that many fewer would have died if they had better or more radios. You don't know that! Nobody can know that, and it is speculative at best to extrapolate the effect of budget cuts that were part of an overall strategy for fiscal discipline onto the events of 9/11 that were catastrophic beyond anyone's imagination.

As I have stated before, I think there are some decisions Rudy made that can be called into question, but this is not one of them.

Additionally, the mayor did not act in a vacuum in NYC. The City Council also was directly involved in budget decisions, and they did not take issue with Giuliani's budget going back to 1997, which included cuts at city agencies.

Going back to 1993, New York City Fire Commissioner, Carlos M. Rivera, suddenly resigned, accusing senior mayoral aides (of David Dinkins) of being anti-Hispanic and of trying to dismantle the Fire Department through budget cuts.

Within hours of submitting his letter of resignation, Mr. Rivera endorsed Rudolph W. Giuliani.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | July 11, 2007 3:50 PM | Report abuse

'I'm a Democrat

I don't like Rudy

Therefore, Rudy is not popular with Democrats'

I guess the concept of relativity is new to you.

I think CC's point is that Rudy is relatively popular with democrats, compared to say, a Mitt or a Fred.

Come on, you get abortion, stem cells, and a host of other wins that you wouldn't get otherwise.

I'm not sure who died and made you the spokesperson for your party...

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Giuliani is a FRAUD.

Posted by: F&B | July 11, 2007 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Now, now, Drindl I'm sure that some of CC's best friends are Democrats.

Do you think that anyone outside of NY State cares about this now?

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | July 11, 2007 3:34 PM | Report abuse

'This has Clinton written all over it. Let the muckraking begin.'

what a scumbag you are, little gopie. you got nothing to say, so bash a clinton. you people are so amazingly predictable. and tedious.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2007 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Man, CC your partisan defense of Rudy and bashing of firefighters is quite stunningly blatant. And you are VERY wrong about Rudy being popular with Democrats -- especially those of us who were in New York on 9/11. Yes he was fine that day -- he stepped up to the plate when there was absolutely no other leadership -- when bush and cheney and pataki were cowering in bunkers. But he made some very questionable decisions, between himself and Bernie Kerik.

But the fact remains that since then, all he has done has gotten very wealthy on it.

And the firefighter's quote is quite accurate. If it were not for Guiliani's budget cuts, which cost the police and fire deparment good equipment [like radios] that would have meant many fewer people would have died.

'The fact is, what Rudy portrays is not a full picture of the decisions made that led, in our view, to the unnecessary deaths of our FDNY members, and the attempt to stop the dignified recovery of those lost."

He already had a defense planned for this occasion, BECAUSE HE KNOWS THE CHARGES ARE TRUE.

And this is a LIE:

'He remains extremely popular among not just Republicans but also Independents and Democrats, largely due to his connection to Sept. 11, 2001.'

He is certainly NOT popular with democrats -- wans't while he was mayor, and certainly isn't now. His brutal authoritarianism, his massive ego, his hatre4d for the first amendment -- he was a rotten mayor.

Don't you ever get away from the republican Beltway Bubble? Have you ever met an actual Democrat?

Posted by: drindl | July 11, 2007 3:29 PM | Report abuse

I think this whole image of being strong on security/tough on terrorism is the only thing he's got going for him in conservative's eyes. He was late and faily non-responsive to the amnesty bill, and his social beleifs are hard to forgive. I just don't think he's going to make it to the nomination.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2007 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Too late, Rudy. You've been outed, dude, and the truth is not pretty. You used 9/11 to pull yourself out of abysmal ratings but you're not going to be allowed to ride that into the White House.

The real you is going to be paraded before the U.S. until there is no doubt.

See you on YouTube, Rudy, along with millions of other watchers.

Posted by: reporter1 | July 11, 2007 3:18 PM | Report abuse

The real question is, which dem candidate has Schaitberger in the bag? He was a John Kerry co-chair in 2004, and he only donates to Democrats. This has Clinton written all over it. Let the muckraking begin.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | July 11, 2007 3:18 PM | Report abuse

I fail to see how anyone can justify these "Swift Boat" tactics. The firefighters union has made a mockery of any claims to morality or honesty or decency. Their ads, and I'm not Guiliani fan, are filled with lies and distortions and half truths. I hope the State Of New York and taxpayers take note and take a chainsaw to pay and benefit incrases for union members.

Posted by: MikeB | July 11, 2007 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I'd hope to hear soon on your analysis of the events re. Senator Vitter. Thanks

Posted by: Bob | July 11, 2007 3:11 PM | Report abuse

If Rudy is right, then you won't hear anything from individual, normal firefighters about this, or, you will hear lots of individual, normal firefighters speaking out against the video.

If the videomakers are right, then lots of individual, normal firefighters will speak up to agree with the video.

This is different from Swift Boat because there were not that many people actually on the boat. But NY is full of firefighters who all have an opinion. So in the end the real scoop will make itself known.

Posted by: Golgi | July 11, 2007 2:48 PM | Report abuse

"By seeking to discredit the messenger before the video even hits the Internet, the Giuliani campaign hopes it can deaden the impact before it has a chance to grow. The next 48 hours will show whether their strategy worked."

What data do you have that suggests that the IAFF video has made/will make any difference? Are people really paying that much attention? Maybe in NYC/NYS (Drindl?) but does the rest of the country really care?

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | July 11, 2007 2:46 PM | Report abuse

What did the firefighters say that was incorrect? Rudy can't claim the presidency because he was the mayor of NYC at such a terrible hour! Although getting in front of the story & mass video release is a wise move, the firefighters are factually correct.

Posted by: Fixee | July 11, 2007 2:40 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company