[quote]JeffR wrote:
…
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
…
[/quote]
Bingo.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
As for you, let’s get serious. You and I both know you are going to write in some communist who thinks cuba is cool.
[/quote]
Isn’t cuba cool? I want to get down there and see Buena Vista Social Club before the rest of the octiginarians from that crew die. A must see.
We already lost Compay Segundo and Imbrahim Ferrer. How can any country that produces these type of artists not be cool?
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
[/quote]
He had the opportunity to do this before the invasion of Iraq. Once the invasion started it was too late.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
He had the opportunity to do this before the invasion of Iraq. Once the invasion started it was too late.
[/quote]
Maybe he agreed. Most Americans did.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
gdol wrote:
JeffR wrote:
gdol wrote:
Didn’t the last seven years teach you guys anything about politicians who talk tough with nothing to back it up?
gdol,
Please explain yourself.
I think cleaning up New York and what he did after 9/11 is pretty damn “tough” work.
Further, being at odds with all the other candidates and many primary voters is “tough.”
Rudy is plenty “tough” enough, especially, in comparison to the democratic candidates.
JeffR
I think the allusion to Bush was clear enough, a guy who used his father’s connections to get into the Air National Guard during Vietnam because, as he told a crowd in 1994, “I didn’t want to go to Canada,” then portrays himself as a warrior, with publicity stunts like the “Mission Accomplished” landing and “bring 'em on.”
As for Rudy, another guy who avoided Vietnam with student deferments and then an employer’s letter, while McCain was enduring the Hanoi Hilton and Chuck Hagel was a decorated sergeant BEFORE going off to college.
Then he somehow becomes “America’s Mayor,” which is basically just saying he looked good on TV and talked a good game in the dark months after September 11. Meanwhile, he set up his command post for terrorism in the World Trade Center, which had previously been a terrorist target. You can find basic details of this on his Wikipedia page.
Some firefighters also blame his decisions on communications equpiment for causing needless deaths on 9/11, which may have been tied to patronage issues.
As for cleaning up New York, I’d certainly give him credit for changing the tone and rescuing the city from the permissive atmosphere that many of its elites had given birth to. But community policing and the “broken windows theory” that accompished so much in New York pre-date Rudy by a long time. Rudy also pushed Bratton, his successful Police Commissioner, out of office because he was getting too much of the limelight.
As for tough talk, great, he can’t run away from his record on abortion, gays and gun control. But when tough talk and accountability was really needed, when it became apparent in 2004 that the war in Iraq, the “central front in the war on terror,” was being egregiously mismanaged, Rudy offered only the most tepid protests against how badly the Bush administration was bungling its central challenge. Some tough guy.
Hey, gdol.
Well, as usual, I couldn’t disagree with you more.
You usually are pretty good about reading linked material. Don’t fail me.
Here are some hard numbers:
www.nyc.gov/html/records/rwg/html/bio.html
These are huge improvements in New York’s overall health.
Further, you are certainly in the minority about post-911.
He was an inspiration and did exactly what George should have done after Katrina.
Now, if you want to minimize those accomplishments, go right ahead.
I know you’ll vote for some reject under the guise of “I’m a discontented Conservative.”
However, there are plenty of open minded individuals who are going to give a serious look at a guy who is tough minded and gets results.
If he can clean up New York and keep it afloat during one of it’s greatest crises, then he should be taken seriously.
He is eloquent and knowledgeable. Where George is weak on specifics, this guy is in command. Where George allows the dem press to dictate the agenda, this guy will use them as a mouthpiece for his initiatives.
If he can move the Republicans to broaden their base of support with his moderate stances, then he should be looked at.
I think the base will come along.
Besides, what alternative do they have?
hillary?
No chance.
I, for one, am weary of having to explain the President’s thinking.
I’m ready for President Giulani to do his own speaking.
JeffR
[/quote]
As usual, don’t see you addressing any of the issues I raised. You take lessons from Ari Fleischer ever?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
JeffR wrote:
…
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
…
Bingo.[/quote]
You’re right, because calling on the president to increase the size of military, or provide them with the right tools for the job, would be “publically trashing” him and them.
I would have thought Vietnam would have taugh us that informed, constructive criticism of a failing war would be a good thing.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
He had the opportunity to do this before the invasion of Iraq. Once the invasion started it was too late.
Maybe he agreed. Most Americans did.
JeffR
[/quote]
And we can probably agree that like most Americans, Rudy has bad judgement and shouldn’t be elected to an official position such as the president of the US. He had the opportunity to publicly show NYC that he cared about justice and not party fame by not supporting some false, trumped-up charge that didn’t pan out, in the end. Bad choice.
Fuel for the fire:
Bloomy tops Rudy in battle of the titans
Daily News poll shows overwhelming support for billionaire
By KATHLEEN LUCADAMO
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU
Monday, May 14th 2007, 4:00 AM
Michael Bloomberg is not only a better mayor of New York than Rudy Giuliani - he’d make a better President, too.
That’s the result of a Daily News poll released today that asked the voters who know best - New Yorkers - which man belongs in the White House.
City voters overwhelmingly chose Mayor Mike over America’s Mayor as their pick for President, 46% to 29%.
“I feel in my heart Bloomberg is a better man,” said Jaen Garcia, 53, of Highbridge, the Bronx.
Bloomberg insists he’s not running for President, even though he has dropped more than a few tantalizing clues, including traveling around the country, pushing national policy changes and reviving his Web site.
If he decided to enter the race - most likely as an independent - Bloomberg and his billions could cast a huge shadow.
But whether he’s willing to take on GOP front-runner Giuliani remains to be seen. Giuliani enjoys a national reputation as the man who cleaned up New York and held the country together in the devastating weeks and months after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Here at home, though, it’s a different story, The News’ survey shows.
Some 56% of voters said Bloomberg has been as the more effective mayor, and 29% picked Giuliani. An additional 10% ranked them about the same, and 5% didn’t know.
“I like that everything Bloomberg said he is going to do for the city, he did. There are more charter schools and I like that,” said Sharran Roberts, a 30-year-old mother from Bushwick, Brooklyn.
“[Giuliani] did over his wife, he did over [New Yorkers] and he is not going to do it with the country,” Roberts said.
Blum & Weprin Associates surveyed 503 registered voters in a Bloomberg-Giuliani showdown and the 2009 mayoral race for The News. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.
In the poll, Bloomberg trounces Giuliani among every demographic group as a better mayor and potential President except Republicans and voters under age 30.
“I’d vote for them as a presidential team, but egos get in the way,” said Dan Ricciardi, a 54-year-old doctor from Brooklyn Heights. “[Bloomberg] is more of an elitist, but he is an excellent mayor.”
The survey found Giuliani’s biggest weakness as mayor was with African-Americans, where he trailed Bloomberg by 64% to 20%.
“Giuliani was a very hostile person to the African-American community,” said Michael Lewis, a 58-year-old African-American from the upper West Side. “I don’t particularly like Bloomberg, either, but he is less rigid.”
Not surprisingly, Bloomberg’s greatest vote of confidence for President came from the richest voters - those earning more than $100,000 annually - who prefer him, 61% to 31%.
“I just see [Bloomberg] as a better person,” said Susan Gershen, a 63-year-old upper West Sider. "And I’d be interested in what he has to say if he runs for President.
[quote]gDollars37 wrote:
JeffR wrote:
gdol wrote:
JeffR wrote:
gdol wrote:
Didn’t the last seven years teach you guys anything about politicians who talk tough with nothing to back it up?
gdol,
Please explain yourself.
I think cleaning up New York and what he did after 9/11 is pretty damn “tough” work.
Further, being at odds with all the other candidates and many primary voters is “tough.”
Rudy is plenty “tough” enough, especially, in comparison to the democratic candidates.
JeffR
I think the allusion to Bush was clear enough, a guy who used his father’s connections to get into the Air National Guard during Vietnam because, as he told a crowd in 1994, “I didn’t want to go to Canada,” then portrays himself as a warrior, with publicity stunts like the “Mission Accomplished” landing and “bring 'em on.”
As for Rudy, another guy who avoided Vietnam with student deferments and then an employer’s letter, while McCain was enduring the Hanoi Hilton and Chuck Hagel was a decorated sergeant BEFORE going off to college.
Then he somehow becomes “America’s Mayor,” which is basically just saying he looked good on TV and talked a good game in the dark months after September 11. Meanwhile, he set up his command post for terrorism in the World Trade Center, which had previously been a terrorist target. You can find basic details of this on his Wikipedia page.
Some firefighters also blame his decisions on communications equpiment for causing needless deaths on 9/11, which may have been tied to patronage issues.
As for cleaning up New York, I’d certainly give him credit for changing the tone and rescuing the city from the permissive atmosphere that many of its elites had given birth to. But community policing and the “broken windows theory” that accompished so much in New York pre-date Rudy by a long time. Rudy also pushed Bratton, his successful Police Commissioner, out of office because he was getting too much of the limelight.
As for tough talk, great, he can’t run away from his record on abortion, gays and gun control. But when tough talk and accountability was really needed, when it became apparent in 2004 that the war in Iraq, the “central front in the war on terror,” was being egregiously mismanaged, Rudy offered only the most tepid protests against how badly the Bush administration was bungling its central challenge. Some tough guy.
Hey, gdol.
Well, as usual, I couldn’t disagree with you more.
You usually are pretty good about reading linked material. Don’t fail me.
Here are some hard numbers:
www.nyc.gov/html/records/rwg/html/bio.html
These are huge improvements in New York’s overall health.
Further, you are certainly in the minority about post-911.
He was an inspiration and did exactly what George should have done after Katrina.
Now, if you want to minimize those accomplishments, go right ahead.
I know you’ll vote for some reject under the guise of “I’m a discontented Conservative.”
However, there are plenty of open minded individuals who are going to give a serious look at a guy who is tough minded and gets results.
If he can clean up New York and keep it afloat during one of it’s greatest crises, then he should be taken seriously.
He is eloquent and knowledgeable. Where George is weak on specifics, this guy is in command. Where George allows the dem press to dictate the agenda, this guy will use them as a mouthpiece for his initiatives.
If he can move the Republicans to broaden their base of support with his moderate stances, then he should be looked at.
I think the base will come along.
Besides, what alternative do they have?
hillary?
No chance.
I, for one, am weary of having to explain the President’s thinking.
I’m ready for President Giulani to do his own speaking.
JeffR
As usual, don’t see you addressing any of the issues I raised. You take lessons from Ari Fleischer ever?[/quote]
gdol,
It’s the old pattern. You made comments grounded in either malice or ignorance.
I corrected you.
No need to bring Brother Fleischer into the discussion.
JeffR
[quote]gDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
JeffR wrote:
…
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
…
Bingo.
You’re right, because calling on the president to increase the size of military, or provide them with the right tools for the job, would be “publically trashing” him and them.
I would have thought Vietnam would have taugh us that informed, constructive criticism of a failing war would be a good thing.[/quote]
Are you trying to state that the majority of the democratic criticism has been either constructive or helpful?
If you are, save your breath.
Politics over principle. It’s the democratic way.
Sadly.
JeffR
[quote]etaco wrote:
[/quote]
I found another poll you might be interested in.
Wrap your mind around that one.
JeffR
P.S. Polls can kiss my ass.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
This is one of things that is so appealing about Rudy. He has cross-over appeal.
He’s certainly different than the other candidates.
I’m pretty excited.
JeffR
[/quote]
Doesn’t matter. Rudy is not conservative enough to come out on top of the primary process. Gun control? Pro-choice? And then those photos? Good. Freakin. Luck.
Moderates definitely have more overall voter appeal in the final race, but the process is set up so that the guys who get there appeal to their party’s base first. And the ‘typical’ voter, the kind that the folks from both sides of the issues bitch about, who toes the party line, doesn’t participate in the primaries. It is typically the ideologues who cast those votes. That’s why we almost never have two candidate, in the end, who espouse similar beliefs.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
gdol,
It’s the old pattern. You made comments grounded in either malice or ignorance.
I corrected you.
No need to bring Brother Fleischer into the discussion.
JeffR
[/quote]
Again, I don’t see you providing any kind of a rebuttal to the serious criticisms of Rudy’s handling of 9/11 in his planning before the attack.
Can you explain how you corrected me? You provided a sunny biography link that tells me something I didn’t know (his tax-cutting record) and makes at least one false assertion (that he fixed New York’s schools).
I’ll happily give him a great deal of credit for cleaning up New York, to a large extent, but the policing theories that were put into action were not his.
And I didn’t even bring up Bernie Kerik and the mob, which is probably the worst skeleton in Rudy’s closet.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
gDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
JeffR wrote:
…
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
…
Bingo.
You’re right, because calling on the president to increase the size of military, or provide them with the right tools for the job, would be “publically trashing” him and them.
I would have thought Vietnam would have taugh us that informed, constructive criticism of a failing war would be a good thing.
Are you trying to state that the majority of the democratic criticism has been either constructive or helpful?
If you are, save your breath.
Politics over principle. It’s the democratic way.
Sadly.
JeffR
[/quote]
No, the vast majority of the Democratic criticism has been anything but constructive, and much of it has simply been using the war to score partisan points. Despite your internet fantasies, I’ve voted for Republicans the majority of the time, and will likely do so in 2008.
I was referring to people like McCain and Hagel, and journalists like George Packer and Tom Ricks, who want to see America succeed in Iraq, but are appalled by the level of mismanagement. Something you still can’t seem to acknowledge, which indicates a Cheney-level disconnect from reality.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
gDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
JeffR wrote:
…
Maybe he thinks that publically trashing the CIC and the military in time of active combat is a poor idea.
…
Bingo.
You’re right, because calling on the president to increase the size of military, or provide them with the right tools for the job, would be “publically trashing” him and them.
I would have thought Vietnam would have taugh us that informed, constructive criticism of a failing war would be a good thing.
Are you trying to state that the majority of the democratic criticism has been either constructive or helpful?
If you are, save your breath.
Politics over principle. It’s the democratic way.
Sadly.
JeffR
[/quote]
Sadly, it’s the GOP way as well. It’s the way of the new millennium! No one wants to use presidential power to help people, they just want to be President.
I’m just gonna keep goin’ round saying Ron Paul V Mike Gravel 2008! ( 
)
… a thousand words
[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
… a thousand words[/quote]
Hey, jlesk.
I was looking at your website.
As everyone knows, jlesk favors the socialist equality party.
By supporting them, he feels above the fray. He’s an “educated” voter. When the “revolution” starts, everyone will turn to his disheveled ass.
The weak shall triumph!!!
jlesk, do you think that jim van auken will run again?
He ran such a strong and inspiring campaign in 2004.
For the rest of you, take a peek at jlesk’s pals:
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
… a thousand words
Hey, jlesk.
I was looking at your website.
As everyone knows, jlesk favors the socialist equality party.
By supporting them, he feels above the fray. He’s an “educated” voter. When the “revolution” starts, everyone will turn to his disheveled ass.
The weak shall triumph!!!
jlesk, do you think that jim van auken will run again?
He ran such a strong and inspiring campaign in 2004.
For the rest of you, take a peek at jlesk’s pals:
JeffR
[/quote]
oh jeffrey, jeffrey, I think your quote “the weak shall triumph” speaks more of your pathetic weak attempt to insult me instead of rebutting the pic showing “Bulliani” with the Handgun Control Inc. crowd.
And no, I’m not a socialist, I’m a true conservative who loves this country and hasn’t drunk either the “Republican or Democrat Kool-Aid”, people like you who align themselves with a party and check their brains at the door are the example of Americans without political personality.
[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
JeffR wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
… a thousand words
Hey, jlesk.
I was looking at your website.
As everyone knows, jlesk favors the socialist equality party.
By supporting them, he feels above the fray. He’s an “educated” voter. When the “revolution” starts, everyone will turn to his disheveled ass.
The weak shall triumph!!!
jlesk, do you think that jim van auken will run again?
He ran such a strong and inspiring campaign in 2004.
For the rest of you, take a peek at jlesk’s pals:
JeffR
oh jeffrey, jeffrey, I think your quote “the weak shall triumph” speaks more of your pathetic weak attempt to insult me instead of rebutting the pic showing “Bulliani” with the Handgun Control Inc. crowd.
And no, I’m not a socialist, I’m a true conservative who loves this country and hasn’t drunk either the “Republican or Democrat Kool-Aid”, people like you who align themselves with a party and check their brains at the door are the example of Americans without political personality.[/quote]
Conservative???
Why do you guys do that? If you line up with the dems and other kooks, why not call it as it is?
Just call yourself a lefty and get on with counseling?
I don’t know of any true Conservative who is as threatened by Fox News as you are.
Further, shall we tally up your posts and see which party you routinely support?
Shall we see, whose ideology you fit with?
You are a kook, but, you are also much more aligned with the dems than the Conservatives.
So spare us the “above the fray” crap and try some honesty.
Good luck,
JeffR
P.S. If you are absent for a while I’ll know that your brain short circuited. Honesty is like oxygen, it can be toxic to organisms that are unaccustomed to it.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
JeffR wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
… a thousand words
Hey, jlesk.
I was looking at your website.
As everyone knows, jlesk favors the socialist equality party.
By supporting them, he feels above the fray. He’s an “educated” voter. When the “revolution” starts, everyone will turn to his disheveled ass.
The weak shall triumph!!!
jlesk, do you think that jim van auken will run again?
He ran such a strong and inspiring campaign in 2004.
For the rest of you, take a peek at jlesk’s pals:
JeffR
oh jeffrey, jeffrey, I think your quote “the weak shall triumph” speaks more of your pathetic weak attempt to insult me instead of rebutting the pic showing “Bulliani” with the Handgun Control Inc. crowd.
And no, I’m not a socialist, I’m a true conservative who loves this country and hasn’t drunk either the “Republican or Democrat Kool-Aid”, people like you who align themselves with a party and check their brains at the door are the example of Americans without political personality.
Conservative???
Why do you guys do that? If you line up with the dems and other kooks, why not call it as it is?
Just call yourself a lefty and get on with counseling?
I don’t know of any true Conservative who is as threatened by Fox News as you are.
Further, shall we tally up your posts and see which party you routinely support?
Shall we see, whose ideology you fit with?
You are a kook, but, you are also much more aligned with the dems than the Conservatives.
So spare us the “above the fray” crap and try some honesty.
Good luck,
JeffR
P.S. If you are absent for a while I’ll know that your brain short circuited. Honesty is like oxygen, it can be toxic to organisms that are unaccustomed to it.
[/quote]
lol, dude, come on, you’re smarter than that…
"Why do you guys do that? If you line up with the dems and other kooks, why not call it as it is?
Just call yourself a lefty and get on with counseling?"
I don’t line up with the Dems or Reps (if that’s what you meant by “kooks”) and I’m not a “lefty”, I’m a conservative, and since when a person has to be a Republican to be Conservative???
“I don’t know of any true Conservative who is as threatened by Fox News as you are.
Further, shall we tally up your posts and see which party you routinely support?
Shall we see, whose ideology you fit with?”
Not threatened by Faux News at all, it’s just funny all the boot licking they do, just like CNN did with Slick Willy, and by the way Mr. Fox himself Ruppert Murdock is a strong financial supporter of Wicked Hillary.
I don’t support a party, aligning yourself with a party is stupid, since political parties often prostitute their ideals for votes.
To be honest, I voted for Bush on his first term, I mean come on, it was either him or “The sky is falling” Al Gore.
"You are a kook, but, you are also much more aligned with the dems than the Conservatives.
So spare us the “above the fray” crap and try some honesty.
Good luck,
JeffR
P.S. If you are absent for a while I’ll know that your brain short circuited. Honesty is like oxygen, it can be toxic to organisms that are unaccustomed to it."
Again, you’re equating Republicans with Conservatives…You must’ve been “Hannitized” haven’t you…?? Or would you prefer to be called a “ditto head”???
For honesty, read the above.
And dude, there’s more to “If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists” ideology.