Rudy: No Fan of Democracy

[hgc]

Of course, living in New York, I already knew that. Afterall, he thought it was a great idea to forstall mayorial succession by election following 9/11, so that he could stay in charge.

Now he thinks that free speech should be severely limited. Check it out what he said to the NRA.

"Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or you don't; whether you agree with the surge or you don't; Democrats even came back from Iraq and said that he's having more success than anybody had thought.

"So to attack the man's integrity, and honesty, and decency, is in my view indecent. It passed a line that we should not allow American political organizations to pass."


Make no mistake about it. If you don't like the degradation of American democracy under Cheney, you really won't like President Giuliani.

[Oliver]

Of course, living in New York, I already knew that. Afterall, he thought it was a great idea to forstall mayorial succession by election following 9/11, so that he could stay in charge.

Now he thinks that free speech should be severely limited. Check it out what he said to the NRA.

Make no mistake about it. If you don't like the degradation of American democracy under Cheney, you really won't like President Giuliani.



I hope he gets president. He would be a good reason for Americans to finally
get off the couch and burn down Washington during the Revolution. :p

:popcorn2

[plumjam]

Seems like an unpleasant man. Is it true his family were in the mafia?

[hgc]

I hope he gets president. He would be a good reason for Americans to finally
get off the couch and burn down Washington during the Revolution. :p

:popcorn2


I wonder how many Germans said just that kind of thing in 1933. But then their worst case scenario burnt down the Reichstag himself.

[Tailgater]

Of course, living in New York, I already knew that. Afterall, he thought it was a great idea to forstall mayorial succession by election following 9/11, so that he could stay in charge.

Now he thinks that free speech should be severely limited. Check it out what he said to the NRA.




Make no mistake about it. If you don't like the degradation of American democracy under Cheney, you really won't like President Giuliani.

What else did he say? Did he say he wanted to outlaw such a thing or did he say that we shouldn't let it pass without condemning it (like congress)? You have the link?

LOL, asshat is a tag.

[Oliver]

I wonder how many Germans said just that kind of thing in 1933. But then their worst case scenario burnt down the Reichstag himself.


Well, the fallacy was that people thought Hitler IS the revolution
already after the economic depression. And unfortunately, it was
even true and led to a lot of blind trust.

[Darth Rotor]

Seems like an unpleasant man. Is it true his family were in the mafia?

*New Yawk gangster voice*

Mafia? Fuggedaboudit! Ain no such ting!

DR

[Tailgater]

Giuliani spokeswoman Maria Comella responds: "The Mayor was referring to the fact that democrats stood silent on an ad that crossed the line in disparaging an American hero."

In other words, the mayor isn't talking about government sanction of MoveOn.org, but the fact that the Democrats have allowed an attack on an American general by not condemning it.

I'm not a fan of RG, but I figured as much.

[marksman]

Giuliani is not affiliated with the Mafia.I'm not voting for him (also a NYer), but thatwasa pernicious rumor started because of a questionable affiliation his dad had, when Rudy was just a kid. Giuliani made his name prosecuting organized crime in NY.

When Dinkins beat Giuliani in their first mayoral race, one of Dinkins' cronies made the allegation. And even though DInkins quickly repudiated it, the accusation stuck, mostly because Rudy's last name ends with a vowel.

It's about as low a political blow as one could land, and it shames me that someone is making me defend the guy.

[Puppycow]

Rudy may not have mafia ties, but he is a piece of work.

If you want to know a little bit about him, and his third wife, I suggest this Vanity Fair article (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/09/giuliani200709).

The mayor began to spend his weekends—accompanied, as the New York Post reported, by a detail of detectives, which may have cost taxpayers $3,000 a tryst—in Southampton, where Judith owned a condominium. Since he had until then always accounted for his weekends, says the incisive Giuliani biographer Wayne Barrett, "his press office started telling reporters, 'He's teaching Andrew how to play golf.' Now, Andrew's old enough to understand—he has to be aware that his father used him as a beard!"

At the annual Saint Patrick's Day Parade, in 2000, Judith marched right behind the mayor. She was by his side when he went to the hospital for prostate tests a month later and then learned he had cancer. When he decided to leave Hanover, in May, he made a public announcement—"Judith Nathan is a very, very fine person" were his words, "and I'm going to need her more now than maybe I did before." That was how his wife of 16 years discovered her marriage was over.

[marksman]

Let the character assassinations begin!

OJ is arrested, Hillary has a health care plan and sexual history is once again fair play in presidential politics. Viva the 90's!!!

[Charlie Monoxide]

Seems like an unpleasant man. Is it true his family were in the mafia?That's a very racist question ...

Charlie (dissing Rudy will get you whacked) Monoxide

[Beerina]

Now he thinks that free speech should be severely limited.

I'm hardly going to be any politician's apologist, but when he said "It passed a line that we should not allow American political organizations to pass", it didn't necessarily mean government thugs should be hired to stop it. It could very well have meant merely that normal social pressures from the bully pulpit be used to ostracise them.

Which was done. Which I support.


Rudy: No Fan of Democracy

Ironically, social ostracism derives from everybody's right to freedom of association.

[JoeEllison]

This si such nonsense. That General Betray-Us isn't an "American hero", he's some suck-up yes man for the Bush Administration, and he SHOULD be mocked, at the least. He's a failure... and so are the politicians who come out in public and defend him, not on his record, but because as a soldier he should be above criticism?

Funny how those same idiots who say he shouldn't be attacked are lots of the same folks who sat by quietly while John Kerry's decorations were under attack, or even joined in. Clearly, only soldiers who support the Republicans are worthy of respect?

[Matteo Martini]

Seems like an unpleasant man. Is it true his family were in the mafia?

Of course.
All Italo-Americans are.

[Tailgater]

This si such nonsense. That General Betray-Us isn't an "American hero", he's some suck-up yes man for the Bush Administration, and he SHOULD be mocked, at the least. He's a failure... and so are the politicians who come out in public and defend him, not on his record, but because as a soldier he should be above criticism?

Funny how those same idiots who say he shouldn't be attacked are lots of the same folks who sat by quietly while John Kerry's decorations were under attack, or even joined in. Clearly, only soldiers who support the Republicans are worthy of respect?

Apples and Oranges comparison to begin with.
Dems sat back and did nothing (they could have condemned the ads in the same manner). I don't think enough Dems really had Kerrys back, and Kerry didn't do alot to help himself by showboating his military service.

I believe that any general put it GPs position would be considered a failure by many. The expectations of such a massive turnaround in one summer will always fall short.
What exactly did he fail?
What exactly are his responsibilites?
Are the failures based on other factors, but being dealt with?
I watched the report from beginning to end. Obviously, he wants to be positive about his own work. That makes him a suck-up? I thought this was the guy the Dems trusted too? With some of the political hardball questions thrown at him, he was about as straight up as he could be. I don't want us to be in Iraq, but I want someone who knows what they are doing, and doing the best they can. To portray him as a Bush cronie is as silly as Olivers Bush/Hitler comparisons.

Excuse me while I don't jump on the partisan bandwagon.

[Elind]

Of course, living in New York, I already knew that. Afterall, he thought it was a great idea to forstall mayorial succession by election following 9/11, so that he could stay in charge.

Now he thinks that free speech should be severely limited. Check it out what he said to the NRA.




Make no mistake about it. If you don't like the degradation of American democracy under Cheney, you really won't like President Giuliani.

Where do you get this free speech connection? There's another moronic thread on the same subject, also thinking that it's a violation of free speech to say that something is offensive, or dishonest, or pitiful, or worse.

Why don't you just defend the ad instead of making inane side attacks on those who thought it was straight out of the gutter, and suggesting that their rights to free speech should be restricted?

[hgc]

Where do you get this free speech connection? There's another moronic thread on the same subject, also thinking that it's a violation of free speech to say that something is offensive, or dishonest, or pitiful, or worse.

Why don't you just defend the ad instead of making inane side attacks on those who thought it was straight out of the gutter, and suggesting that their rights to free speech should be restricted?


You don't have to blow your stack just because someone poked a stick at Commander Rudy. I'm sure a big, tough, cross-dressing bossman like him can take the heat.

Again, for the semi-literate among us:

It passed a line that we should not allow American political organizations to pass.

[dudalb]

Apples and Oranges comparison to begin with.
Dems sat back and did nothing (they could have condemned the ads in the same manner). I don't think enough Dems really had Kerrys back, and Kerry didn't do alot to help himself by showboating his military service.

I believe that any general put it GPs position would be considered a failure by many. The expectations of such a massive turnaround in one summer will always fall short.
What exactly did he fail?
What exactly are his responsibilites?
Are the failures based on other factors, but being dealt with?
I watched the report from beginning to end. Obviously, he wants to be positive about his own work. That makes him a suck-up? I thought this was the guy the Dems trusted too? With some of the political hardball questions thrown at him, he was about as straight up as he could be. I don't want us to be in Iraq, but I want someone who knows what they are doing, and doing the best they can. To portray him as a Bush cronie is as silly as Olivers Bush/Hitler comparisons.

Excuse me while I don't jump on the partisan bandwagon.

Allow me to join you in refusing to jump on any politcal bandwagon.
And I get a sick feeling that,on both sides, 2008 will be the most disgusting election in recent history. It is like both parties are engaging in competion as to which can be the scummiest.

[dudalb]

It passed a line that we should not allow American political organizations to pass
A.Who Is We?
B.Would you be just at outraged if was a left leaning politican engaging in these pracatices?

[Elind]

You don't have to blow your stack just because someone poked a stick at Commander Rudy. I'm sure a big, tough, cross-dressing bossman like him can take the heat.

Again, for the semi-literate among us:

If you care to read what was written, I was commenting not on what R.G. said, but on how you contrived to make what he said a criticism of free speech, when all it was was a criticism of gutter manners.

Want to try again?

[hgc]

A.Who Is We?


Well, he said it, but I'm assuming it's whoever has the power of disallowing. There is no other possible meaning, unless he misspoke.


B.Would you be just at outraged if was a left leaning politican engaging in these pracatices?


Yes. Don't believe me? Just wait until one of them does so.

[hgc]

If you care to read what was written, I was commenting not on what R.G. said, but on how you contrived to make what he said a criticism of free speech, when all it was was a criticism of gutter manners.

Want to try again?


His words are plain - not in need of much interpretation, and certainly no contrivance on my part. "We should not allow" means disallow means stop someone from doing something that they currently do.

[JoeEllison]

Apples and Oranges comparison to begin with.
Dems sat back and did nothing (they could have condemned the ads in the same manner). I don't think enough Dems really had Kerrys back, and Kerry didn't do alot to help himself by showboating his military service.

I believe that any general put it GPs position would be considered a failure by many. The expectations of such a massive turnaround in one summer will always fall short.
What exactly did he fail?
What exactly are his responsibilites?
Are the failures based on other factors, but being dealt with?
I watched the report from beginning to end. Obviously, he wants to be positive about his own work. That makes him a suck-up? I thought this was the guy the Dems trusted too? With some of the political hardball questions thrown at him, he was about as straight up as he could be. I don't want us to be in Iraq, but I want someone who knows what they are doing, and doing the best they can. To portray him as a Bush cronie is as silly as Olivers Bush/Hitler comparisons.

Excuse me while I don't jump on the partisan bandwagon.

Sorry if you think that reality has a left-wing liberal bias... :p

[corplinx]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill....... poorly.

[hgc]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill....... poorly.


You've certainly a right to that opinion. Pesonally I think the words of politicians who are seeking the office that gives them power to put their words into action matter.

[corplinx]

If we wanted to overparse politician statements, the forum could be filled with nothing but that.

[The Painter]

Well if Rudy is pissing off all the left wing loonies here, he must be doing something right. (no pun intended)

[Talby]

It's a sad day when believing in free speech makes you a left wing loonie.

[Puppycow]

This si such nonsense. That General Betray-Us isn't an "American hero", he's some suck-up yes man for the Bush Administration, and he SHOULD be mocked, at the least. He's a failure... and so are the politicians who come out in public and defend him, not on his record, but because as a soldier he should be above criticism?

Funny how those same idiots who say he shouldn't be attacked are lots of the same folks who sat by quietly while John Kerry's decorations were under attack, or even joined in. Clearly, only soldiers who support the Republicans are worthy of respect?

You're welcome to that opinion but I'm afraid that you won't find many Americans agreeing with you. If you don't want the democrats to win the next election, then you and MoveOn just keep saying those sorts of things. I want the democrats to win.

If MoveOn doesn't run another ad like that, it will be a tacit admission that it was a big mistake. After this, I expect that they will have been learned, but you never know.

[The Painter]

It's a sad day when believing in free speech makes you a left wing loonie.


Yes so sad.

[The Painter]

This si such nonsense. That General Betray-Us isn't an "American hero", he's some suck-up yes man for the Bush Administration, and he SHOULD be mocked, at the least. He's a failure... and so are the politicians who come out in public and defend him, not on his record, but because as a soldier he should be above criticism?

Funny how those same idiots who say he shouldn't be attacked are lots of the same folks who sat by quietly while John Kerry's decorations were under attack, or even joined in. Clearly, only soldiers who support the Republicans are worthy of respect?


Who were those idiots that put him in charge? Oh yeah, all of them.

Petraeus was unanimously confirmed as a four-star general and MNF-I commander on January 27.

[JoeEllison]

Who were those idiots that put him in charge? Oh yeah, all of them.

What's your point?

[JoeEllison]

You're welcome to that opinion but I'm afraid that you won't find many Americans agreeing with you.

Which logical fallacy is that?:p

[SteveGrenard]

Marksman wrote:
Giuliani is not affiliated with the Mafia.I'm not voting for him (also a NYer), but thatwasa pernicious rumor started because of a questionable affiliation his dad had, when Rudy was just a kid. Giuliani made his name prosecuting organized crime in NY.

But tell me his police commissioner, later to become his business partner, does not have mob ties....

Have you checked Rudy's Federal Prosecutor's office record of convictions while he was occupying that office? The government had to wait until Rudy and his cronies were gone before they could get John Gotti.

[Puppycow]

Which logical fallacy is that?:p

It's not a fallacy, its political pragmatism. For example, I'm an atheist, but if I was advising a political candidate who was atheist, and our top priority was to win the election, I would advise him/her not to admit it. That would be practical advice, not a fallacy.

[dudalb]

You're welcome to that opinion but I'm afraid that you won't find many Americans agreeing with you. If you don't want the democrats to win the next election, then you and MoveOn just keep saying those sorts of things. I want the democrats to win.

If MoveOn doesn't run another ad like that, it will be a tacit admission that it was a big mistake. After this, I expect that they will have been learned, but you never know.

The problem the Dems have with groups like MoveOn is exactly the same as the GOP had with the religious right: They are great for mobilizing the Hardcore ideologues and raising money but they turn off mainstream and undecided voters with some of their more extreme stands.
The game the presidential candidates for both parties play to is to court groups like Moveon for the Dems and Moral Majority (or whatever they call themselves nowdays) for the GOP during the primary stage,but as soon as the party has a nominee to keep them out of the spotlight.
MoveOn's real problem is like most militant groups,it appeals to the already converted but is not good in winning people over.

[JoeEllison]

It's not a fallacy, its political pragmatism. For example, I'm an atheist, but if I was advising a political candidate who was atheist, and our top priority was to win the election, I would advise him/her not to admit it. That would be practical advice, not a fallacy.

Most people are to the left of the Democrats... so I don't see how moving further right is supposed to help the Dems.

[Gurdur]

Most people are to the left of the Democrats....

In the USA? Really? Strange how come Republicans get voted in, then.

I don't think the Dems should move further right, either; but I strongly doubt the USA electorate is as you describe.

[JoeEllison]

In the USA? Really? Strange how come Republicans get voted in, then.

I don't think the Dems should move further right, either; but I strongly doubt the USA electorate is as you describe.
Voter apathy and election fraud.

[JoeEllison]

Oh, and I'm not saying that Americans are particularly "to the left"... I'm just saying that the Democrats aren't either. They only look that way because the Republicans as a whole have become so insanely right-wing.

[Gurdur]

Voter apathy and election fraud.

Voter apathy -- and they are still supposed to be "left"? Puh-leeze.

Election fraud -- exists but not to the extent, or even one-sidedness, that could justify your assertion.

I really don't see it. The American electorate is pretty rightwing by most international standards, and the Dems -- like the Reps -- do a fair job of trying to combine different groups with different agendas.

[JoeEllison]

Voter apathy -- and they are still supposed to be "left"? Puh-leeze.

Election fraud -- exists but not to the extent, or even one-sidedness, that could justify your assertion.

I really don't see it. The American electorate is pretty rightwing by most international standards, and the Dems -- like the Reps -- do a fair job of trying to combine different groups with different agendas.

Hey, you can have your opinion... and you'll be wrong.:jaw-dropp:D

[Gurdur]

Hey, you can have your opinion... and you'll be wrong.

*shrug*

That's what they all say. If you have evidence, I would be glad to hear it.

[JoeEllison]

*shrug*

That's what they all say. If you have evidence, I would be glad to hear it.

Look at the polls, my friend... especially on the war, but pretty much on every subject. People want all the things we associate with "the left"...

Oh, I forgot the third element, it is so devious: right-wing branding.

[hgc]

If we wanted to overparse politician statements, the forum could be filled with nothing but that.


But instead the forum is filled with overparsing and poopooing of any criticism directed toward authoritarian sacred cows.

[Gurdur]

Look at the polls, my friend... especially on the war, but pretty much on every subject. People want all the things we associate with "the left"...

They do? I look at the polls, and see a fairly rightwinger-dominated electorate, with a large isolationist streak, and a very small well-organised-left. I see decreasing trade-unionization, and a fragmenting into single-issue campaigns.

I do see a mildly more balanced electorate in some cases, such as California, New Jersey, or above all Vermont. I do not see Vermont or Massacheusetts or California as representitive of the USA as a whole.

[corplinx]

But instead the forum is filled with overparsing and poopooing of any criticism directed toward authoritarian sacred cows.

I'm going to be honest with you here. You made a bad topic. This was really stretching. There are a few posts who were genuinely puzzled by this overparse.

I've had my share of bad topics. I feel for you brah.

[hgc]

I'm going to be honest with you here. You made a bad topic. This was really stretching. There are a few posts who were genuinely puzzled by this overparse.

I've had my share of bad topics. I feel for you brah.


Your concern is touching. But even if it were ridiculously overreaching, it would be of little concern. Had too much of bad topics? My advice is don't read them. I usually steer clear of threads I think of as worthless -- unless I want to take the piss.

Don't torture yourself. If I had the power, I'd disallow you from reading my threads, to protect you.

[Tailgater]

Sorry if you think that reality has a left-wing liberal bias... :p

I have no idea what you are talking about. You are the one that can't seem to deal with reality by blaming your disappointments on conspiracies.

[Tailgater]

Look at the polls, my friend... especially on the war, but pretty much on every subject. People want all the things we associate with "the left"...

Oh, I forgot the third element, it is so devious: right-wing branding.

Does anyone really know someone who has been polled?

In four decades, I have never answered a poll or knew someone who did.

Amazing how your reality is based on polls.

[JoeEllison]

Does anyone really know someone who has been polled?

In four decades, I have never answered a poll or knew someone who did.

Amazing how your reality is based on polls.

Consider this my official throwing up my hands in disgust.:(

[Tailgater]

Voter apathy -- and they are still supposed to be "left"? Puh-leeze.

Election fraud -- exists but not to the extent, or even one-sidedness, that could justify your assertion.

I really don't see it. The American electorate is pretty rightwing by most international standards, and the Dems -- like the Reps -- do a fair job of trying to combine different groups with different agendas.

Agreed.

[Puppycow]

Consider this my official throwing up my hands in disgust.:(

But if most Americans are to the left of the democratic party, and apathy, fraud and "right-wing branding" account for republican election victories, that has some disturbing implications for the left:

1) lefties must be more apathetic than righties
2) lefties must be easier to fool than righties
3) lefties aren't as good at politics as righties

[JoeEllison]

But if most Americans are to the left of the democratic party, and apathy, fraud and "right-wing branding" account for republican election victories, that has some disturbing implications for the left:

1) lefties must be more apathetic than righties
2) lefties must be easier to fool than righties
3) lefties aren't as good at politics as righties

The second one doesn't fit. "Lefties" are less easy to fool, with explains #1 and #3. :D

There's an ebook on the subject of right-wing authoritarians, why they are so easily lied to, and why they are so easily led. If you get a chance, you should take a look at it.

[Gurdur]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill....... poorly.

I really have to agree with Corplinx and Tailgater here.

[marksman]

But tell me his police commissioner, later to become his business partner, does not have mob ties....
Which part of "I'm not a fan of Rudy and I'm not going to vote for him" was unclear? Rudy has no mob ties. People he's been affiliated with have had mob ties, but I don't think there's a businessman or politician in New York City who couldn't be linked to the mob through two or three degrees of separation. That way lies madness.

Have you checked Rudy's Federal Prosecutor's office record of convictions while he was occupying that office? The government had to wait until Rudy and his cronies were gone before they could get John Gotti.
Gotti didn't head his crim family until 1985. Giuliani left the Prosecutor's office in 1989. That didn't leave a lot of time for Giuliani to build a case against Gotti. Gotti was in fact arrested less than a year after Giuliani left office, under an investigation commenced by his office.

It's a real stretch to say that Giuliani gave Gotti some sort of pass. In fact, it sounds like a pernicious hack job.

Look, there are plenty of reasons not to want Giuliani as President. His heavy-handed politics, his poor management style, his lack of respect for the first and fourth amendments, his ongoing defense of the Iraq War, etc. His conduct as a prosecutor? Not so much.

[ponderingturtle]

Of course.
All Italo-Americans are.

Also all the Irish, Jews, Mexicans, Chinese and so on.

Shouldn't let the Italians take all the credit for organized crime.

[marksman]

Does anyone really know someone who has been polled?
I was polled in 2004 on the Presidential election. I don't know why they bothered, since there was very little doubt that New York's electors would be going to Kerry.

[Kerberos]

But if most Americans are to the left of the democratic party, and apathy, fraud and "right-wing branding" account for republican election victories, that has some disturbing implications for the left:

1) lefties must be more apathetic than righties
2) lefties must be easier to fool than righties
3) lefties aren't as good at politics as righties
First one is probably true. As a rule the lower classes are more likely to not bother voting. Also the lower classes are, for obvious reasons, more likely to be left wing, at least on economical issues. Therefore it's reasonable to think that if the US got a higher turnout you'd move somewhat ot the left (again economically, on other issues it's less certain, and you might even move right).

[dudalb]

Most people are to the left of the Democrats... so I don't see how moving further right is supposed to help the Dems.


You are delusional,guy.

[dudalb]

I have a sick feeling this it the first of many such political hit threads we will get from both side for the next 13 months.

[Elind]

His words are plain - not in need of much interpretation, and certainly no contrivance on my part. "We should not allow" means disallow means stop someone from doing something that they currently do.

Want to be a pretend lawyer, be my guest. We should not allow....to pass unchallenged......

Seems to me a very colloquial use of the term. Each to his own, as always.:rolleyes:

[Elind]

I really have to agree with Corplinx and Tailgater here.

Cute. :grouphug:But do you have anything of your own to add?

[Elind]

Oh, and I'm not saying that Americans are particularly "to the left"... I'm just saying that the Democrats aren't either. They only look that way because the Republicans as a whole have become so insanely right-wing.

Blame it on the other guy, or the mirror.

I'll wager I've been a Democrat longer than you. They use to be the rational ones. Now they just want to be like the Republicans, left handedly.

[hgc]

Want to be a pretend lawyer, be my guest. We should not allow....to pass unchallenged......

Seems to me a very colloquial use of the term. Each to his own, as always.:rolleyes:


Now there's a fancy contrivance. Too bad he didn't actually say that. "We should not allow" and "we should now allow to pass unchallenged" are two very completely different things. He said the former and not the latter.