A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

I hope voters judge candidates by their associates.


The right-wing rap sheet
Submitted by Rick Perlstein on June 25, 2007 - 10:26am.
By now most of the world should know that Rudolph Giuliani's South Carolina campaign chair is not a cocaine dealer. No, none of that. He's alleged to have merely given the stuff away.

One of our minor obsessions here at The Big Con is how, when it comes to conservative failure, obvious patterns - the sinkhole epidemic, right-wing terrorism - get reported, in our "liberal media," merely as isolated incidents, one after the other after the other.

The case of the Palmetto State Party Boy reminds me of another: that the Republican Party, and especially its presidential campaigns, is staffed stem to stern with alleged criminals.

Romney's got two. His director of operations is a loon with a habit of impersonating police officers for his own freakish purposes, a crime carrying a penalty of up to one year in prison. More gravely, the co-chairman of his Utah finance committee is being sued for alleged "physical abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual abuse" at the residential boarding schools he operated.

And as I reported here, ol' Hollywood Fred Thompson keeps around as a close advisor a man whose most notable resume line is his work stealing campaign documents for Richard Nixon.

The California Republican Party has hired an undocumented immigrant - or, as Republicans like to call them, "illegal aliens" - to run its operations.

Giuliani? Where to begin. The coke guy. The fact that his consulting firm has kept employed a pedophile priest ("cautious but relentless" in "pursuing his victims," a grand jury found) accused of covering up 60 molestation accusations. His old pal Bernie Kerik: sickening, isn't it, that Giuliani tried to foist this man on the nation to protect our homeland security? He's since pled guilty to ethics violations committed while working for the city. Kerik also had mob ties - a fact upon which he'd been briefed. He coughed up that admission after, at first, saying he'd had no idea.

As for Giuliani himself, his proclivity for skipping meetings of the Iraq Study Group so he could rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars giving motivational speeches is merely a moral, as opposed to a literal, crime. So we'll keep him off this list for now.

Romney expected to do less well in the money stakes this quarter; could spell trouble for his campaign.

Romney to Tap Own Money for Campaign

Giuliani is looking more foolish every day.

Giuliani slams Bill Clinton on terrorism By BOB LEWIS, Associated Press Writer
37 minutes ago



VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. - Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani on Tuesday accused former President Clinton of not responding forcefully enough to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing or later terrorist attacks.

Rudi should be attacking Bush on terrorism, not Clinton. Before 9/11, Bush did nothing in the face of strong warnings. In response to 9/11, Bush (duh!!) attacks Iraq, which has become a great breeding ground for terrorists.

Advocate, It's so obvious to almost everybody, only people like Giuliani doesn't "get it." He must be blind to the chaos Bush created during the past six years. A loser.

Romney Strapped Dog to Car Roof
June 28, 2007 8:45 AM

ABC News' Jake Tapper Reports: Republican presidential candidate former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., has angered animal rights activists for strapping his dog to the roof of his car on a family trip from Boston to Ontario, Canada.

According to the Boston Globe, in one of the family's 12-hour drives to their family's cottage in Canada over 25 years ago, Romney strapped a dog carrier to the roof of the car for the whole trip -- with the family Irish setter, Seamus, inside.

Seamus protested in a scatological way, going to the bathroom on the roof of the car.

Animal rights activists reached by TIME Magazine said the tale seems a little cruel.

"It is commonsense that any dog who's under extreme stress might show that stress by losing control of his bowels: that alone should have been sufficient indication that the dog was, basically, being tortured," Time quoted Ingrid Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals as saying.

Newkirk said it was "a lesson in cruelty that was ... wrong for [his children] to witness."

User Comments
link

Lovely people, those republicans.

Nothing foolish about that. Granted hindsight is always 20/20, but if it's permissible to slam Bush for not doing enough for several months before the attacks; it's certainly reasonable to slam Clinton for not doing much in the 8 years between them.

I'm talking about Giuliani's one-sided, biased, comment about Clinton while saying nothing about Bush.

How much warning did Clinton have vs Bush?

Rudy had how many years to outfit the NYPD and NYPD with communication systems that worked and worked together. New York knew there was a major problem especially after 1993. Rudy's failure is duly noted by the NYFD and it did cost lives. It will become a more well known and talked about issue in the coming days. Rudy dumped on the firemen big time before, during and after 911 and will have to face up. "GIULIANI'S 9/11 FAILURES"

A. PRIOR TO 9/11

1. IGNORING THE FBI - When the WTC was attacked in 1993 and we had a President who actually captured and killed EVERY person responsible for those attacks, the FBI released a series of recommendations to NYC to follow in the mid 1990s. But Giuliani, by that point replacing a competent Bill Bratton with an incompetent Howard Safir (and later third grade detective and door holder Bernie Kerik) put his ego (Giuliani is an incompetent leader and only feels secure around people even more incompetent) ahead of security and snubbed his nose at the FBI. Had these recommendations been implemented, more American lives in NYC would have been saved on 9/11.

2. FIREFIGHTER EQUIPMENT - Part of those recommendations were to give the firefighters radio equipment to communicate from ground to air. Those on the ground knew that the WTC would collapse 15-20 minutes down the road. IF the firefighters had the proper radio equipment, they would have been told to get out. Instead, they climbed to their death.

3. The COMMAND CENTER IN THE SKY - Only an idiot builds a command center 23 stories in the sky next to a major target of terrorists AFTER being told by the FBI NOT TO. Had there been an operational command center on 9/11, more lives would have been saved.

4. COORDINATION OF DEPARTMENTS - Again Giuliani the incompetent ignored the FBI recommendations to coordinate police with fire and EMT. Instead, we had a bunch of people running around not knowing what to do. This indecisiveness and confusion cost lives on 9/11.
link

The record is clear that Clinton did nothing. He treated terrorists as a criminal problem, not a national security problem. That is the record. Also, the "wall" prevented agencies within the federal government from communicating between them concerning potential terrorists, and this factor was instrumental in us not preventing 911, which factor was ignored by the 911 commission of course. Hmmm, what papers did Sandy Bergler steal and probably destroy? I am not particularly a Guiliani fan, but he is totally correct in regard to Clinton's record.

Also, Clinton pardoned terrorists just before leaving office, for what reason we don't know, except to help his wife get elected in New York, so the guy has a terrible record on terrorism. Couldn't be worse.

okie, Go back to school. Clinton was in office less than two months when the twin towers were attacked. He also had to contend with other issues left over from Bush Sr.

Foreign policy of the Clinton Administration
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Foreign policy of the Clinton Administration was the foreign policy of the United States from 1993 to 2001 under President of the United States Bill Clinton during his Administration. Clinton's main foreign policy advisors were Secretaries of State Warren Christopher and Madeleine Albright and National Security Advisors Anthony Lake and Sandy Berger.

President Clinton assumed office shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War, but nevertheless was forced to confront numerous international conflicts. Shortly after taking office, Clinton had to decide whether the United States, as a world superpower, should play a role in the conflicts and violence occurring in Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Haiti.
Initially, Clinton was reluctant[1] to become involved militarily in international conflicts. However, Clinton came to believe[2] that the United States had a stake in the protection of human rights and the promotion of the political and economic stability of remote countries. As Commander in Chief, Clinton ordered armed forces to these regions to end fighting, maintain peace, and protect innocent civilians, and few American lives were lost in military action. Clinton also spent much of his foreign policy effort on trying to end the conflicts in Northern Ireland and the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular.

There are always issues "left over," imposter.

Undeniable facts, imposter:
Clinton administration treated terrorists as a criminal problem, not a national security problem. Most informed people have recognized this as a fundamental mistake, and a big one.
Secondly, Clinton had a chance to get OBL, and passed on it.
Third, Clinton pardoned known terrorists, for reasons unknown, but the only logical one that I've heard being to help his wife get elected in New York.

Your Wikopedia article sounds nice, but has little substance, imposter. Many of the problems we have now are due to his mistakes.

Oh, is that so?

Informed people like, say, the ones who were on duty when 9/11 happened? They didn't start treating terrorism like anything other then a police problem until too late.

Like the ones who pushed for the Iraq war, and still support it? These are the 'informed' people?

I assert that treating terrorism as a criminal problem is not a fundamental mistake whatsoever, and that the 'informed' folks have made a complete mess of things inspite of their supposed wisdom.

Cycloptichorn

okie: Many of the problems we have now are due to his mistakes.


I wonder what world okie lives in? Since Bush doesn't make mistakes, his approval rating is now below 30%, and some GOP leaders are now criticizing their leader on Iraq.

And Bush Jr was in office less then 8 months when 9/11 happened,and he also had to contend with other issues left over from Clinton.

Since you have claimed that Bush was responsible since he was POTUS when the attack happened,how can you now,with a straight face,claim that Clinton wasnt responsible since he was POTUS at the time?

What exactly is the amount of time a person must be POTUS before he or she becomes responsible for what happens during their admin?

Nobody has ever claimed that Bush makes no mistakes. My argument is the same as it has always been, and that is that Clinton was not doing his job, obviously, as he was taken up with more interesting personal things. At least Bush has applied himself to the job. I give him credit for that. You don't have to agree with every detail of how he has done the job. In fact, I disagree with many of his domestic policies and have said as much, and I don't necessarily agree with all of his foreign policy, but he has at least earned my respect as a decent man trying to do his job as president, even when I disagree with him. I give no credit in this regard, whatsoever, none, zilch, nothing, to the Clinton administration. The whole bunch of them should have been impeached, as they were not doing their job, period. At least Bush cares about us out here in fly over country, more than his interns.

I am simply pointing out what everybody knows, whether they wish to admit it or not.

okie, i do have a question. do you honestly think you represent "fly over country USA" because if you think that you would be just as wrong as if I said I represent "fly over country USA" You okie are every bit as much an extremist as I am. I'm thinking you need to realize reality.

My views are similar to much of rural America, dys, that constitute a large body of power. I speak as an individual, but I know plenty of people that agree with much or most of what I believe. We are admittedly out of step with intelligentsia, the main stream Media, and the liberal establishment, that I admit. I wish I could say we are in the majority, as we used to be, but we do deserve to have our voices heard, which cries out for decency, responsibility, and common sense in government.

If you view my opinions as extreme, then perhaps Reagan, Eisenhower, Lincoln, and many other great Americans might be viewed as extremist according to you dys. I frankly don't know that you are an extremist, you seem awfully conflicted and confused from one opinion to the next.

okie: "...which cries out for decency, responsibility, and common sense in government."

Gezuz, it wasn't that long ago when the GOP led congress didn't listen at all to the democrats. Now, they want "decency, responsibility, and common sense government" while Iraq burns and many die - all while Bush ignores the wishes of the American People and congress. What a dork.