The Kerik indictment, Giuliani, and the GOP; Update: Kerik pleads not guilty
Update 2:00pm EasternThe NYPost compiles Kerik’s “rap sheet:”
Update 1:30pm Eastern Kerik pleads not guilty.
Here’s the PDF of the indictment.
Update 12:04pm Eastern. Kerik facing a cumulative 142 years in jail.
Rudy Giuliani in the wake of the indictment news: “I am not running as the perfect candidate.”
“Sad day,” prosecutors say.
Update 11:30am Eastern. McCain piles on: “McCain Says Kerik Reflects on Giuliani.” The problem is that this criticism of Giuliani’s bad judgement on vital homeland security and war on terror matters comes from Mr. “F*** You!” Shamnesty himself. Pot and kettle.
Update 9:14am Eastern. Kerik surrenders to authorities: “The U.S. attorney’s office said it would hold an 11:30 a.m. EST news conference with FBI and Internal Revenue Service officials in White Plains “to announce an indictment of a former public official.”
NYDN: Rudy Giuliani won’t say if he’d pardon Kerik as President.
***
We are all fallen, imperfect beings. The news of the federal indictment of Bernie Kerik is a sad moment, a cautionary tale, and an object lesson.
Sad, because Kerik rose from the child of a prostitute to “America’s cop”–and this nation loves such tales of success.
Cautionary, because it speaks to the fallibility of anointed heroes and the temptations of power.
An object lesson, because it highlights the flaws and vulnerabilities of GOP front-runner Rudy Giuliani’s on the issues of corruption and immigration enforcement.
Here’s what I wrote back in December 2004 when Kerik was forced to withdraw from consideration as DHS chief because of his illegal alien nanny problem and his lack of candor about the debacle:
I find it annoying that Bernard Kerik is getting praised in some quarters for “coming clean” and “accepting responsibility” for his “mistake.” From all accounts, including Kerik’s own, President Bush’s aides asked him upfront about the nanny question several times during the vetting process and he did not come clean.
Kerik didn’t just make some minor clerical error. He misled the White House. So, stop making him a martyr.
It’s also interesting that some political observers on both the left and right are pooh-poohing the illegal alien nanny issue. I heard Geraldo Rivera ask Rudy Giuliani during a press conference yesterday why Kerik was in trouble over a “de minimis” issue. A number of other commentators on the Sunday shows echoed that sentiment. And John Podhoretz says Rudy Giuliani, who pushed the Kerik nomination, won’t suffer any blowback.
I disagree. I think the fiasco substantially damages Rudy Giuliani’s reputation as a homeland security leader (and 2008 presidential nominee)–not only because of his sloppy vetting of Kerik, but also because Giuliani’s own laxity on immigration (more here on his open-borders record ) will be difficult to ignore as a result of the Kerik taint.
A few other thoughts on Bernard Kerik’s withdrawal :
First, it puts an end to feminist complaints that only women nominees are penalized for having “nanny problems.”
Second, it keeps a white-hot spotlight on many of the issues raised by maverick House Republicans during the “intel reform”/border security debate, including the push for secure documentation, improved employer verification of Social Security numbers, and strengthening of penalties for immigration-related fraud.
Third, it puts a much-needed focus on the need to enforce federal employer sanctions. Why is it that the only employers who ever seem to suffer consequences for hiring illegal immigrants are Cabinet nominees?! In 2002, the federal government fined only 13 employers nationwide for hiring illegal immigrants. Enforcement of employer sanctions has been a nationwide joke for the last two decades.
And fourth, unfortunately, it virtually kills the prospects of getting someone with real homeland security enforcement experience to head DHS.
Since that post nearly three years ago, there has been little change on the homeland security and immigration enforcement front. Giuliani still refuses to acknowledge his aggressive, proactive protection of New York’s sanctuary policies.
Hillary Clinton’s botched illegal alien license answer gave the GOP some breathing room. But when the Dem-on-Dem “pile-on” dies down, we are still left with a leading GOP presidential candidate who positions himself as War on Terror strong horse–but who exercised extraordinarily weak judgement in recommending his corrupted ally for the nation’s top homeland security post, continued to rationalize it, and fails to see his own culpability in perpetuating open-borders chaos in NYC.
Three years ago, the conventional wisdom from many parts of the NYC-DC punditocracy was that Giuliani’s Kerik problem wouldn’t matter in the ‘08 presidential election.
It does.
The grass-roots conservative base is sick and tired of cronyism and open-borders arrogance–two traits that dominate the Bush White House, two traits on naked display in the intertwined fates of Rudy Giuliani and Bernie Kerik, two traits that dangerously undermine public confidence and public safety.
If Republicans are going to decide that Giuliani is the best standard-bearer for the party, they better do so with eyes wide open and absolute candor. He is–at best–only marginally better than Hillary Clinton on immigration and border security. He was a bad judge of character at a key moment in the Department of Homeland Security’s history. And despite his lip service and cable TV-friendly talking points, he remains obstinately committed to non-enforcement of immigration laws when push comes to shove.
Caveat emptor.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » ABC News report: Kerik indicted
- JammieWearingFool
- Kerik Time « New Yorkers Against Rudy
- Dean's World
- Liberty Pundit
- The Mahablog » The Devil You Know
- Kerik Indicted and… a Pardon in the Making « The Van Der Galiën Gazette
- Vegas Bound « THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS
- java » Roger Ailes: Add Federal Felon To Your Resume? Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 makes it a crime to…
- java
- java
- EckerNet.Com » Blog Archive » She Nails It
- short term car lease
And Giuliani’s name is mentioned no fewer than 7 times on the page for CNN’s story. It’s amazing the selective connections the MSM makes. Newsbusters noted the same thing about CBS’ the “Early Show”.
You are known by the company you keep,
the company you sponsor, and the company you back. Kerik’s own problems are justifiably tied to Guliani.
Corruption and illegal immigration are two VERY big issues for me and, I would suggest, most Conservatives and Independents.
Pay attention, candidates, to the American public. We are well-informed (thanks to our gracious host and many others on the net) and we are pi$$ed off at your duplicity!
Nicely put. That’s just nicely put. However, unless there are warning signs, or some type of marker in a candidate’s background, any leader can be burned with an appointee/hire who later turns out to be corrupt. Cronyism is certainly a problem when the individual is sorely lacking in the qualifications, and chosen just as some type of favor. I hope whoever when’s the Whitehouse is square and on the level, because citizens are tired of the corruption. Looking at the two leading candidates, I’m not sure about the prospects.
MM,
Good post, too bad I have to go to class.
This is not happening.
Michelle is right that if we buy Rudy we should do so with open eyes. Maybe we can have Tancredo for Secretary of Homeland Security?
The sad fact these days is that the issue of character has virtually disappeared from the qualification process in both government and the private sector.
Overcoming a bad upbringing may be a sign of one’s tenacity, but it ultimately says nothing about a man’s character. We elect leaders who are effectively deadbeats when it comes to honoring their personal financial obligations and those who will sell out those they represent to the first lobbyist with a fat checkbook.
We appoint CEO’s to run companies who may be stellar salesmen, but who think nothing of cutting a few corners to enhance their personal wealth.
Glitz, glamour and charm have replaced character in the selection process. Who has the best hair, who hsa the whitest teeth, who has the best sounding voice; all these things eclipse the character issue.
We need to get back to asking the question, “Is he or she a good person”, versus the visceral response to good looks and a hollow but great sounding message.
That requires some effort, unfortunately. And until the voters get motivated enough to dig a little deeper, we will be left with electing people based on soundbites and glossy pictures.
George W Giuliani. Wake up people!
I’m afraid the day will come when the
American people will wish they had Kerik for DHS chief instead of Cherkoff
…and don’t forget that DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff (we all know how well he’s handling that little border issue) used to work for Giuliani.
Rudy surrounds himself with bad-news people! He’s obviously a poor judge of character. The former Monsignor/ alleged child molester and Bernie Kerik and Rudy staunchly defends both. Well, maybe he’s backed off from Bernie, and I imagine he’ll back away from the Monsignor once he’s proven guilty.
Isn’t it great that we are all such perfect conservatives on this blog. As pure as the new fallen snow!
I am not so naive as to think I am going to have the perfect candidate to vote for but I want the one who will beat the democrats. It’s more likely that Giuliani will listen to our wishes than Clinton
Guess you missed the very first sentence of my post:
Nope! I didn’t miss it but everyone else did!
Rudy is Hillary-Lite. The 30% less unattractive candidate.
Hear Hear! Well said MM!
Sobering stuff Michelle.
I wonder if it’s not too late to mount a conservative insurrection against our ‘top tier’ and solidly get behind Duncan Hunter, with the right wing blogosphere at the tip of the spear.
HAHA. I’m funny. And delusional.
Giuliani is just Bush II, the Sequel. Everybody knows it, though few can bring themselves to say it. Yes, he was great immediately following 9/11, but he was terrible on security during his time in office leading up to the attack, and like McCain he will say anything to get the base off his back — and then if elected (a very big “if,” indeed), will revert to his true, open borders, glad-handing self.
I don’t want to rag on the man about Kerik, it was a mistake and I am willing to be forgiving — the guy seemed solid at first — but on everything else, Rudy is just not up to it. He’s out of his depth and it shows.
**********************************
So Mark Steyn for President! And VP? Ann Coulter.
Oh, boy. I love Ann, dearly. Craziness and all. But VP. Yikes. RE: Steyn, you may have something…but he wasn’t born here (correct me if I’m wrong there)…probably not gonna happen.
Michelle, excellent post.
I am very disappointed in Mr. Bernie (say it aint so). I hope he can take his punishment, straighten up and fly right. I think he deserves what he deserves but some part of me is really pulling for him.
Gulianni is better than Hillary. But we really need another Gipper…sigh. And that won’t happen.
There is a representative out here in California named Tom McClintock. He should have beaten out Arnie out for Gov. of California (IMHO) but popularity and notariaty took the votes.
I’d probably vote him…at least for the next governer. Presidential race is not in the books. But again, if I had my druthers.
More Rudy -
Via Wikipedia.
Heh. Maybe National Rudy Online can lead the way?
i’d take giuliani’s bad judgment over bush’s anyday.
As it happens, we don’t have to take either mans bad judgment. Now is our chance to upgrade our Republican politicans. Lets kick the corrupticons to once side and elect somebody we don’t have to be ashamed of.
Lets not pick a man who says things like “illegal immigration is illegal, but its not a crime.”
At least Rudy has the stones to address it
Unlike another Presidential candidate with a classified document stealer/shredder on speed dial (who happens to be married to a person with OWNING UP issues, ahem)
I’d like a candidate who is NOT a Democrat himself. And that is what Rudy Giulaini is. He’d have to move right to be called a RINO.
Stupid story. Rudy is not this guy’s watch dog. Get over it.
As Dennis Prager once said, when you vote for a candidate, you’re not only voting for him, you’re voting for his Rolodex.
Giuliani’s association with Kerik does not augur well for the type of cabinet appointments Giuliani might make as Commander in Chief. Remember that it was Giuliani who first recommended former U.S. Attorney Louis Freeh for Director of the the FBI back during the Clinton administration. Though opinion is divided on Freeh’s overall perfomance as director, it cannot be denied that the Bureau under Freeh completely botched the Wen Ho Lee investigation. Would Giuliani, if elected, appoint another Freeh-clone to the helm should the current director step down?
These are questions we should be asking of all the candidates, not only Giuliani.
Dumbest. Quote. Ever.
Unless someone’s Rolodex reads “Jesus, Jesus, Jesus” page after page you’re going to have issues. Get over it.
I consider Fred’s Rolodex much more troubling than Giuliani’s. (see Abraham, Spencer)
I belive that America could handle Clinton in the White House for four our eight years, we managed it before. And I, unlike some, don’t believe that she would be stupid enough to scuttle America’s effort in the War on Terror.
What I do believe would be damaging to America is if the Republican Party were to sell out its principles in order to maintain political power.
Giuliani would only be the beginning. Once the Republican Party has a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, weak on immigration, anti-second ammendment leader; the only way for the party to go will be down hill.
How could social conservatives demand that our agenda be included in the party platform when it directly contradicts the views of the leader of the party?
If we elect Giuliani, we will only be proving that we value power more than everything that we claim we stand for. We will need to change our mascot from an elephant to a RINO.
My pastor at church says: “One’s character can be measured by the company he keeps.”
Giuliani is of poor moral character.
I have to say my first thought was how awful because I really liked Kerik and it shows how the powerful no matter whom they are will continue to disappoint…..I;m going to guess that there is a defective gene in those who rise to such heights which makes them more apt to be “soulless”.
I suspect it is in the gaining of and the desire to keep that power…..and it would be in all of the Presidential candidates as well not just Rudy….you need only look into all of their lying eyes.
Southern: “One’s character can be measured by the company he keeps.”
Or the “origianl” version of the quote. Proverbs 13:20 He who walks with the wise grows wise, but a companion of fools suffers harm.
Very Very True.
Related is I Cor 15:33 Do not be misled: “Bad company corrupts good character.”
oops - original
Rudy’s friendship with a corrupt politician should come as no surprise to anyone - they are politicians.
Bring it down to the elements, MM is very correct that everyone has fallen short; however, I doubt that I am alone when I say that our political leaders seem to have fallen a great deal shorter than the rest of us.
I dread to see Hillary in the White House, but I can’t see Rudy carrying the votes.
This is beginning to look like a good election cycle to vote for the person I really want in the White House and not the ‘lesser of two evils’.
I hope Fred Thompson can win the primary race. It is still early, and polls can be wrong about his numbers.
after 911 we wanted to believe in heroes–and the media certainly fed that need–now it turns out rudy spent more time at yankee’s games (where he could be seen as a symbol of 911 resistance) than he did at the world trade center, and it turns out kerik is a pretty nasty and self-serving guy.
good reminder not to hold off on annointing people to sainthood. doesn’t mean they’re not out there, but we need to be more selective.
Rudy Sinks. Mitt Rises. Go Mitt !!!
I have always felt less than impressed with Giuliani due to his sanctuary policies while mayor of New York City. His other positions on key issues of 2nd Amendment and right to life issues continues to keep him at arms length in our household. This incident continues to fuel those doubts. Both he and Romney bother me as RINO light candidates that will sell us out to the nutroot led Democrats in a New York minute.
I lived in NYC when Giuliani was elected. He appointed Kerik after he fired Ray Kelly for taking too much credit for falling crime rates in NYC. People at the time said Kerik was unqualified, inexperienced, and mob related, but Rudy appointed him anyway. You cannot appoint a known mobster as police Commissioner and then call it a small innocent mistake.
Conservative support for Giuliani and Romney does not make conservatives look good. These two men have serious problems with truth telling. They are denying positions that they once wrapped themselves in to get elected. Rudy is endorsed by religious conservative Pat Robertson, despite the fact that he is denied communion because he violated fundamental principles of his faith (unlike Kerry).
Await the vast left-wing slime machine!
LGM, now that the first Mrs. Kerry is deaceased he can receive communion. He was not able to do so until she passed away last year. Get your facts straight and explain the entire story.
BTW nothing makes you look good. Your absolute hatred of conservatives is quite telling.
lgm - Why should you be concerned with truth?
And the liberals enamorment with the truth impaired Clinton’s, Kennedy’s and Kerry’s of the world makes them look good?
As far as I can tell, to a liberal, there is no such thing as absolute truth. I’ve observed that liberals spend years and years defending lack of truth, while true conservatives rather much spend their time condemning lack of truth from ANYBODY - whether with a (R) or (D) or nothing after their name. That is why you might have noticed that on this site to name one place, there has been an outcry for Larry Craig to go. Hi didn’t tell the truth.
birds of a feather flock together, you can soar with eagles or dredge on the ground with turkies..
i frankly, do NOT trust Guiliani. i do not want to be forced into voting for another lesser of two evils. i am hoping that this lowers his advantage quickly so i don’t have to vote for this guy in November 08. Geesh..
Well! that clinches it for me. If lgm is going to bad mouth Giuliani, I feel perfectly comfortable in voting for Rudy!
Does anyone know any details on just what “federal corruption charges” Kerik was indicted on?
Depending on what he’s up against, it may well be a tempest in a teapot, which could soon blow over. Although it is probably a given that the MSM will give this story more legs than Norman Hsu.
j s ragman,
This is from a report on my home page.
here’s a link to that page for the rest.
rr home
You’ve got that right!
Hey MM…
seems to me that we social conservatives are allowing the liberal MSM to effectively choose the Republican candidates. We hear about Rudy and the other social liberals and we never, never see or hear about social conservatives like hunter or tancredo…they get no press. Even if the money was the same, the MSM would still embargo them. So MM, it’s up to you and other social conservatives to get them some play time……..otherwise we end up losing even if republicans win……
Maybe it’s just my upbringing in the Northeast, but I have always had an impression that big city mayors are part politician and part mob boss (James Michael Curley comes to mind). They take care of their friends and screw their enemies. Everyone expects that the mayor’s friends will get their streets plowed first and their trash picked up and the mayor’s enemies won’t. Rudi’s reputation as a mean, spiteful, revengeful mayor fell right in line with this. Mayors can survive having scumbag associates because the voters expect it as normal and their power base stays loyal through the patronage system. So even if he weren’t weak on issues like immigration, I don’t think that he has what it takes to run a country. But then, I don’t think that any city mayor (regardless of size) has what it takes. Nevertheless, even in my worst nightmare scenario, any Republican candidate is preferable to the Clinton Crime Syndicate.
My husband is from Chicaago so I have learned
about big city mayors from his stories about the Daleys. However, I have to agree, if Kerik is no longer
viable why not Tancredo when his term is over? He has stated that he will not run for reelection.
Thanks, aj.
So in Clinton campaign terms, this would be defined as “networking”?
The Stupid Party has so thoroughly sacrificed any semblance of principles as they fail to grasp their shrinking power, they are rallying around a man who in normal sane times would’ve been pilloried as a liberal Democrat! Rudy is pro-abortion, pro-illegal immigration, anti-gun and thrice married - any of which would’ve been deal-killers for Republicans (much less conservatives) in the past - but we’re so scared of Hillary! that we’re supposed to accept him now? Pass.
Dirk (and others)…I’m not so sure the party is rallying around Rudy. That is what the MSM reports - but that’s because that’s what they want. The MSM desire is for a left vs really far left choice. Don’t believe a poll anywhere at this point. The only polls that matter are the ones that open 6 am on a certain morning and close that evening. Now we just have to make sure that the only ones with input into those polls, are ones who have the right to cast their vote.
Well, if the association between Guiliani and Kerik is enough to set your hair on fire, after 16 years of the cesspool of scandal and corruption of the Clinton’s, I only gots two words…
Go figure
McCain piling on - lol - He’s apparently thinking - if I’m on a sinking ship, I’m gonna take you with me.
aj, are you sure you haven’t opened the “Clinton File” by mistake?
ConservitveRus, I think you’re 100% right that the MSM wants Rudy to be the nominee. I don’t pretend to know hundres of people but I do know quite a few from my days in the military and from friends of my husband who currently serves. We can’t find anyone who says they’re voting for him. I gave money to Duncan Hunter’s campaign and a friend of mine gave to Rudy. She said that her money is better spent. I don’t think so myself but it just seems that it’s almost impossible for anyone but Rudy to get any traction. I really wanted to like Fred but I don’t see any fire in his belly. The campaign is not a scripted event that will run in continous reruns on TNT. I don’t know, I just know that for me this is just another in a long line of reasons not to like Rudy.
What an amazing piece of justice we have in this country….not defending at all - but if Mr. Kerik killed somebody he wouldn’t be facing 142 years in jail.
Just sayin
The MSM despises Rudy. The idea that they want him to win is ludicrous.
They are bashing him in the hopes that somebody like Romney or Huckabee wins the nomination, so that they can then scare the heck out of the American people with worries about a theocracy.
Is it bigoted against religious people? Absolutely. So what? The MSM doesn’t care.
They want the strongest republican general election candidate who can put blue states in play to go down in flames in the primaries.
Also, did anybody think the timing of this announcement was a coincidence, one day after the Pat Robertson announcement?
The timing reeks like a Dan Rather memo.
To quote Double-M, “Puh-lease.”
(I hope I spelled it right).
Respectfully,
eric
http://www.blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com
How, exactly, are they “bashing him”? From what I can see they are being nicer to him than to Hillary. Hsu received a lot more play in the MSM than Rudy’s problems are getting.
blacktygrrrr, you were saying that Rudy is a conservative Republican. I’d like you to read these comments by him.
Even though I consider Islam’s war against the West to be number one on my list of priorities I find it hard to vote for Rudy. Everything else he stands for is on the Democratic/Global/Socialist platform. Tell me again, why is he running as Republican?
Whats your beef with Spencer Abraham? He has no criminal record that I’ve heard of.
Can anyone tell me why the idea is out there that Giulinai would be any good regarding the GWOT?
What specifically has he ever done or said to cause people to think he is some sort of Avenging Angel of Death to terrorists?
Fixed that for ya there Rude!
You are thinking of William Bratton, who Rudy fired and has since moved to the LAPD. Ray Kelly was Police Commissioner under Dinkins and again, now, under Bloomberg.
Kelly actually got the NYC crime reduction started before Giuliani and has continued it post-Rudy. If Rudy had wanted to promote someone for DHS, Kelly would have been a great choice. Kerik was bizzarely unqualified–Harriet Meyers unqualified.
Living in NYC, I’m glad Kelly hasn’t taken a DC post since we need him here.
I find McCain’s comments tawdry. Talk about the politics of “Pile On.”
The “Rap Sheet” - nice. By the time people list “The Moll”, you’re pretty much toast.
On the other hand - sad to say - I think he’d be doing a better job with the border.
If it comes down to Guliani or Clinton I will still vote for Rudy.
Guliani has never been high on my preference list. He just moved into a tie with Ron Paul, behind every other Republican candidate. The kindest thing I can say is I would still prefer Rudy to any of the Democratic candidates.
Regardless of Mr. Guliani and his issues, let’s not forget our old friend the presumption of innocence, which has fallen on rather hard times of late.
Let us also not forget how unbelievably f*ck*d the American legal system is (doubters need to read “Until Proven Innocent” or Mark Steyn’s long and depressing series on the Conrad Black trial.)
Mr. Kerik, I do not like you one little bit, but good luck regardless.
I hear a lot of people saying that Mr. Kerik was un/underqualified. A few facts:
1. As head of Rikers Island, he decreased the number of assaults from ONE THOUSAND to SEVENTY incidents a year.
2. The crime rate decreased by 5% over Kerik’s tenure.
3. Along with Giuliani, he risked his life on 9/11 to facilitate the evacuation of the WTC. According to Fred Siegal’s “The Prince of the City,” 97% of office workers below the fires were evacuated before the buildings came down.
4. Within weeks, NYC was a functioning city again with a decreasing crime rate, EVEN with a battered police force and extra responsibilities.
Yes, Mr. Kerik is not a squeeky-clean individual… and he deserves punishment for any crimes he has commited.
However, he is also an American hero who got the job done. We would be a lot safer today if he were in charge of Homeland Security. (Or anyone familiar with COMPSTAT policing programs…)
How quickly some people forget…
While people struggle over
- Rudy “sanctuary” Juiliani
- Hillaary “adultry-ok” Clinton
.. and other cheap politicians.
No matter what slim chance he stands, there is dignity in supporting Tom Tancredo. His record is impeccable. His patriotism unquestionable and his spirit, American.
After voting for Tom, I will not have to say “Why did I vote for this guy”. I know Tom will never sell America out to rich wahhabbis or to corporations with riches built on comman-man’s blood or turn a blind eye to foreign criminals while prosecuting deligent border patrol agents. With Tom, I know he will not “make sense” of driver’s license to criminals, nor leave America’s back-door open. With Tom, America cannot go wrong and can see myself in the mirror, with respect and dignity in exercising the ballot, with a clean conscience.
Still not too late to support a patriotic statesman like Tom Tancredo, than rich, spoilt, smooth-talking sellouts like Rudy / Hillary / Bush and the others.
Well said, ptwrtr1988
In my opinion the best line so far comes from blacktygrrrr:
“
beenthere has this, also, particularly,
All the Fred/Huckabee/McCain et al people here seem to be forgetting something pretty important, as has our host, it seems, with all due respect: Kerik has pleaded not guilty.I think people who are against Giuliani in general are using this as an excuse to point accusatory fingers at Rudy as though Kerik has already been tried and convicted.
For the record, here’s my choice for the GOP: someone who is pro-life, anti illegal immigrant to the point of at least trying to get some system to send all illegals back to their home country with a 10-year-ban on re-entering. This person is a huge fiscal and social conservative who can articulate the common sense of such values so convincingly that they are essetially unassailable by the MSM. This person is doggedly determined to destroy terrorist activities at almost any cost and isn’t afraid the point a few thermalnuclear intercontinental ballistics at rogue states that get out of hand to straighten them up, including Russia if they don’t start getting with the program. This person is disarmingly charming to the point of being nearly hypnotic with such charisma that even his or her enemies cannot help but love him or her. In the current PC climate this person might also be an ethnic woman. And on top of it all, this person has such name appeal that he or she outdistances Hillary in every poll by 20 points.
The problem is this person doesn’t exist. So we have to compromise. the MSM is now pointing the way (just walk in the opposite direction for a stable country): every day they have more and more good things to say about Thompson - who is at 7% in the polls - and less and less about the front-runners, even supposedly “liberal” Giuliani. They do this every election cycle to see to it that the GOP frontrunner will get eaten alive by their candidate on the left.
The necessary compromise has to have some obvious priorities. Giuliani leads Hillary. He’s the only one with a record a person can manifestly point to in terms of tangible, real-life results: bringing the mob under control in NYC, cleaning up the cesspool that was Times Square/42nd street and turned it into a wonderland and of course his amazing leadership after 9/11.
Early on is one thing, but this late in the game you don’t start with the guy who who matches your values and work backward to that person’s electibility less than a year out from the election, you do it the other way around and compromise for the best if you want to get a majority of victory instead of a complete loss. Giuliani is the closest thing we have to a sure bet, and he isn’t half bad if you don’t start accusing him of dealing with dirty people and making bad appointments before the dirty guy/bad appointment has even been scheduled for his day in court much less before he’s had it.
Idealism is great, but unless it’s Hillary’s ideals you want to embrace, some angry anti-Giuliani people better start getting practical and with the program and do it right away.
Rudy Giuliani is not a compromise, he is an unconditional surrender. He stinks on all the issues you mentioned.
He DOES NOT lead Hillary! He trails her.
What “amazing leadership” did he display after 911? I hear this all the time and nobody ever explains it. And its a little deranged for you to say that people such as Romney, McCain, Thompson, Huckabee, etc heve no record of accomplishment.
If you liked Bill Clinton but felt he was a litte too right wing, you will love Rudy Giuliani. Otherwise, you need to look elsewhere.
Idealism is great, but unless it’s Hillary’s ideals you want to embrace, some die-hard pro-Giuliani people better start getting practical and with the program and do it right away.
Because this sleazy liberal will never get the support of conservatives.
Why don’t you actually LOOK at his record before you say things like this? I’ve quoted you a part of it right here on this thread. Look at post #61 for starters. He’s not half bad, he is 100% bad.
The blasted Giuliani people make the Paul supporters seem sane. You can point out things about Rudy which would kill ten normal candidates, and they just refuse to pay the slightest bit of attention. Because he is a “great leader”!
My wife looked at the picture and asked when Rudy came out of the closet. Her comment was, “It looks like Rudy is embracing his life partner.”
In your opinion. In my mind an unconditional surrender is backing a candidate who cannot win against the clinton machine supported by an overwhelming, sympathetic-left and left-supportive mass media.
In some polls you’re right, in one not so much, but I’ll conceide that they’re in astatistical dead heat, which puts him several points ahead nationally of any other GOP candidate. So in that respect the detail is wrong but the point - that he’s way ahead of the pack - remains. Which makes me wonder why the anti-Giuliani people attack him so much. Do they think that by bringing down the one candidate who is more or less tied with Hillary, that some nature-abhorrs-a-vacuum, see-saw effect will take place and elevate another candidate to replace him to tie with Hillary? The factual answer is no. It will just leave conservatives in a less powerful position to combat Hillary.
If everyone says it maybe you simply aren’t paying attention. I could explain it, but it would take a long time and you’re angry, defensive attitude suggests to me that you’d just spin/rationalize what I said anyway, making explaining it a waste of my time. Suffice to say that when the ultra-left media calls a Republican “America’s Mayor” - and the majority of Republicans agree - the thinking isn’t flawed, presumably your ability to grasp the information is flawed.
DERANGED? You mean to suggest that defending Rudy’s record is like a crazy guy weilding a knife? Slow down and take several deep breaths. Compared to Rudy what have they got to run on? Seriously. “Leg-is-la-tion”? Cutting pork to one bill and adding pork to another? Building some fence on a boarder is about the most manifestly tangible thing any of them did. Lower taxes? Rudy did that. I know. I was in NY and read the pounding he took in the editorial pages all the time. (The left wing doesn’t love him and never did, at least until that one moment of fleeting sanity immediately after 9-11 when this country showed what it could be if people cut the crap and got together and made some productive gains with a little common sense).
What has McCain done? A war vet and “highly respected senator” who has often behaved like Ted Kennedy’s toy boy.
Romney? Well, he says he isn’t pro-abortion, but he once once. What makes Giuliani a tad better in many people’s eyes is that he doesn’t pay lip service at election time. He never did, and that’s one reason why tough New Yorkers, in a mostly Dem city, elected him. There’s one thing that cuts across party lines in NYC, and it’s the same reason Reagan did unusally well there for a conservative: dropping the BS and meaning it.
What has Huckabee done? (although i love the guy and wish he could win, but it’s just impossible, the media would slaughter him and what was left would be gnawed down by the Clinton machine until not even a bone was left)Two words to never forget: Bob Dole.
Rudy turned around a city and I was there to watch the slow, very hard-fought but miraculous transformation. And he did fight hard, the NY Times and the Daily News couldn’t stand him and fought him every step of the way, and he still prevailed. He was “Cruel” for taking mentally disturbed homeless and dangerous con men off the streets. He was “anti 1st amendment” for using a brilliantly clever tactic of keep porno houses such and such a distance from schools, legally shutting them down almost everywhere and vanquishing the drug-dealing and violent slime that usually went with them. Approps that, he did something thought nearly impossible at the time: he convinced developers to rebuild 42nd street from 8th ave - the port authority, where many get their first glimpse of the city - east beyond the intersection of Times Square, creating a trickle down financially which simply created the most stark before and after contrast one could ever imagine, apart from comparing Hawaii to the craters of the moon and did so with the full and relentless opposition of the local media. The porno industry in NYC was/is(?) run by the crime families, so on an entirely different front he was fighting them as well. And of course, he took the mob on directly, basically cleaning them out of one of their toughest strongholds, the Fulton Fish Market area downtown. This was no small thing. Even Elliot Ness had to get Capone of tax evasion. Giuliani took them on much more directly, won and lived to tell about it, not an easy thing to do in NYC/eastern NJ. In fact, an unprecidented accomplishment in the war against organized crime - to strike hard into the very belly of the beast and to, mostly, win. When the towers came down, of course, despite amazing danger for an elected official not to mention general health concerns, he went down right in the middle of the chaos co-ordinating and helping to organize while senators paniced and hid under their desks - or went home. And he did organize and lead. Those where mind-blowing days for an entire country, and he was cool and calm and, yes, this sounds fawning but fair is fair, couragious. Can you imagine Romney going down into the dust and asbestos so thick you couldn’t see 50 feet in front of you after a terrorist attack on the nation - the largest attack ever on US soil? Or all the senators who evacuate the captial at the drop of a hat when there is an alert doing what Giuliani did? People take his on-the-scene leadership style for granted and it’s easy to do because he’s so different from the pack that people rarely make a direct comparison with other leaders, but they should. The guy is not only someone who has accomplished much, but he’s done it in a gutsy - a very gutsy - way.
No, none of the other guys with their paper pushing, their appeasement to liberals in the senate (depending on whom we’re discussing) and basically comfy, desk-bound duties don’t matter an iota compared to mafia-fighting, city re-building (in hostile political territory), porno-vanquishing, 9-11 leader Rudy Giuliani. And if says he’s pro-choice, well, I don’t like it, but I like liars and flip-floppers even less. No, those other guys can’t hold a candle to Rudy’s record. Being a prisoner of war is a terrible thing, but living through it is a personal accomplishment. What Giuliani did - and sometimes put his life on the line when he didn’t necessarily have to - he did in the fulfillment of his job, and did things no one else did before. That’s huge. That’s gigantic. And his record absolutely dwarfs the competition. And that’s why he can beat Hillary. Everyone else has words and spin, and in that world, Hillary wins because she has a massive machine and the full unflinching support of the media. Giuliani has the record of manifest results.
I’d ignore this, but it’s too strange not to quote for effect.
You mean conservatives like Pat Robertson? Sorry to tell you the news, but it’s already happening. Not all conservatives, like you, but enough. Conservatives, real conservatives, are real conservatives because they’re smart enough to understand reality when they see it, and act accordingly for the common sense solution when faced with real-life choices.
By the way, calling Giuliani a sleezy liberal is a great way to march forward, intellectually honestly into the sunlight. That is, if you have the intellectual capacity of a tapeworm. You can do better than that, Flenser.
.
I do know his record. Not just what he said in election cycles - because a mayor needs financial support from washington - but by what he did. Sure, you can knee-jerk all you want at quotes out of context, or even in context. But in a great stronghold of liberalism he: lowered taxes, brought down crime with tough prosecution and tough policies, was pro law and pro police, brought down abortion rates - yes, he did, by instituting adoption policies that enraged liberals and editorial writers, rebuilt the city financially after Dinkins smashed it, rebuilt areas physically which had essentially been abandoned, and yes, that includes 42 street, which had turned into a deserted, drug, prostitution, violence-filled slum.
Instead of yammering in a panic about a few remarks, why don’t you add his poll standings compared to other Republican candidates with his manifest record of accomplishment? Use your head.
You really do make my point. What you have literally said here is that people who tend to support Giuliani do so because they’re smart enough to ignore the occasional remark in favor of his accomplishment and leadership.
Face it. Pushing papers isn’t real leadership or manifest accomplishment, and neither is blathering partisan talking points in the comfy, malliable world of the abstract, and that’s all this generation of congressman, and most other mayors and Governors, know how to do.
Now, Flenser, I’ve spent alot of time and energy on your response. Repay the interest by 1/3 and cite the accoplishments of any single candidate - pick your favorite - that can compete with Rudy’s. Not what they say mind you, but what they’ve done. Leave out the quotes and hyperbole and just state the facts of their accomplishments. That seems fair.
Mr. Conservative Cat, thank you.
None of the Republican candidates meets those criteria. All of them are capabale of beating the Democrats next year.
a) He is not several points ahead of any other candidate.
b) These polls are meaningless. In Januarary 1980 Ronald reagan was trailing badly to Jimmy Carter. In 2004 John Kerry was a nobody until the last moment when he won the nomination.
This sort of passive aggressive attitude seem to be the stock in trade of Rudy supporters. The only angry, defensive attitude on display here is by you. I notice that you managed to insult me and skip answering the question in your book length response.
No, you dishonest idiot, I mean that saying that none of the other candidates have any record of accomplishment is deranged. Those are the words I spoke. But I expect that you will continue to put different words into my mouth, then attack them. You are very skilled at making strawmen.
What exactly do you think Giuliani has done?
Again, your book length response manages not to address any of the questions I asked. I guess you were too busy beating up those strawmen.
No, I don’t want this sort of vague, impossible to define starement. I want specifics. I want you to tell me what he has done. Specific actions and dates.
Sure, why not? I’m serious. I want to know why you think that Romney would not have gone to the WTC after the attack. Keep in mind that Rudy headed up-town ASAP.
Rudy Giuliani spent the entire decade of the ninties appeasing liberals. Stop trying to push this lie. And Rudy Giuliani is a thouand times more a paper pusher than is John McCain or Duncan hunter, two Vietnam vets who put the lives on the line while Rudy was dodging the draft. Really, this is insufferable.
Yes, you sure keep mentioning what “he did” a lot. But you just cannot seem to get very specific about what it was.
By all means, provide the context which you are saying I omitted. I insist. Really.
Well, Rudy did day that his polices were the same as Clintons on most things. And Rudy did file lawsuits designed to get Clinton to be more liberal. Rudy did oppose welfare reform. He did oppose immigration reform. He did oppose Clinton trying to reign in the bloated NYC Medicaid program. He did work with Clinton to pass the assault weapos bad.
Note that I am iving you specifics here, not the gaseous generalities that read like they were written by a Rudy staffer which you are offering.
Many of the tax cuts he now claims credit for were cut over his objections.
Look it up.
Crime was falling for several years BEFORE he came into office. Again, you can look it up.
The people against Giuliani in New York were liberals, yes. But the people backing him were also liberals.
I bet you have read “Prince Of The City”. The man who wrote that is a liberal Democrat who is an advisor to the DLC, and works at a liberal think thank.
Read the fact check article. He did not do what you are saying he did.
Wow. So YOU are calling ME angry and out of control simply for quoting Rudy, but your calling me a tapeworm is a sign of your intellectual sophistication, balanced personality, and maturity?
You are the person on this thread doing all the name calling.
You might want to scroll up and read the post that this comment thread is attached to.
Then google the names “Alan Paca” and “Raymond B Harding”. You might learn something about sleaze.
There must be some sort of scrambling device built into your computer screen, because once again, the words you read are not the wrods I wrote. Try reading them again.
Face it. Pushing papers is what Rudy Giuliani has spent his life doing. Often badly. I’ll have more on that later.
Any yet, alas, you have managed not to respond at all to any of the points I have made. I guess you were too busy with those strawmen and your “tapeworm” name-calling.
Perhaps next time you will eschew those and make at least a token effort to respond to what I am saying.
You betcha!
Just as soon as you get around to telling me what exactly Rudy DID as Mayor of New York.
Lets see - sued the feds to get the line item veto tossed out because it threatened NY pork? Check!
Sued the feds to get them to leave illegals alone? Check!
Sued the feds over the welfard reform bill? Check?
Sued the gun manufacturers? Check?
But don’t worry. Since you are unable to give an account of his full record, I’ll return later and tell you what it was.
In the meantime, you can think up more nasty names to call me. I bet you can do better than “tapeworm” if you put your mind to it.
William Bratton created COMPSTAT and implemented it in New York City, but Rudy fired him.
Kerik’s infidelity makes Rudy look faithful in comparison. He is accused of misusing police detectives for personal business, and has already pleaded guilty to charges of accepting six-figure gifts from contractors doing business with the city.
A lot of New Yorkers faced challenges and behaved heroically on 9/11. Unlike Kerik they didn’t make millions from it.
It is hard to imagine how Bernie Kerik could have acted more carelessly or with greater disregard for is sponsor’s future political career. He belongs at DHS like Brownie belonged at FEMA.
They should put him in the jail that used to be named after him.
Lindsey,
You’re welcome, and thanks for the implied common-sense perspective about the candidates on your part. This country needs more people like you - fast.
Flenser,
Me:
Your response
I did tell you, and anyone reading, in the body of the post to which you responded, and it’s there in a few gigantically long paragraphs for all to see. In fact, your entire response was just exactly what I predicted it would be:
I’m not interested in allowing you to spin my response off track into the vagueries of the endless minutia - that’s an old debating trick used by people losing the debate. I think most people would agree that keeping it simple in terms of basic concept is how things get done, and we can debate the basic minutia of that, not all the other stuff (which we can debate later, but first things first for perspective). The basic concept here that matters is what has Giuliani manifestly accomplished compared to what the others manifestly accomplished. That’s what’s important because anyone can talk a good game. You clearly don’t what to answer the very simple question I put to you, instead, demanding to know what Rudy actually did, before you’ll answer mine. What’s pathetically clear to anyone reading is board, Flenser, is that I already did that in my previous response. The people here aren’t stupid. They get it that that question was already answered. However, to meet your demand so as to try to hold you to your promise of a response, here are the high points quoted from my last post which indeed answered your question/demand before it was asked/demanded”:
He also managed and balanced one of the world’s largest economies, whether you’ll admit it or not (I was there and I don’t know what your first-hand knowledge is in all this or where you’re getting you “knowledge” about his record). He also cleaned the place up literally, so that various areas that were grimy and covered by graffiti
were reasonably cleaned up. Not all five boroughs, mind you, but the better part of Manhattan up to around 100th street, where the worst kind of urban blight had been entrenched for, literally, several decades. That’s another gigantic accomplishment.
Is he too soft on illegal immigration? probably, though he did plenty to clean up crime - and illegal immigration is a crime - in a city that had essemtially been written-off, and again, I was there so I know.
So there. Thart’s enough of an answer for anyone in terms of what he did (the high points) as Mayor of New York. You promised to answer my question if I told you what he did, even though the answer to your question was already in the body of the post to which you responded. Okay, then, slam me out of the ring. Send me to the emergancy room with an actual knockout. I repeat my question having addressed your demand you made before you would answer it the last time:
Mr. Conservative:
Please observe the “Fair Use” rules regarding other people’s writing.
No more than a 200 word quote from any article in the future. You don’t need the entire piece - that’s what the “link” button above is for.
Violation in the future will result in the comment being deleted.
Rick,
“Please observe the “Fair Use” rules regarding other people’s writing.”
For the record I was primarily quoting myself. Since Flenser didn’t seem to be able to read what was written the first time, I figured I repeat it.
Still, your point is taken and, sincerely, I’ll do my best to stay within the guidlines. Apologies offered.
I’m still waiting for Flenser to answer the question, by the way.
People are still waiting for Flenser to answer the question.
It’s been three days and people are still waiting for Flenser, usually Johnny-on-the-spot with a response, to answer the question.
I’m not picking on Flenser, by the way. This is one of those defining questions that any anti-Giuliani person needs to grapple with if we’re going to be intellectually honest about our choices in the upcoming election. Anyone caz talk a good game, and talk in politics often means nothing. Newt new this when he had his fellow congressman sign the Contract with America on the steps - it was a written document - tangible - it meant something. It wasn’t a Promise with America, it was a Contract with America. So, too, do the manifest, tangible accomplishments of whomever is running for President need to be the first thing we discuss. Not what the candidates have said, but what they’ve done.
So go ahead, Flenser, flail me alive with your surgical response. Hit a home run into the bleachers. We’re still awaiting an answer to the question posed to you almost a full three days ago .
Day 4 and we’re still awaiting an answer to the question by Flenser. He’s fast losing this debate by default. How long do we wait before declairing victory?
Day 5. How long will we have to wait for Flenser to keep his promise?
Day 6. I wonder if he’s merrily posting elsewhere and hoping this question will just go away. Nice.
Day 7. A full week.
It isn’t as though there was any statement on Flenser’s part that suggested that he had regarded this conversation as completed. Everyone else has probably forgotten this thread but I’ll bet that Flenser hasn’t.
I’m inclinded to declare victory by default, but that’ll be a mistake - a mistake to conclude my participation, go away and have him pop back in at some later date when this thread has be forgotten and make some declaration of some sort which would go unopposed.
Links to this thread can be posted anywhere on this board, Flenser, so you might as well keep your promise and address the question. Or just admit that you can’t. For someone who was all over this thread until this question came up, 7 days is quite long enough for you to answer.
It’s not long after midnight here but I figured I get this in lest I forget tomorrow: Day 8.