Rudy Giuliani admits defeat (political, what else)

[rgraham666]

Check out the TV ad on the home page of Rudy's website.

I caught it earlier at another forum, and my jaw dropped. I couldn't believe that someone would stoop so low. In fact I thought it was a fake, something an opponent put together to make him look bad.

But there it is, on his website.

I never thought much of him. Nw I'd rather not think about him at all.

 

[Pure]

same old repugnican stuff, rg. a terrorized populace is their only hope.

 

[jomar]

State of fear.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

same old repugnican stuff, rg. a terrorized populace is their only hope.

State of Fear.

No, that (movie) was the same old Demogogratic stuff - a guilty populace is their only hope for their version of expanded government authority - socialism.

The usual resolution is for Repugnican and Demogograts to make a deal - your police state in return for our socialsm. "Let's call it 'National Socialism'."

 

[cantdog]

You people talk as if Rob made any sense.

What the fuck do you mean, Rob? I don't see anything on your link site which answers to what you said in the post.

 

[sr71plt]

Check out the TV ad on the home page of Rudy's website.

I caught it earlier at another forum, and my jaw dropped. I couldn't believe that someone would stoop so low. In fact I thought it was a fake, something an opponent put together to make him look bad.

But there it is, on his website.

I never thought much of him. Nw I'd rather not think about him at all.

Guess he's sort of missed-by a couple of weeks--the revelations that the public polls have shown we're bringing back the "it's all about the economy, stupid" mantra for this campaign.

What I find amusing in watching the various campaign debates and propaganda is that all of the candidates, Democratic and Republican alike, seem to be running against the Bush (the lesser) administration. Not that the White House staff would notice.

 

[DesertPirate]

No, that (movie) was the same old Demogogratic stuff - a guilty populace is their only hope for their version of expanded government authority - socialism.

The usual resolution is for Repugnican and Demogograts to make a deal - your police state in return for our socialsm. "Let's call it 'National Socialism'."

Can't argue with your logic.
They aren't even honest by LBJ standards anymore, "once their bought, they stay bought".

My name are slightly diferent, Democraps and Republipricks

 

[rgraham666]

You people talk as if Rob made any sense.

What the fuck do you mean, Rob? I don't see anything on your link site which answers to what you said in the post.

There's a video there, on the right side of the screen, entitled 'Ready'.

It such a horrible piece of propaganda that I feel Giuliani has all but thrown in the towel and is hoping that he getting the nutbars to vote for him is his only chance now.

 

[cantdog]

Ah.

Well, he's hardly alone in this kind of message. I watched a Repug debate. The candidates all tried to outdo one another supporting torture camps. "I would put even more people in Guantánamo!"

It was pretty sickening. Barbaric.

 

[cantdog]

Ah.

Well, he's hardly alone in this kind of message. I watched a Repug debate. The candidates all tried to outdo one another supporting torture camps. "I would put even more people in Guantánamo!"

It was pretty sickening. Barbaric. But all that is very mainstream, on that side of the aisle.

The nutbars? They like Huckabee! He has said, in all seriousness, that Jesus is his running mate. He has garnered thousands of born again wackos in so doing.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

You people talk as if Rob made any sense.

What the fuck do you mean, Rob? I don't see anything on your link site which answers to what you said in the post.

I got the "code": You're not supposed to suggest that terrorism in the present context has any Islamic component, but only happens because - well, just because. In code, doing so means you're "desparate."

That said, Giulianni is a former prosecutor, and people of that background always want to infringe civil liberties in the name of security. It's knee-jerk, just as opposition to any expansion of investigatory authority however sensible is knee-jerk with some groups and individuals. That prosecutorial inclination is not limited to just Republicans, either.

For all that Giulianni is probably my least-hated serious candidate on the GOP side, because while I think his ability to expand that prosecutors' agenda is limited (in the "Patriot Act" they already got the full laundry list they'd been seeking for years even before 9/11), someone who actually reduced taxes, spending and regulation in New York City stimulates the libertarian lobes of my brain.

 

[sr71plt]

What I find really amusing about Giulani's one-half-issue approach to the campaign is that he's running on stopping the terrorists, when he has absolutely no experience or track record in anything related to that. His one-note "I did it" samba is all about cleaning up after a terrorist attack, not about stopping or even finding terrorists. He couldn't even come up with a viable candidate for Homeland Security chief--the only point at which he's been involved in anything remotely related to preventing terrorism.

He can't even seem to win a war inside his own house.

 

[Boxlicker101]

There's a video there, on the right side of the screen, entitled 'Ready'.

It such a horrible piece of propaganda that I feel Giuliani has all but thrown in the towel and is hoping that he getting the nutbars to vote for him is his only chance now.

I saw the ad also, although I had already seen it on TV. Rudy is pointing out the threat of Radical Islam, and he's right. If you don't believe there is any threat, talk to the folks at Darfur or Madrid or London or Lockerbie or New York or Bali, or many other places. Maybe some of those victims or survivors of victims can change your mind.

I am referring to the USA, of course, not Canada so much.

 

[Pure]

note,

i saw a videoclip of mccain yelling for 'hunting down osama dead or alive.'

and iirc, romney has said similar things.

the militaristic and toughguy rhetoric is mostly a repug staple. it may prove useful. in view of obama's rising popularity i can see it being deployed against him.

the 'terrorists are landing on our beaches [or taking over the world]' stuff is just the other half of the military gambit.

==

BTW, i kinda like Giuliani. i think i could live with his Republicanism. i have worries he'll survive the 'moral critique.' in some other countries, mistresses are a *qualification* for office, not an impediment!

 

[sr71plt]

the 'terrorists are landing on our beaches [or taking over the world]' stuff is just the other half of the military gambit.

Heck, I've already heard Republican whispers that the leading Democratic candidate is one of the terrorists. ("That thar's a rag head's name, t'ain't it? Can pick one of thm out a mile away.")

 

[Pure]

yep, nothing is too low for the US looney right. [e.g. the obama/osama thing]

 

[Boxlicker101]

note,

i saw a videoclip of mccain yelling for 'hunting down osama dead or alive.'

and iirc, romney has said similar things.

the militaristic and toughguy rhetoric is mostly a repug staple. it may prove useful. in view of obama's rising popularity i can see it being deployed against him.

the 'terrorists are landing on our beaches [or taking over the world]' stuff is just the other half of the military gambit.

==

BTW, i kinda like Giuliani. i think i could live with his Republicanism. i have worries he'll survive the 'moral critique.' in some other countries, mistresses are a *qualification* for office, not an impediment!

I've said the same thing, except I have probably added "preferably dead" or words to that effect. I'm quite sure millions of others have done so also. It's not a Rep. staple, it's a widely held opinion.
Some terrorists probably are landing on our beaches. Or at our airports or bus stations, or other places. After all, they have to get here somehow.

 

[Pure]

well, if hillary is a man... [so say the far right]

obama is a woman!

berrington and onore, in the New York Post, Jan 7


Yet it's not only Obama's policies and strategies that appeal to women. He is like a woman: slim, good looking, with long elegant fingers, appealingly dressed -- all terms more typically ascribed to female candidates.
[...]on Thursday night it was Obama who won the androgyny sweepstakes.

[...]
Women are gravitating to Obama out of a different urge -- the desire to invite him to our book club, join him for coffee or have him coach our child's soccer team. He embodies many of the positive characteristics we tend to regard as feminine: sensitive and empathetic, seeking to find common ground and minimize conflict, not taking power for granted. We've yet to catch Obama beating up an opponent.[...]

By the end of this year we might indeed have our first woman president -- but not necessarily Hillary.

===

full column reproduced at

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801080002?src=item200801080002

 

[sr71plt]

I've said the same thing, except I have probably added "preferably dead" or words to that effect. I'm quite sure millions of others have done so also. It's not a Rep. staple, it's a widely held opinion.
Some terrorists probably are landing on our beaches. Or at our airports or bus stations, or other places. After all, they have to get here somehow.

Well, yes, preferable dead. We're really, really bad with handling the trials of live demigods (e.g., Saddam Hussain)--and the endpoint is the same in either case.

 

[Liar]

I've said the same thing, except I have probably added "preferably dead" or words to that effect. I'm quite sure millions of others have done so also. It's not a Rep. staple, it's a widely held opinion.

Well, yes. Having OBL squashed is a pretty wide held wish. But it seems to be a Rep. staple to use it as campaign mantra for the news network soundbits.

 

[rgraham666]

Hey, if Osama catches a .50BMG round from a McMillan or some other fate that sends him to his reward you won't see me shedding any tears.

But seriously, terrorism isn't that big a threat. No where near as dangerous as the Soviet Union was. As Gwynne Dyer puts it, "A world where terrorism is the biggest problem is a world without any big problems."

So I find Rudy's video, and similar 'they're all evil and they're coming to destroy us, the Chosen Ones!' messages, excessive and a far bigger danger than the terrorists.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Hey, if Osama catches a .50BMG round from a McMillan or some other fate that sends him to his reward you won't see me shedding any tears.

But seriously, terrorism isn't that big a threat. No where near as dangerous as the Soviet Union was. As Gwynne Dyer puts it, "A world where terrorism is the biggest problem is a world without any big problems."

So I find Rudy's video, and similar 'they're all evil and they're coming to destroy us, the Chosen Ones!' messages, excessive and a far bigger danger than the terrorists.

Isn't that the essence of the Bush presidency? We live under a cult of fear generated by the White House with secret police, illegal wiretaps, domestic spying on honest Americans and the constant reminder that "al-Quida is out there."

Rudy mistakenly thinks we want to live that way and could get elected under that banner. I have one thing to say to him, "No Way, Jose' "

 

[sr71plt]

Isn't that the essence of the Bush presidency? We live under a cult of fear generated by the White House with secret police, illegal wiretaps, domestic spying on honest Americans and the constant reminder that "al-Quida is out there."

Almost makes you nostalgic for the Nixon years.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Hey, if Osama catches a .50BMG round from a McMillan or some other fate that sends him to his reward you won't see me shedding any tears.

But seriously, terrorism isn't that big a threat. No where near as dangerous as the Soviet Union was. As Gwynne Dyer puts it, "A world where terrorism is the biggest problem is a world without any big problems."

Notwithstanding the changing of a major city's landscape and the murder of 3,000 people in a single attack (which could easily have been 10,000), it's true that terrorism with conventional weapons is not a "major threat" in the same league with nuclear Armageddon. However, ignoring the increasing potential for WMD use by terrorists is not a tenable position. The use of bio-weapons in particular potentially could result in billions of deaths worldwide. In the current context the most likely vector for such mayhem is Islamicism, and that can't be ignored either, but it's not the only potential vector.

All that said, a 9/11 type attack on 6 or 12 targets such as Chicago's loop and the Mall of America the day after Thanksgiving, a football stadium where a big game is underway, the Las Vegas strip, a couple major container shipping ports, perhaps a few critical petroleum infrastructure components, could generate a psychological reaction that would trigger a worldwide 1930s-type Depression. Not Armageddon, but pretty fucking serious. So that can't be dismissed either.

Naturally balance is required, and demagogic alarmism is also a danger. But to pretend that this is not a vital issue that should be seriously considered when the world's hyper-power selects its leader is not a tenable position.

 

[Pure]

rox But to pretend that this [domestic terrorism] is not a vital issue

and none of the candidates is doing so, thus the superemphasis in some compaign literature (e.g. the Giuliani clip, rg referenced) is pure politicking.

and no poster here is doing so, making one wonder at whom Roxanne is directing her admonishments about the dangers.