« Lieberman Skips Senate Dems' Strategy Meeting | Home | Flashback: Rudy Said The Law Was A "Far Greater Weapon" Against Terror Than Violence »

Rudy Emerges As McCain's Front Man On Terror, Bashes Obama As "Defensive"

Rudy is now officially John McCain's lead crooner when it comes to singing the GOP's Dems-are-weak-on-terror golden oldie.

On a conference call with reporters just now, Rudy bashed Obama and Dems as weak and "defensive" and unleashed a whole bunch of boilerplate that we've been hearing for many years and will hear for many, many more.

"The reality is there seems to be more concern about the rights of terrorists, or alleged terrorists, than the rights that the American people have to safety and security," Rudy said. "I do not understand why, at a time we're facing this terrorist threat, we want to create new rights that didn't exist before for people alleged to be involved in terrorist activities or alleged to be enemy combatants."

"It is fair to say that Osama Bin Laden would be given new rights that nobody ever had before," Rudy continued.

You don't need to know the rest, because it's just Rudy singing from the same sheet music the Republicans have been using since 2002.

But Rudy's emergence begs a serious question: How much authority will the national press accord Rudy as a voice on terrorism during the general election? Rudy has no foreign policy experience whatsoever. His aura of national security experience comes solely from having been photographed walking through the smoke and dust on 9/11.

When Rudy ran for president it took the press corps many months to realize that Rudy has absolutely no authority to speak on this topic. Now that he's popped up again as McCain's front man it may take the press many more months to awaken to this reality again -- unless perhaps Team Obama makes sure to stress this obvious point as often as possible.

Late Update: Here's the audio from the call:


98 Comments

| Leave a comment

Typo

"Now that he's popped up again as Rudy's front man..."

Now that he's popped up again as Rudy's front man should be as McCain's front man.

user-pic

thanks. fixed

Sure. Thank him. Even though I caught it first. Figures.

Your comment must've appeared while I was messing with my html. So exactly 50% of Greg's thanks go to you.

But this is hilarious. Rudy is such a fucking disgrace.

What is the McCain camp thinking? "Let's take a man who has become a fucking punch line in this country and prop him up on the very topic for which he became a punch line." Can they find no one with even the slightest bit of foreign policy legitimacy?

This can only backfire on them.

Can they find no one with even the slightest bit of foreign policy legitimacy?

This crossed my mind. I guess they figure celebrity trumps experience. Saying Rudy is an expert on terrorism is like saying a person who got hit by a car is an expert on energy policy.

user-pic

RUDE-ee is my hero . . . No other Republicant is working as hard to sink McCain . . .

Rudy should really find some other issue if he wants to have any effect, this crying wolf thing just doesn't have any legs with him any more . . .

user-pic

He has no other issues.

correction:

he has no issues.

I think Rudy has lot's of issues, just none that matter in an election. He need professional help.

user-pic

The reality is there seems to be more concern about the rights of terrorists, or alleged terrorists, than the rights that the American people have to safety and security,

So what happens if an American is alleged to be a terrorist? Oh wait, he's just talking about our rights to be "safe and secure" not "free". And you know, what could be safer or more secure then a cell in Gitmo?

Oh, we'll I guess there's that whole torture thing, but don't worry about that. It usually doesn't kill you.

user-pic

Anybody else get the feeling, now that a little heat is on mcbush, that the mcbush camp is flailing all over the place? There is no message and it's just grasping at straws and flailing. If I were mcbush, I wouldn't have Mr. 9/11 anywhere around. He lost all credibility he had, which wasn't much, during his joke of a campaign.

Let's see just this week, Mr. 9/11 talking on the terrorist threat and drilling off-shore to help oil companies. And the poll numbers keep going further and further south for mcbush. Landslide coming in november. Go Obama!

user-pic

He's deffinately flailing and sucks as a campaigner...our only hope is that people look beyond Obama's ability to give a sermon and check out his voting record and policy positions.

user-pic

You know I really don't get it. He had a three month head start. He had weeks to prepare for that primary night speech, which even if he was a great orator and it was a good speech, it wasn't, I still think that was a dumb move. I really don't get it. I actually liked mccain in 2000. He has totally done a 180. Is it possible that maybe his age is catching up with him? I can't think of another explanation.

That would be my biggest hope. Comparing the two records would lead to a 400+ win for Obama.

user-pic

McCain's campaign definitely has that reek of ad hoc about it. He has no theme, or plan, for America. Come to think of it, he doesn't have a plan for Iraq -- not once has he offered any ideas to improve the outcome of the Iraq mess.

It's really odd how they're pulling the 9/11 card so early. Is it all they can really talk about? Iraq? Playing the drums of fear?

Shouldn't this wait until the late summer period to define Obama on this?

The more they play this up, the less impact it's going to have on voters, I think.

user-pic

The SCOTUS forced the subject with their rulling on the prisoners in Gitmo.

Every reply to Rudy's nonsense should be to play up that Iraq has had nothing whatsoever to do with domestic terrorism (or any threat to the US at all), and in particular that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Drive that message home, and you neutralize this gang of wailing eunuchs completely.

user-pic

That's what they mean by the pre 9/11 mindset... In the wake of 9/11 you couldn't just sit back and wait for the next strike and hope to prevent it. GWB had to look at potential threats and eliminate them. Saddam was defying the sanctions, firing on US planes daily, was believed to have Chem/Bio weapons, had the ability to reconstitute his Chem/Bio programs and was a real threat to supply terrorist organizations with them. He moved to eliminate that threat. Saddam didn't attack us on 9/11 but was a threat that needed to be dealt with.

user-pic

Oh brother. That post is so utterly false. Saddam was no threat, was a bulwark against iran and islamic extremism, hated al quaida because it was a threat to him, etc., etc., etc.

Try again.

user-pic

In order for it to be false it would need to be factually incorrect. All the facts are true. The opinion portion you are free to argue.

user-pic

Ok, I'll play:

1. Defying sanctions, true to build his palaces. So what.

2. Firing on US planes daily. False. Never happened anyway. They were locking radar on planes and there were a few firings years ago. I don't think that there was one firing post 9/11 nor even any radar locks. Saddam wasn't stupid. He didn't want to provoke us after 9/11 for obvious reasons.

3. Believed to have chem/bio weapons and ability to reconsitute programs. True it was an alleged belief of the administration; however, there was no evidence to support the belief and actually evidence to the contrary. On balance, false belief.

4. Real threat to supply terrorist organizations with them. False. Al Quaida was as much a threat to saddam as they were a threat to us. There was no way he would give them any weapons, even if he had them, which he didn't.

On balance, I would stand by my assertion. False post.

user-pic

1. Was true...just so what...

2. Was true:
Firing on US planes daily. False. Never happened anyway...I don't think that there was one firing post 9/11 nor even any radar locks. Saddam wasn't stupid. He didn't want to provoke us after 9/11 for obvious reasons.

ONW Aircraft fired upon and targeted by radar Feb 28, 2002 -- Iraqi forces threatened Operation Northern Watch (ONW) Iraqi forces threatened Operation Northern Watch (ONW) coalition aircraft today. Iraqi forces fired anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) from sites north of Mosul while ONW aircraft conducted routine enforcement of the Northern No-Fly Zone.

Operation Northern Watch
zone 18 Nov 2002- Iraqi forces threatened Operation Northern Watch (ONW) coalition aircraft today. Iraqi forces fired anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) from sites northeast...
URL: http://www.globalsecurity.org/...ops/northern_watch-2002.htm

DefenseLINK News: Coalition Aircraft Respond to Iraqi Provocation
Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 19, 2003 - Coalition aircraft bombed a series of Iraqi targets today in response to Iraqi anti- aircraft artillery firing on...
URL: http://www.globalsecurity.org/...2003/iraq-030319-afps04.htm

I could go on...

3. Was believed at the time to be true by members of both parties (the stock pile part, the "ability to reconstitute" part was proved true)

4.Al Queada isn't the only terrorist organization out there...Saddam supported and harbored members of:
Fatah-Revolutionary Council (Abu Nidal)
Palestine Liberation Front (Abu al-Abbas)
Islamic Ulama Group
The Afghani Islamic Party (Gulbuddin Hekmatyar)
Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Ayman al-Zawahiri)

...I think I'm back in the "True statement" column.

user-pic

2. Too funny, look at what you typed on the "daily missle attacks." Some AAA fire isn't a missle attack, nor is firing twice in a six month period daily. Also, don't you think that maybe the two incidents of firing could be by rogue officers and not mandated by saddam? Tooooo funny. You made my case for me. Thanks.

3. The administration knew that the bio stuff was nonsense, they just wanted to spin it to justify war. Give me a break.

4. And those terrorist organizations attacked the us on 9/11 or ever planned attacking us soil. Please, that's a stretch.

Sorry, try again, ah don't bother. Kind of sad when you think about it.

user-pic

Maybe you should read them again, your claim that my statement was false claimed:
2. Firing on US planes daily. False. Never happened anyway. They were locking radar on planes and there were a few firings years ago. I don't think that there was one firing post 9/11 nor even any radar locks. Saddam wasn't stupid. He didn't want to provoke us after 9/11 for obvious reasons.

I showed examples of them firing on our planes after 9/11...there were also radr painting incidents, you said there were none.

3. Believed to have chem/bio weapons and ability to reconsitute programs. True it was an alleged belief of the administration; however, there was no evidence to support the belief and actually evidence to the contrary. On balance, false belief.

Members of both parties believed it...you've seen the quotes.

4. Real threat to supply terrorist organizations with them. False. Al Quaida was as much a threat to saddam as they were a threat to us. There was no way he would give them any weapons, even if he had them, which he didn't.

I said there was a threat of Saddam working with terrorist organizations (not just Al Queada) and listed some for you.

Saddam didn't attack us on 9/11, that doesn't mean he wasn't a threat...that claim is still as true as ever.

user-pic

You know what really f*cking pisses me off. The gd administration knew that it was lying about the bio crap and the nuke crap and they f*cking lied about it to destroy a country and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children. That's a f*cking fact. I am soooooo sick of that crap that dems "believed it." Big f*cking deal, the administration knew that they were lying and hopefully someday they will be in the f*cking hague facing war crime trials.

The rest of your post is a joke. A little AAA fire on three occasions and we f*cking destroy a country? Some tenuous ties with long defunct and worthless middle east terrorist organizations that were no threat to the us. Give me a break.

You people really are insane. Don't you care about all the dead and maimed women and children based on lies?????? Unbelievable.

user-pic

It rises again to feed on the blood of the living ...

user-pic

These republicans are so 2004 . . .

user-pic

...and Obama's positions are so 1976...

Lame.

user-pic

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

user-pic

A few weeks ago, I found you pretty sad and annoying, SFC. But I went on vacation and I've come back with a new outlook. I've learned to embrace you and be entertained by your perspective. The part that helps the most is knowing that you won't just be amusing to me until December... I'll have the entirety of an Obama Administration to look back on your posts here and laugh about the idea that you thought John McCain would be a better President. It's a joke already, mind you, but 8 years of actual hard evidence of how wrong you are will be fun to experience. Hell, you were probably stoked for Georgie boy too... "Al Gore: Jimmy Carter 2.0".

user-pic

I'll be here for your entertainment...even if there is a, God forbid, Obama administration.

user-pic

No. 1776.

Precisely. I guess McCain and Rudy and that crew don't much believe in the Founders' "self-evident rights" idea.

"When Rudy ran for president it took the press corps many months to realize that Rudy has absolutely no authority to speak on this topic."

I'd argue they never did actually realize it. There's certainly no defining moment I can think of where the MSM turned on Giuliani with regard to his posturing.

Biden's "noun, verb and 9/11" quip got some airtime but Rudy was such a joke shortly afterwards that he just fell off everyone's radar in the MSM.

I think we can fully give Joe Biden the credit for destroying Rudy's politicial career. Amazing.

weeeeeell, we got a case of "More Credit Due" here

politics is great

where else do you get points for kicking a corpse ???

actually, Biden picked up the corpse and beat mcsame with it

"It's no surprise that it takes a man with zero national security and foreign policy experience to defend the policies of John McCain and President Bush," Biden said.

thank you jebus

user-pic

Greg and Eric, I've criticized you occasionally and supported you occasionally. This, however, is one of the most insightful things you've ever written:

When Rudy ran for president it took the press corps many months to realize that Rudy has absolutely no authority to speak on this topic. Now that he's popped up again as McCain's front man it may take the press many more months to awaken to this reality again -- unless perhaps Team Obama makes sure to stress this obvious point as often as possible.

By the way, simple question next time he raises the issue of Osama bin Laden would be given rights: How can he be given rights when the McCain-Bush team hasn't found him?

THIS IS GREAT NEWS!!!!! FOR THE TERRORISTS!!!!

Some Chutzpah to be taking credit for viewing, not preventing, the attack, then letting the perpetrator get away. As I wrote elsewhere (forgive me this one time), what is the problem in 2008 with reminding voters that Condoleeza Rice got a warning of 9/11 in the August intel reporting and ignored it. Somehow that has always seemed impolitic to mention, in some twisted way. Or that the Clinton people told them that terrorism was their top priority and they just chuckled and pursued their crackpot missile defense and porn issues. Or that George Tenet told them in June and July 2001 that the board was blinking red and they were in for real danger, and that Condie and company blithely let that go by, even though reinforced by the August intel report? Not to mention the countless terrorisim studies that showed that WTC was a prime target/the prime target. Is this ugly sequence still somehow *gauche* to bring up?

user-pic

How about Bush telling the CIA agent in August 2001, "you covered your ass. You can go now."
He hates to have his vacation interrupted. And look what he got from it. A catastrophic attack that gave him license to do whatever he wanted to do for the next 7 years.

I noticed during Rudy's piece on CNN American Morning today, it took about 2 minutes before Rudy said "September 11th" - and John Roberts audibly laughed.

Desparate.

user-pic

Well Osama has the right to " Life Liberty and the pursuit of Additional Attacks" because the likes of Rudy failed to take them away. Where does this guy get the stones to offer this and how can he possibly get away with it?

Susan Rice on Morning Joe today (paraphrasing a little here):

"There are two ways to handle foreign policy, the smart way and the stupid way. We've had 7 years of stupid... John McCain would be 4 more years of stupid."

Awesome.

Yow! Brillian!

...brillianT

Dear American Voters, reporters and political professionals, and let us believe in Family, Friends, Fellows, Faith. Funds, Foundation, Fun, with Fairness & Freedom and without Fear, Favor, and Failure. This is for Mr. Jiulani.

Hon. Senator McCain and Obama, besides each having many attributes and characteristics. The critical differences between the two of these presidential presumptive nominees are as under:

1. Presidential "Temperament and Composer".
2. Little Washington "insider Versus outsider" experience.
3. "Vision and mission" for our nation future rather than past.
4. American policies, " first U.S.A Centric" than any other country [ ies ] centric.

In my professional opinion Senator Obama leads in all above qualities.

The need of our next movement and generation is a change. The Change in " past Washington and its Leadership". A change we can believe in and not the seductive, deceptive, and confusing slogan of "leader we can believe in" [? Effexor ?".

Our Greatgrand Nation has to address many present and future challenges and start with new clean "Slate and Senator".

God Bless America. its diverse people, and our Greatgrand Nation.

Our Greatgrand Nation is needs the CHANGE at every level and for long time.

I am sure Senator Obama with the help of Senator Clinton and her supporters, can deliver that CHANGE.

Please stay involved, stay engaged, and stay informed. Please do not allow any seduction, deception, and or confusion by some partisan media and leaders effect your vote [ Psychological Terrorism ]..

Yours truly,

COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall
Disabled American Veteran
Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas

PS: Please talk about the " Presidential Temperament And Caliber " of our presumptive presidential Nominees. Thanks.

user-pic

He hates our freedom.
If this doesn't constitute a third Bush term, what does?
I like the line "โ€ฆor alleged terrorists". That implies that the mere accusation of being a terrorist means the suspect forfeits all legal rights forever. What a sweet deal for the executive. Accuse your opponents of terrorism and lock them up indefinitely without due process. Just like "the enemy" does.
Habeas Corpus and the Magna Carta is SO 13th Century.

Rudy's a man in search of a balcony.

Go home, Rudy. No one is listening to your fearmongering any longer. I think they stopped about October 2001.

You should be sickened by how you politicize what was an infamous day in U.S. history.

Politicians who politicize the grief and pain of others are the lowest common denominator and make us all ashamed.

"It is fair to say that Osama Bin Laden would be given new rights that nobody ever had before," Rudy continued.

Habeas corpus is a new right that nobody ever had before?

Memo to McCain: Please, please, puleeze have Rudy speak at every campaign event. In fact, he'd make a crackerjack VP candidate.

user-pic

Yep, it's a new right that nobody had before the . . . . . Magna Carta. What a buffoon!

user-pic

I don't think the Magna Carta gave unlawful enemy combatants the right to appeal their detention in US Federal court...I could be wrong though...

user-pic

1. Not what mr. 9/11 said.

2. It's called habeus corpus. Look it up.

user-pic

Actually it's "habeas copus" and I am familliar with the concept. I'm also aware of the fact that it has never been extended to lawful or unlawful combatants in military custody. That's what the military tribunals were for. Now a detainee at Gitmo has more rights than a guard at Gitmo.

user-pic

copus=corpus

user-pic

Got me on the spelling. Second time I made that stupid mistake. I'll make sure to double check spelling next time.

I think the fundamental dispute is that you believe that there is some all out war going on and I think that we are dealing with criminals. Nonetheless, what is the big deal to have a stupid hearing why we are holding these people? They should have been tried and convicted long ago.

This really isn't a war between states like wwII. This is dealing with criminals. Why do you want to give them status as soldiers or warriors and not treat them as common criminals? It doesn't make sense and only plays into their hands.

user-pic

If they are captured on the battlefield they should be treated as outlined in the Geneva Conventions which states "...the status of a detainee may be determined by a 'competent tribunal'." Until the Supreme court ruled last week that had been a military tribunal, under the UCMJ rules. Now it's a US Federal court under those rules, if they weren't Marandized on the battlefield will their case be tossed out? Certainly no warrants were issued for their "arrests." Do they have a right to face their accuser? Does it have to be determined which US soldiers captured which detainee and if that can't be determined will they then be released? And back to the original question, is a military tribunal competent enough to adjudicate a court martial of a guard at Gimo but not the status of a detainee at Gitmo?

user-pic

Oh brother, you don't understand the ruling.

1. Most of prisoners weren't captured on a battlefield. They were captured in pakistan and turned over to us by pakistani intelligence. This argument is a red herring.

2. Incidentally, I thought that we already beat the taliban in afghanistan and the war was won, why weren't they released when hostilities ended?

3. You really don't understand the ruling. I agree that the UCMJ would have been adequate, but the problem is that's not what they were using. Warner and Graham wanted to use that and just put the prisoners under the UCMJ, which would have been fine, but the king and his cronies didn't want to do that and came up with the rubberstamp commissions that didn't give a fair hearing. That's the genisis of the smackdown by the supremes. Incidentally, a us soldier could file a writ of habeas corpus and would get a hearing in federal court as well. The court would then kick it back to the UCMJ proceedings, because they are adequate. I don't get your arguments. They make no sense.

4. No the military commissions set up by the administration would not be sufficient for a hearing for a us soldier or any american. They were a joke.

5. You are being extreme, not unexpectedly, on what would happen before a federal court on a writ of habeas corpus for one of the prisoners. Not surprising.

They are criminals, treat them as such. Why do you want to turn these criminals into war heroes in their native lands? Why don't you answer that one? It makes no sense.

This man was once a US Attorney. Imagine what would happen to the Constitution if he were to become president.

Giuliani needs to be sent back to his prolonged Weekend with Bernie (Kerik).

THIS IS GREAT NEWS!!! FOR MCCAIN!!!

The quality of surrogates between these two campaigns is staggering.
Yesterday I was listening to Richard Clark defend Barack Obamas views on how to treat terrorism and how the republicans have completely mismanaged this effort and made ourselves less safe.His arguments were factual, lucid,and based upon years of professinal service.
On the other hand we have Rudy Guilianis one man band of 9-11,9-11,9-11!!! The whole time ignoring the facts that he moved the terrorism command center to the World Trade Center.He spent one hundred and twenty million,banging this one drum, and netting something like twelve republican delegates.
These people are completely incompetent.
Anyone notice what's happening in Afghanistan lately?

Yeah, the Taliban are taking over villages, several of them. Afghanistan is slipping away.... piece by piece....

He's even more pathetic than that... It was actually only 1 delegate...

Rudy is nothing. Let them use him as a lapdog attackdog, and it will implode as a strategy. He's not 'America's Mayor',
he's 'America's Mare': a horse's ass.

I am so salivating over this. Who wants to bet that before noon something goes out from the Obama camp along the lines of "We are not going to be lectured on counterterrorism by someone who located his command center inside the biggest target on the eastern seaboard so that he could (One of the below)

1. Have a love shack walking distance from city hall.
2. Do a favor for his mob buddies.
3. Do a favor for his real estate buddies.
4. Be closer to his pal Roger Ailes.

We'll you get the idea. They are serving up meatballs for the Obama rapid response team. Expect them to keep knocking them out of the park.

user-pic

What's really funny is that the obama camp doesn't even have to do that. Everyone knows that mr. 9/11 is a buffoon. The media will do the obama camp's work for them.

I wish that were true but sadly its not. For instance The Boston Herald today reported on The McCain camp's "Sept 10 Mindset" BS without even mentioning the Obama camp's response. Keep in mind that the worlds largest media empire is run by former Bond villain Rupert Murdoch. That paper belongs where I find it every morning. On the floor of my office bathroom

user-pic

I agree that the media is totally right-wing, with the bond villain at the helm. However, mr. 9/11 is such a buffoon that there will be some bleed into the reporting, hopefully. In the end, I don't think its necessary and the obama camp will stay above the fray and keep the message positive.

Joe on Morning Joe this A.M.; "Torture's okay if the detainee is bad enough."

On 9/11, in America's darkest hour, Rudy performed like a hero, on 9/11, which happened on 9/11, in case you were wondering. And you know, 9/11 is an important date in our history. 9/11 will not be forgotten. Count on Rudy to bring that spirit of 9/11 to McCain, who is already fighting to finish what Bin Laden started on 9/11.

Thank you. 9/11.

9/11.

I wonder how much he charged to participate in the conference call.

Rudy's reemergence as the standard bearer of "911" fear politics and jingoistic nonsense about giving "rights" to terrorists wouldn't scare me half as much if I weren't convinced there are so many Americans gullible enough to take the fall on this fearmongering. Americans get what they deserve.

Lovely Nina (and your pic is *lovely*), I strongly agree that American voters have a lot to answer for in bringing us these fools. Totally. But it is up to a candidate (and campaign) in part to make them realize it, see it, own up to it, avoid doing it again. I think BHO might be able to fill the bill.

His aura of national security experience comes solely from having been photographed walking through the smoke and dust on 9/11.

Yes, and the only reason he was walking through the smoke and dust is that his bunker was unusable (and later that day destroyed) because Rudy insisted on locating it next to the #1 terrorist target in the United States. Instead of managing the crisis, Rudy left New York's emergency response chaotic and leaderless as he wandered the streets looking for a make-shift command center.

It's worth reminding people of this: http://rudy-urbanlegend.com/

Rudy! The gift that keeps on giving.

"he wandered the streets looking for a make-shift command center." And a make-up man to boot!

Look at the primary highlight reels strung together by various media outlets (Slate and MSNBC come to mind), and you will invariably find the clip of Joe Biden mocking Rudy with, "Every sentence has three parts. A noun, a verb, and 9/11."

That joke was the singlemost accurate, devastating line of the primary season for two reasons: it was clever, and it was profoundly true.

Every day McCain's campaign moves ever closer to that point where its awfulness crosses below that of Dole's 1996 effort.

Tapping Rudy as your 9/11 point man knowing full well the ridicule he faced on that point moves the McCain camp ever closer to that point.

Unbelievable. I mean, really.

The only problem for McSame is that Nosferatu can only come out and shill for him at night. This will limit his effectiveness.

The guy who thinks people think he's a hero, but people really think he's a jerk, jerking off on 9/11- reporting from New York.

I disagree with you one on point, Greg. I believe there is merit in listening to the entirety of Giuliani's taped remarks. It was a real hoot.

user-pic

Maybe I'm being nitpicky, but Rudy is seemingly coming out against establishing any kind of rights for accused terrorists, while simultaneously conceding that they are only "alleged" terrorists.

What exactly is the Zero of 9/11's claim to greatness?

"Hey, everybody, run uptown, and fast"?

user-pic

Why doesn't Rudy actually try and give us a figure to how many terrorists they have actually prosecuted and convicted through their ways of Gitmo and torture? If any at all. And Rudy brings up a good GOP point,...it's much better to torture people who may not be the enemy rather than actually go after Osama Bin Laden. Talk about being weak on terror,...who dropped the ball on Bin laden and went after Saddam instead? Go Rudy, he's sinking faster than his campaign for the presidency. Time to capitalize on foolish statements like this.

McCain has a pet Nazi!

I'm confused as to why anyone should listen to Rudy on 9/11, defense, national security...or, really, anything else. Hasn't the American public already spoken on his outlook, and said "No"? Is he thinking his one delegate is going to leverage him some policy input at the Republican Convention?

I just saw the CNN clip played on NY1, and I was simply mystified. Why is this guy still getting airtime?

I heard that Rudy Giuliani was a Hero of 9/11. I heard that he exhibited real leadership that day.

Now, where did I hear that? Hmmm. Oh yeah, he told me.

This guy is such a joke, it's not even worth talking about this dork.

user-pic

"I heard that Rudy Giuliani was a Hero of 9/11.

Now, where did I hear that? Hmmm. Oh yeah, he told me."

He probably charged you for that gem of information too.

I used to love to hear him say "strict constructionist judges." It makes me laugh.

Rudy demanded money to make ads for repubs and he's probably getting paid for this attack. We'll see if they think he's earning his keep.

You know, there's a very good reason the republicans trot out these assholes to make smear points against the democratic candidate. It's only because the republicans think the American people are extremely stupid and gullible. And you know what ? Look at the past two elections, folks.

Look at the past two elections, folks.

Both close enough to be stolen by the Republican'ts.

Not this time.

Is our electorate learning?

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address