Latest This Modern World

[Click for larger image]

This is my favorite This Modern World so far in 2007, and it really says a great deal about the PR machine that is the Giuliani image (and myth). His arrogant braggadocio regarding his "brilliant" decisions during and after 9-11 should give everyone pause, but unfortunately, many have bought into the myth. I don't believe any of it - not for a city minute.

I have no idea who will receive the nomination for either party, but I don't believe Giuliani's candidacy will last much beyond Super Tuesday.

Fred Thompson cuts a, ahem, "commercial"

This one kinda says it all about Fred Thompson - a look into his past, especially his record as a lobbyist, should not hold up to scrutiny, but whether it will or not depends on whether there is any sort of scrutiny in the first place.

Kind of like Rudy Giuliani, and how his stupid, often idiotic decisions surrounding 9-11 get pathetically little scrutiny.

Many are calling Fred Thompson the "New Ronald Reagan." Greeeeeat - that's just what we need - let's put a man in charge of the very government he dislikes and who thinks government is the problem. No, it's anti-government people like Reagan and Thompson who are the problem. Why would anyone ever think it's a good idea to put someone in charge of something he despises? I never understood that.

I found this cartoon last week about Reagan that brought back all of those unpleasant memories of him, as well as the Reagan wanna-bes in the GOP field [Click the image for a larger view]. ...

Rudy's phoniness higher than his 9-11 profits

I've been out of it politically for a little while now - with school starting back up, coupled with a million other things going on, I just have not had the time. And, when I have had the time, quite frankly, I've been too disgusted to read, watch and write my usual quota about the disgraceful state of politics in our country.

However, leave it to the Republicans on Capitol Hill to get me equal parts fired up, angered, pissed off and motivated. So, in short, I have lots to get to. First, though, I'd be remiss to not comment on the 9-11 Profiteer himself, Rudy Giuliani, and his fifth-grade campaign tricks.

In the video above, America's Mayor would have us believe that his wife called him right in the middle of a campaign speech during a speech to the NRA (an organization that he vilified as mayor of New York City, by the way). Nothing turns people off like insincerity and phoniness. When I first saw this ridiculous footage, I couldn't help but think of GiuLIEani's oft-repeated lie about what he said to his corrupt NYC police chief, Bernie Kerik, on the morning of 9-11: "Thank God George Bush is our president."

Well, really I can't prove that what he said to the sleazy Kerik on 9-11 is a lie, but if it isn't, it should be. I know more than a few simple-minded, partisan rubes who said to me personally following 9-11: "Thank God Gore isn't president." Pretty funny how that laughable statement becomes more and more absurd with each passing day.

GiuLIEani has pulled the cell phone trick before, too; take a look at the footage below...

The best part about the footage of the NRA convention (at top) is that shortly after his little phone stunt, I hear that the crowd started to turn on him. Good. Now, I can't wait for the rest of America to follow suit.

I'm really going to enjoy watching Giuliani fail in his bid for the presidency. First, it was McCain who added joy to my life, and now it will be Rudy.

McCain is the new McGovern
Rudy is the new McCain

Life could be worse.

Mitt's racking up the coveted endorsements

Boy, GOP Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney sure is on a roll with endorsements. First it was Ann Coulter, moments before she publicly called John Edwards a "fagott," and now it's disgraced Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) extolling his virtues.

No word yet on who Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan and Mark Foley are endorsing.

Rudy's daughter is for Obama

This is sort of a non-story story, but it indicates something, too. When your old children won't back you to be president, maybe you have just a few character flaws? I dunno, just a hunch. There is a saying about Rudy that has gotten a great deal of play since he announced his candidacy: "Those who know him best like him least."

Here's the story, via AP:

The daughter of Republican hopeful Rudy Giuliani has signaled she's backing Democrat Barack Obama for president.According to her Facebook profile, Giuliani's 17-year-old daughter, Caroline, belonged to Democrat Barack Obama's Facebook group "Barack Obama (One Million Strong for Barack)." She left the group Monday morning after the online magazine Slate sent an inquiry.

Her profile can be viewed by Facebook users who have access to New York City's Trinity School or Harvard University networks. Caroline, who is Giuliani's daughter with his second wife, Donna Hanover, recently graduated from Trinity and will attend Harvard in the fall.

Slate posted a screen shot of her profile, which uses a slightly different last name. She lists herself as having liberal political views.

Giuliani, campaigning in Iowa, declined to comment on his daughter's political preference.

"My daughter I love very much," he told reporters outside an Italian restaurant in Clear Lake. "I have great respect for her, and I'm really proud of her, and I don't comment on children, because I want to give them the maximum degree of privacy.

"The best thing to do, if you want to ask the press to leave the children alone, the best way to do it is not to comment on them one way or the other, except to say you're very proud of them, and you love them very much, which I do," he said.

The Obama campaign did not have any comment.

Giuliani, a leading Republican candidate, has asked for privacy to deal with strained relationships in his family. Son Andrew, 21, has said their relationship became distant after Giuliani's messy divorce from the children's mother and his marriage to third wife Judith Nathan.

"There's obviously a little problem that exists between me and his wife," Andrew Giuliani told The New York Times earlier this year.

In May, Giuliani attended his daughter's high school graduation but kept a low profile, sitting in a last row balcony seat with his wife and leaving without speaking to his daughter, the New York Daily News reported.

Again, this isn't a huge, sensational, politically damaging story in any significant way, but I'm guessing this will make more than a few people wonder. However, I guess that will depend on whether character counts anymore. (It did during the Clinton years, remember?) Lousy father? Check. Lousy husband? Check. Despised mayor, pre-9-11? Check. Myths about his 9-11 leadership? Debunked on a daily basis, with plenty more to come.

Sam Brownback, Material Girl

Is this Rudy Giuliani in drag again? Just kidding. Well, not really. This guy is nearly as disturbing as Rudy in drag, and his voice is just a touch better.

It will come as no surprise to you that I'm no fan of Sam Brownback, one of the most conservative candidates for president in '08. Anyway, he's got about as much of a shot at being president as I do.

I'll say this - the script for the video is cleverly written, if nothing else.

Mitt Romney: afraid of snowmen

I haven't always been a big fan of Howard Kurtz on CNN, but I have to give him credit for this one. This past weekend, Kurtz was discussing how Republicans do not want to have a YouTube debate similar to the one that Democrats had last week. Above is the video of Kurtz's dig at Mitt Romney, who has a now-famous reason for declining to participate in the YouTube debate:

KURTZ: Mitt Romney said that, he was expressing his reservations about joining the next YouTube debate, "I don’t think candidates should have to answer questions from a snowman." Well let me just say this to the former governor: how are you going to deal with Osama bin Laden if you’re afraid of that snowman?

Nice one, Howard.

Really, couldn't Romney's people come up with a better official explanation for ducking out of the debate than not wanting to "answer questions from a snowman"? Ouch. I can guarantee you he'll be teased and taunted for the rest of his campaign about the gaffe.

I'd like to dig a little deeper and offer my thoughts as to why most Republicans don't want to answer non-scripted questions from everyday Americans like the ones from last week's YouTube debate. I think the reason's quite simple, actually. It's because they don't want to answer the tough questions. Think about it - if you were a Republican who put your arm around President Bush when times were good, do you want to have to answer to that now? Of course not. I can just about guarantee that at least a few of the questions would go something like these:

• Where do you stand on stem cell research?
• How do you feel about campaign finance reform?
• Why did you support President Bush's War in Iraq?
• I'm a woman, why will not not support my right to choose?
• I'm a middle-class American - why should I bear more burden than those making over $1 million per year? Why do they deserve a tax cut?
• What about the ballooning deficit? How can you guarantee me that Social Security will still be there when I'm ready to retire?
• Hey, remember Osama bin Laden?

Yea, I guess if I were a Republican, I wouldn't want to answer these questions that Americans have been dying to ask Republicans, face-to-face, for just about all of the Bush administration. The Republican Party is not a popular one right now, so if I'm a Repube running for president, I want to stay on the sidelines, offer plenty of wind-blown rhetoric on Fox News, and also to answer as few tough questions as possible.

The GOP opposition to being asked real questions reminds me of President Bush's 2004 campaign, when it was well documented that he would only appear before Republican audiences. People who attended the event had to sign "loyalty pledges," saying that they were a registered Republican and would not demonstrate or cause any disruptions. I don't remember what else the pledge contained, but I believe it said something about how you wouldn't ask inappropriate questions, or something like that. In other words, "You won't ask the president any awkward questions that might not look good on TV."

What a load of crap. I will criticize any candidate, of any party, who employs similar tactics this year. This isn't Soviet Russia - this is the United States of America. And, we are supposedly electing someone who will look out for us and the issues we believe in. Before a candidate is elected president, he or she should want to answer the tough questions. I'd think that would be a noble quality in a candidate that all of the contenders would want to demonstrate. But, at least as far as the Republicans are concerned, they're too afraid that a question might not play well on TV. What a joke.

It's only a matter of time for McCain

I meant to get to this one the other day - but it bears mentioning now. John McCain's campaign is about out of gas. Talk about a ray of sunshine on a cold Washington State day - I've been waiting to type those words for some time now. I wonder how Judas John feels now that he realizes that this dream of becoming president will never, ever become a reality.

Too bad it's all of his own doing. By trying to appeal to the radical-right, conservative base, he lost the abandoned the principles that made him an attractive bi-partisan candidate in the first place.

The latest blow is that his media team has resigned, or as I like to call it, rats jumping off a sinking ship.

From AP:

Sen. John McCain's advertising consultants have resigned from his presidential campaign, the latest in a rash of staff shake-ups in recent weeks.

McCain communications director Jill Hazelbaker on Wednesday described the departure of Russ Schriefer and Stuart Stevens as amicable and said the Arizona Republican "appreciates their service" but accepted their resignations when they were offered Monday night.

Schriefer and Stevens were part of George W. Bush's campaign team in 2000 and 2004 and were part of Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign. The Wall Street Journal first reported the departures Wednesday night.

While the two had an agreement to work for the McCain campaign, FEC records indicate that they had not been paid and were not owed any money.

Read more Here.

I can't blame them for leaving - maybe there's still time to get aboard another failing campaign - maybe America's Mayor is looking for help - they could swim over to that sinking ship so they could jump off that one later on as well. Okay, Giuliani's campaign isn't quite sinking yet, but a guy can wish, can't he?

In a way, it's too bad about McCain, though. I really would have considered voting for the John McCain circa 2000 - I don't know where that McCain went, but we haven't seen him in quite some time, and we probably never will again.

As Crooks & Liars opined the other day, probably the only reason he's staying in the race is to get matching federal funds so he can pay down his mounting campaign debt.

Strange Mitt Romney ad

This is one odd political ad - one of the strangest I've seen so far in this young presidential campaign. As PoliticsTV sagely points out, is this Mitt Romney ad "an ad for a candidate, the environment, or E.D. treatment?"

I can't add anything pithier than that. The Peggy Noonan reference is rather odd, too. Like all of the GOP candidates running for president, Romney has a fetish for President Reagan. Noonan was a favorite speechwriter of Reagan's, and Romney's quoting her passage in this ad is just weird:

Following the Columbine shootings, Peggy Noonan described the world as 'the ocean in which our children now swim.' She described a cesspool of violence and sex and indolence and perversions. She said the boys who had done the shootings had 'inhaled too deeply in the oceans in which they swam.'

The only people who did any inhaling were the people who thought those lines should be included in this ad, and maybe even Noonan herself. I love analogies and use them on a daily basis to get my points across, but Noonan was trying waaay too hard with that one. She's done better. And for Romney's sake, I hope his political people do better than this. It's just plain funny.

Giuliani forecast for S. Carolina: heavy snow

This story is yet another little dent in the armor of America's Mayor. It's an embarrassment to Giuliani and his campaign, but here's a fearless prediction: Thomas Ravenel, chair of Rudy's 2008 South Carolina presidential campaign effort, was indicted on drug charges the other day, and it will have zero effect on Giuliani's popularity in the polls in the near- or long-term.

Ravenel, the South Carolina state treasurer, has been suspended from his duties and he has resigned from the Giuliani campaign. I'm the first one to say "innocent until proven guilty," but nevertheless, this is still got to have Rudy fuming. But again, not really, because the lightweight media treatment he receives won't cause him to suffer much. This phenomenon will be identical to Bernie Kerik's effect on Rudy. Kerik, the former NYPD Police Commish and former nominee to be Director of the DHS, has more ethical lapses than Heidi Fleiss, and Giuliani has a close and personal history with him. After Kerik's doomed nomination to be the DHS chief (Rudy very publicly pimped Kerik for the job), a whole litany of uncouth revelations came to light about him: alleged mob ties, a private apartment near Ground Zero in Battery Park, NYC, where Kerik was shtooping his mistress, and alleged kickbacks. Oh, and that little Battery Park love nest? It was at taxpayer expense. Another great case of our tax dollars at, ahem, work.

Rudy is godfather to two of Kerik's children.

Anyway, we'll see how this plays out, but here's saying this will be a blip on the radar screen in a few weeks.

Rudy's oversimplifications & distortions are a tour de force following GOP debate

I've been meaning to get to this one, and before it's too after-the-fact, I have to mention it. After watching the Republican debate on Tuesday night, I left CNN on to listen to some of the post-debate interviews.

I was paying attention half-heartedly until Rudy Giuliani came on with Larry King. He immediately started dropping some whoppers. Here's an excerpt of his interview with King:

GIULIANI: If we have confusion about who is in the United States [referring to the immigration bill], then these situations like we've had in New Jersey, like the situation we had in Fort Dix with the attacks that take place - we're after September 11 now. And if this bill is going to be worth all the compromising that's necessary, it has to achieve a complete database of the people who are in this country.

KING: I think of all the candidates, you were the one attacking the Democrats the most, mentioning by name the debate of two nights ago.

Are you running already?

GIULIANI: Well, you know, I'm running against the...

KING: Have you got the nomination?

GIULIANI: I'm not running against the people on that stage. I mean we have some...

KING: Well, you are.

GIULIANI: Well, I'm not really. I have some disagreements with them, but largely, I hear things that I agree with. I mean, a lot of the things Senator McCain said, I agree with. Mitt Romney, at least three or four times, said, "I agree with Mayor Giuliani."

I probably disagreed with him most of the time.

My disagreements with are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and John Edwards. John Edwards saying that the war on terror was just a bumper sticker, and not even amending that after this plot in New York was uncovered to attack Kennedy Airport.

It's not a bumper sticker. It is a real war. And whatever you think about Iraq, it's bigger than Iraq.

These people want to come here and kill us...

Unbelievable - it was predictable as the day is long that as soon as Edwards said that the War on Terror is simply a bumper-sticker slogan, his statement would be distorted and maligned by hawkish Republicans (with a nod to Ron Paul).

Here is what John Edwards said during the June 3 Democratic Debate:

I reject this bumper sticker, Wolf. And that's exactly what it is. It's a bumper sticker.

As president of the United States, I will do absolutely everything to find terrorists where they are, to stop them before they can do harm to us, before they can do harm to America or to its allies.

Every tool available - military alliances, intelligence - I will use.

But what this global war on terror bumper sticker - political slogan, that's all it is, all it's ever been - was intended to do was for George Bush to use it to justify everything he does: the ongoing War in Iraq, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, spying on Americans, torture.

None of those things are OK. They are not the United States of America.

But, people like Rudy Giuliani and Bill O'Reilly have done nothing but distort and take out of context what Edwards said. And Rudy was right on message on Tuesday night. I should point out that Giuliani has appeared on Billy's show on numerous occasions, so people who want to paint BOR as someone out of the Republican mainstream need a reality check. (More on O'Reilly's Edwards distortions in a later post. Back to the Giuliani/King interview:

GIULIANI: I think the Democrats want to put us in reverse to the 1990s. All I heard on that stage two nights ago was to go back to the 1990s. The 1990s - when our taxes were 24, 25 percent higher. [No Rudy, when YOUR taxes were 24-25 percent higher, and any other millionaire - PECAD] The 1990s - when we weren't recognizing the Islamic threat against us, when they attacked the USS Cole and we didn't retaliate. We didn't do anything about it.

They attacked us in 1993. We had a criminal justice response, not a response commensurate with a terrorist threat.

KING: But we only have a minute left.

You will agree Iraq is the gorilla in the room, though?

GIULIANI: Iraq is...

KING: You can't escape Iraq.

GIULIANI: Iraq is very, very important. But how you deal with it is going to say a lot about how we deal with this terrorist threat. And to give the enemy a timetable of our retreat - when in the history of war has any army ever been required to do that? And that's why I think the Democrats are in denial.

So, if Giuliani is elected president, we can expect more of the same in Iraq? I'm wondering how the American public feels about that. Recent polls show that more than 2/3 of America disagrees with his position.

I also got a kick out of Rudy saying he's not running against the people on the stage with him, his fellow GOP presidential hopefuls. That's pretty arrogant. Polls right now show him in the lead, but I've also read that his lead is shrinking. Right now, he IS running against other GOP candidates, whether he likes it or not. Of course, every GOP candidate has to state what how his views differ from Democrats as well as fellow GOP candidates, but Giuliani seems to be simply dismissing the other candidates. That's no surprise - the arrogant candidate acting arrogant.

What outraged me most about his King interview was his vast, Reagan-like oversimplification of terrorism.

First of all, history shows that it was the BUSH administration that did not retaliate for the USS Cole bombing, not the Clinton administration. I've done some reading on this - Giuliani acts like we immediately knew who attacked the Cole and that we had airtight proof. That's simply not true.

From the 9-11 Commission:

Evidence of al-Qaeda's involvement was inconclusive for months after the attack. The staff of the 9-11 Commission found that al-Qaeda's direction of the bombing was under investigation but "increasingly clear" on November 11, 2000. It was an "unproven assumption" in late November. By December 21 the CIA had made a "preliminary judgment" that "al-Qaeda appeared to have supported the attack," with no "definitive conclusion."

Giuliani's also way out of bounds for deriding the Clinton administration for its "criminal justice response, not a response commensurate with a terrorist threat."

That's flat-out b.s. First of all, we caught who was responsible for the 1993 attacks. Following the '93 World Trade Center attack, ATF bomb technicians found the axle in the bomb crater with the VIN of the Ryder truck that carried the explosives. The ATF discovered the vehicle had been rented by a Palestinian named Mohammad Salameh.

On March 4, 1993 authorities announced the capture of Salameh. In March 1994, Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Mahmud Abouhalima and Ahmad Ajaj were each convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the World Trade Center bombing.

In a sweep the same day, Salameh's arrest led to the apartment of Abdul Rahman Yasin in Jersey City, New Jersey, which Yasin was sharing with his mother, in the same building as Ramzi Yousef's apartment. Yasin was taken to Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) headquarters in Newark, New Jersey, and was then released. (Great, but that's Clinton's fault? Try the FBI.) The next day, he flew back to Iraq, via Amman, Jordan. Yasin was later indicted for the attack, and in 2001 he was placed on the initial list of the FBI Most Wanted Terrorists, on which he remains a fugitive today. He disappeared prior to 2003's U.S. coalition invasion in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The capture of Salameh and Yasin led authorities to Ramzi Yousef's apartment, where they found bomb-making materials and a business card from Mohammed Jamal Khalifa. Khalifa was arrested in relation to the crime on December 14, 1994, and was deported to Jordan by the INS on May 5, 1995. He was acquitted by a Jordanian court and lives as a free man in Saudi Arabia. Yea, the same Saudi Arabia that has such a cozy relationship with the Bush administration. The same Saudi Arabia that is responsible for 15 of the 19 9-11 hijackers. The same Bush administration that Rudy has functioned as a PR flak for since 9-11.

The 1990s also shows that the Clinton administration also prevented a number of intended attacks in the United States. Funny how those foiled plots never got very much press though. That's a 180 compared to today, when an FBI agent finding a scrap of paper on the street is heralded as "foiling a major terrorist plot." Anyone who needs great examples of that - the recent Fort Dix and JFK "terrorist plots."

Of course, since 9-11 is Rudy's "franchise" and because he's from New York, he's going to milk those two instances for all they are worth. Never mind the fact that he was mayor of New York City for almost all of the 1990s (and mayor during the entire time between the WTC terrorist attacks). I've read lots about how his arrogance and lack of preparation of the city made the immediate aftermath of 9-11 worse, not better. (I'm reading some books about this soon, and I'll blog more at length about it.)

Giuliani is beyond contempt - a man who has profited and made millions of of 9-11. Whoops - another inconvenient truth about American's Mayor that receives next to no press from our liberal media.

Live Blog: the GOP Presidential Debate

Okay, we are just about set to go - the candidates are on the stage and ready to rumble. I know they are hard to see here, but they are, from left, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.); former secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson; Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.); former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney; former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani; Sen. John McCain, (R-Ariz.); former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee; Rep. Duncan Hunter, (R-Calif.); former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore; and Rep. Ron Paul, (R-Texas). Tonight's Republican presidential primary debate is at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, N.H. Like Sunday, CNN's Wolf Blitzer (foreground) is moderating.

Lou Dobbs just asked the question, in so many words, "Does anyone care about these debates?" I believe that many people do. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction right now in the American electorate. Our country is crying out for leadership on issues that make a difference in our everyday lives; issues like gays in the military don't make a bit of difference in the lives of probably 95 percent of Americans.

Dobbs is getting ready to throw it to Blitzer. Here we go...

Again, Wolf with the introduction sentences. Stupid.

7:01: Rudy Giuliani has annoyed me already with his "live free or die" opening statement. Why doesn't he just come out in an American flag suit? The belligerent patriotism of many Republicans just rankles me, but I'll try to give you my non-crazed opinions as the night goes on.

7:04: I just can't believe that the moderators are going to spend time with the first question - "Was it a mistake to invade Iraq?" Of course, Mitt Romney, the first person to get the question, took a swipe at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Kudos to Romney for pushing back to Blitzer on another dumb "knowing then what we know now" question. Totally pointless.

7:06: Now to Giuliani... I could predict his answer before he even says it - and it took less than three minutes (the debate started at four minutes after) for a candidate to bring up the Sunday night debate. Thanks for making me look good, American's Mayor.

7:08: Brownback is up, and he has the best hair on the stage, without question. He proposes a three-state solution on Iraq. I won't pretend to be some sort of an expert on Iraq, but maybe a three-state solution is worthy of consideration. It's worked in the former Czechoslovakia and also Yugoslavia (admittedly, with some growing pains).

7:10: McCain is talking about Iraq, without wearing his flak jacket.Just about everyone seems to be insinuating that we should not have diplomatic relations with Iran. We need to have direct dialogue.

7:18: Hunter is right, though - if the Iranians are moving deadly equipment across the Iraqi border and killing Americans, we need to take care of business with the Iranians, one way or the other, but he just said that he would use tactical nuclear weapons. Anyone freakin' scared by this?

7:19: Yeeeee Haaaaaw! Let the war mongering begin. Rudy - two answers, two mentions of the Democratic debate on Sunday night. He's so full of shit about Fort Dix and JFK - over-hyped "plots" by half-wits. I have every ounce of respect for law enforcement, and 9-11 taught us that we need to take every threat seriously, but people in the Bush administration, and on this stage, have hyped two plots that were more firecracker than nuclear, and I'm being kind. But, Hey! Hey! Hey! - you can't talk about NYC without Giuliani.

7:22: Mitt Romney just referred to the Democrats and what they said on Sunday night. Why are they so obsessed with the Democrats? Anyway, whatever. He just said, with a straight face, that the Democrats "don't think there's a War on Terror." That is a bold faced lie, and Romney knows it. This is the type of tactics that Republicans resort to - just lie, and they don't get called on it. Soon, it's repeated over and over, and the next thing you know, it's "fact." Get with it, Mitt. John Edwards said that the slogan "War on Terror(ism)" is a bumper sticker - we need more than slogans.

7:25: Rudy is now talking about immigration. Can we get another Democratic mention, Mr. America's Mayor? Okay, to be fair, I really don't have a problem with what he's saying here - a data base and an ID card for immigrants is a good idea. He's right on this issue.

7:26: Romney has a problem with illegals staying here, but what would he have us do? Deport them all? Some of them? It's a tough issue, but deporting even half of these people isn't realistic.

7:28: McCain brings up immigration as a national security issue. First of all, stop saying "my friends," and quit bringing up Fort Dix. Ridiculous.

7:29: Wolf is focusing on Romney, McCain and Giuliani. I don't have a problem with it, but the other candidates are probably getting pretty angry.

7:30: Hunter must be in a twilight zone if he thinks that everyone will be lining up for jobs that illegal immigrants have. Sure, you can find examples of that, but how many illegal immigrants have jobs that pay $18 an hour? The candidates (and Blitzer, too) are muddying two issues - immigration and border security. Bush should have freakin' dealt with border security oh, something like five years ago. And no one can say there is no money - $500 billion spent in Iraq so far. Unbelievable that in 2007 we are still debating and fighting about securing or border. That's on President Bush - lock, stock and barrel. If he can take our nation to war, surely he can get a fence built.

Blitzer just asked, with a straight face, "Do we need to secure the border with Canada?" Boy, those Canadians are just lining up to come down here, aren't they? I'm half kidding - I get his point - Canada is the world's largest undefended (friendly) border, so if it isn't secure, terrorists could land in Canada and get into America that way. With Canada, it's a security issue; with Mexico, it's an immigration and a security issue.

7:35: Blitzer is asking the "English as an official language" question again. Karl Rove is smiling somewhere. McCain is kissing lots of Bush ass, and I've heard about six "my friends" from McCain. Fire the staffer who is afraid to tell you that you need to stop saying it. I'm not your friend, Senator.

7:38: Why the hell are the moderators asking about Fred Thompson? You've got to be kidding me. This is why I'm constantly saying that there is very few credible, intelligent people left in the media today.

Now Wolf is getting in with a Thompson question. It's unreal. It reminds me of when there's a big story, but nothing new to report, when anchors and talking heads start interviewing each other about a story. On the air.

7:41: I gotta be fair - as much as I'm anti-Giuliani on many things, he has it right on abortion. Many may say he's trying to have it both ways, but I get his point of view on abortion, and I share it. I don't like abortion, I could never tell my wife to have one, unless there were extreme circumstances like severe birth defects or if her life was threatened, but I DON'T think it should be illegal. Most of all, I don't think that a bunch of men, in the name of religious ideology, should determine what a woman should do with her body.

7:44: Mike Huckabee is being a little slippery with his stance on evolution. This guy is a minister, and he doesn't really believe what the Book of Genesis says, that God created the Earth in six days. Weird.

7:46: McCain is right on religion - I have to say it - I like the idea of children being exposed to all religious beliefs, including evolution, in our schools.

7:48: Ron Paul was just asked a question about separation between church and state, and I have no idea what his answer is. He's jumping all around and he clearly isn't on message, for whatever reason.

7:49: On to climate change. These should be interesting answers. Points to Giuliani - he says that it is a problem and we need to work on solutions, most notably energy independence. He's showing his moderate colors, and I applaud him for it. He's plagiarizing the Democrats as far as having an "Apollo like program" to come up with energy alternatives. I can't remember who said it, but I've heard it a great deal during Democratic debates.

But, deeds, not words on global warming. I remember President Bush running on a carbon tax in 2000, and one of the first things he did after taking the oath of office was tear up that proposal.

7:51: Romney is showing his moderate colors as well on global warming and alternate energy sources, until he brings up ANWR. Boooo.

7:52: Ron Paul could have a "D" behind his name with his answer on oil subsidies - our foreign policy is shaped by our excessive need for oil. He's right on.

7:55: Another Don't Ask, Don't Tell question. These wedge issues really annoy the daylights out of me, but it was asked on Sunday night, so it's no surprise it's being brought up now. Ron Paul just answered it as good as any Republican can - it's about personal conduct (or it should be).

7:57: Giuliani is dodging the gays in the military question. He's right - it's a divisive question, but everyone else is answering, so you should, too. Major kudos to Wolf Blitzer for bringing up the trained Arabic linguists who were recently discharged from the military because they are gay.

7:59: My friends, I'm tired of hearing John McCain call everyone "my friends."

8:00: Tommy Thompson must have sniffed glue - he would send former President Bush (W) out to speak to the youth of America, about integrity?

8:01: Brownback is attacking President Clinton for his conduct since leaving the Oval Office. "He shouldn't be injecting himself into policy" issues? So, former presidents lose their ability to have a point of view? That's hogwash. Clinton has been very visible, but I can't think of a time that he was a distraction or caused any sort of major controversy since he left the Oval Office. He's campaigned hard, which presidents Reagan and Bush Sr. have not done, but Clinton was also much younger when he left office than either of them were.

8:04: Hunter is giving Reagan a tongue bath. God, I have Reagan fatigue - I'm working on a long piece about him which I'll post soon - maybe tomorrow. I'm really growing fed up with the lionization of Ronnie.

8:05: The groundwork is being laid - Libby will get pardoned. Rudy is stating his résumé as a former prosecutor. Wow, America's Mayor, I'm impressed. He recommended 1,000 pardons to President Reagan? Why so few?

8:06: Tommy Thompson is a smackdass - he just compared Scooter Libby, who participated in blowing the cover of a CIA agent, and quite possibly threatening her life, and others, to President Clinton, who lied about an extra-marital affair. Yea, they're comparable.

Phew! Halftime.

8:13: On to some questions from the audience... Erin Flanagan, who lost her younger brother in Iraq, is putting the question to the candidates about when we are getting out of Iraq. Hunter's got plenty of credibility here, and it's probably the only time his candidacy has the aire of legitimacy.

8:17: Ooooo, we're going to get some straight talk from McCain. I find it offensive and absurd that McCain insinuated that if we lose in Iraq, Flanagan's brother died in vain? I'm going to have to go back and check the transcript, but that's what one could take if taking his comments at face value. I don't think he meant that, but McCain's so maniacal about our "winning" in Iraq, he'll say just about anything.

8:19: Ron Paul is the only voice of reason on this stage about the War in Iraq. He states that our soldiers should stop patrolling the streets of Baghdad - that's for police. Right on.

8:20: Mr. Mayor is doing exactly what President Bush has been doing since before the War in Iraq even began - tying 9-11 to Iraq, when anyone who has done ANY reading or research on 9-11 knows that the two were not linked. We are less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq. Of course, Giuliani gets in a dig at the so-called "liberal media," before he's finished, too - "What if General Petraeus says that things ARE going well in Iraq in September? Let's make sure that that is reported with the same intensity [as if the news is poor]." Sean Hannity and BOR will both kiss him the next time they meet. (For the record, Rudy is a guest on both shows.)

This is a typical GOP distraction - what about all of the good news coming out of Iraq? Well, I'm all ears, if anyone wants to point out to me all of this positive, favorable news I've been missing.

8:26: Rudy is now sounding a familiar neocon, conservative theme - government is the problem. (This goes back to President Reagan's debilitating oversimplification, "government is the problem.) Again, he gets in a mention about the Democrats the other night: "What the Democrats are proposing is socialized medicine." Far right-wing Republicans will eat that up, guaranteed. Anything that even insinuates being anti-socialist or anti-communist still gains traction on the far right. But, the far right doesn't trust Rudy anyway. So, call it a wash.

Rudy wants to give a $15,000 tax deduction so people can go out and get their own health care. "If you want to see the cost of health care skyrocket, wait until you see how high it goes with socialized health care." I've got two quick responses to that -- what about someone who makes $15,000 per year? That type of system would still screw the poor. Rudy also has a pretty funny platitude that scored well, but doesn't pass the smell test: "If you get a $15,000 tax break and you find health care for $8,000, you just saved $7,000." Okay, Mr. Mayor - there isn't an intelligent person in America who believes that if every taxpayer gets a $15k tax break, that there will be ANY health care available for $8,000, even at Walmart.

8:35: I don't mean to stick with Rudy, but he's the only one giving anything resembling an interesting answer right now. I don't agree with him, but right now, the only show goin'.

8:36: Ron Paul - our biggest moral dilemma is pre-emptive war. I can think of no bigger moral issue, either.

8:37: Sam Brownback jumps in on the moral issue: "We've been a party that has stood for a culture of life...Every life is beautiful, is sacred, is a child of a loving God, from conception to natural death." He even brings up Darfur, and he's in love with the term "whole life." I guess all of the above applies, except for the hundreds of thousands who have died in Iraq. The party of life is the biggest war mongering party, too. You can't be half pregnant, candidates. Heck of a job, Brownback, heck of a job.

8:41: Romney is blabbering on about immigration. "I love immigration," he bellows. I'm reminded of the movie Jerry McGuire, when Tom Cruise yells, "I love the black man!"

8:43: Tom Tancredo just said, "Bi-lingual countries don't work, and we should not encourage it." I think Canada might have something to say about that. "English holds us together?" Heaven help us.

8:44: McCain just tries to say thank you in Spanish. Stick to English, as long as you quick saying "my friends," or even "mi amigos." He's right on English being our official language, though (he disagrees). This is such a non-issue issue. People like Tancredo and Bill O'Reilly just fan the flames of xenophobia and jingoism by insisting that English be our official language. It's just stupid.

8:49: Tommy Thompson and Tom Tancredo are the biggest boobs on the stage, so it's appropriate they sit together. Thompson calls Democrats "the professional spenders" and Republicans "amateur spenders." Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only two presidents in 40 years that have submitted balanced budgets to Congress. And Bush and the Republicans have gone through money these last six years quicker than a bean burrito through a tourist in Mexico.

Tancredo just said that President Bush "ran like a conservative and governed like a liberal." I'm for universal health care, but not for people like Tancredo - he doesn't need it, because he already has access to some pretty good drugs with answers like that. Bush, governing as a liberal? Boy, have I missed something for the last six years - something like the entire Bush administration.

8:52: Tancredo is blabbering on again. I'm tuning out - he just said again that we need English as an official language. If Tancredo were a movie, he would be Waiting to Exhale.

8:54: Rudy is now plugging Abe Lincoln, a must for any serious GOP candidate, and Rudy's RIGHT about immigration. We do need legal immigration, and to be fair, Rudy said it eloquently. It's obvious he was a U.S. Attorney for so many years, because he's a good debater, even when I disagree with him.

8:55: McCain is up, and he hasn't said "my friends" once. But, we did get a Ronald Reagan mention.

8:57: Rudy is finishing with a partisan bang - another mention of how the Democrats are weak on terrorism and how they play "defense." If Rudy means that America should stay on offense, who should we going to invade next and spend (borrow) $500 billion of taxpayer money on?

8:58: Mitt is giving Ronald Reagan another tongue bath. To borrow a line from the Gipper himself: "There you go again."

8:59: McCain's turn - His CD is skipping - he brings up Fort Dix and JFK Airport again. Stir up that fear, Senator. Your candidacy is sinking, and I'm happy to watch the ship go down.

Well, that's it - talk about a lot of Republican blarney to listen to - two full hours. But, I think it's important to find out what the other side is promotes, believes and proposes. I didn't like much of what I heard, but believe it or not, the top three, McCain, Romney and Giuliani, would make a better president than Bush (I know, that's setting the bar pretty low). All three of them are moderate on at least some of the issues.

But, I believe they are all fatally flawed in a number of ways, too.

Well, that's all for now - typing for two hours straight with one little break is a bear, but I like the two-hour debates as opposed to the 1.5 hour ones. Off to get some dinner. I have the post-game show on TiVo, so I'll probably watch it and comment later.

AP Photo/Elise Amendola

GOP warmonger presidental debate, 7 p.m.

Tonight's the last of the debates, at least for a little while. The more I think about it, I'm actually looking forward to this Republican candidate debate a little bit more than last Sunday's Democratic candidate debate. With the Democrats, I listen too hard, because I'm really putting a great deal of thought into who I'll vote for in the Democratic Primary. With the Republicans, I can just sit back and relax.

A few predictions about tonight...

First and foremost, we're gonna hear a great deal about the plot to blow up JFK Airport, the only question is how much. I can guarantee you it'll be a lot, though. I'm sure Rudy will weigh in - he has to protect his precious 9-11 franchise.

Scooter Libby will be Kryptonite - if it's mentioned (if Wolf does his job, he'll ask), the candidates will say very little, except the bottom feeders, who have to score points any way they can.

Mark this one down - the candidates will refer to the Sunday debate, specifically Dennis Kucinich's statement that he would not use force to take out Osama bin Laden. Time to dust off the "Democrats are Pussies" manual, which is dog-eared and well-worn from being in Karl Rove's back pocket since 1999. Thank GOD that right after Kucinich said that on Sunday, Barack Obama said that he would take out bin Laden, without qualifying his remarks. (By the way, I agree with Obama - I'm for peace, but in the case of bin Laden, he declared war on America by killing 3,000 people. I'd put a bullet in his head.)

It'll be interesting to see if Wolf Blitzer maintains the format, overall tone and style that he used on Sunday in the Democratic debate. Will there be any hypotheticals? If so, will anyone call Wolf out about it? The hypothetical questions in every debate so far have been totally absurd - from extensive "What Ifs" about terrorism, to "What role would Bill Clinton play in your administration?"

The debate begins at 7 p.m., and I'll begin blogging shortly thereafter.

Sun. & Tues. debates: I'll live-blog both

There are two more (Two more? Already?!?) presidential candidate debates coming up, and I will live-blog them both.

This Sunday, the Democrats take center stage. Obviously, I'm more anxious to see this one than the upcoming GOP debate, but not by much. I have to admit, when the debates have this many candidates in them, it's more like a glorified press conference. And the questions from the audience that the moderators choose to ask are for the most part absurd - probably the dumbest so far was when Chris Matthews chose to ask the GOP candidates "What do you think about Bill Clinton being back in the White House?"

I hope and expect that CNN's Wolf Blitzer, an excellent journalist on a network mostly devoid of them, will do a much better job. One thing's for sure - the previous moderators have not set the bar very high.

On Tuesday, it's the GOP's turn. The one burning thing I can't wait to see is if 10 white men can possibly try to "out war monger" each other any more than they did in the last debate. This is more of a question than a statement, but I found the whole spectacle equal parts funny, pathetic and frightening. Is the base of the Republican Party really this blood thirsty? If you think I'm exaggerating, go back and look at the footage from the debates. (It's readily available online, but try YouTube if you're reeeeeeeeally bored today and I'm sure you can pull up clips with no problem.) The thing I'm looking for in this one is how well Rudy protects his franchise, 9-11, and whether he goes after Ron Paul for being right on 9-11 and our foreign policy that helped provoke the attack.

Anyway the Sunday debate begins at 7 p.m., and I'll be in front of the tube, on my laptop.

Where does Fox find these people?

I got a kick out of this one - author Thomas Sowell predicting a U.S. military coup to fix what's wrong with our country. Scary, mindless, and stupid. I swear, Fox producers must dream up outrageous statements, then go find a guest who will say it on the air. That network is becoming more and more like the Jerry Springer Show every day.

I also got a laugh at Sean Insanity saying that a Giuliani/Gingrich GOP ticket in '08 would be a "good ticket." If that is the best that Republicans can do next year, I've got three words that President Bush is very familiar with: BRING IT ON.

Ron Paul gives Rudy a reading list; Foreign Policy for Dummies should top it

While I'm in an anti-Rudy mood (when am I not?), I wanted to bring you this footage from CNN's Cafferty File.

As usual, Jack Cafferty takes aim at ignorant, arrogant or ill-informed Republicans; three hats that America's Mayor wears quite well.

In this footage, Cafferty gets viewer reaction to Congressman Ron Paul's assigning Rudy Giuliani a reading list. Paul's press conference really did make for good political theater, because it had the added value of being true.

Whoever wrote in and said that he was "sick and disgusted" and the hoots, hollers and wild applause after arrogantly trying to dismiss Paul's remarks about the root causes of 9-11.

I'm glad that Paul is not withering in the face of criticism from within his own party about the war. Paul represents a dying breed in American politics (much like Joe Lieberman) - minority voices that are not only afraid to speak out and to stand up to the leadership within their own party.

That takes political courage, and I applaud Paul for having something that most do not in contemporary American politics.

Is Rudy to blame for 9-11 air-quality death?

This is an amazing piece of footage. In the same breath, America's Mayor tells reporters that there is "no chemical agent that we have to be worried about, at this point," right after telling reporters that workers are experiencing "burning eyes" from all of the dust and smoke. I'm no scientist, but even I know if people were having nasty problems with their eyes, it sure as hell wasn't going to do their lungs any good.

I must have missed "health department expert" on Rudy's résumé.

This footage is notable because this past week, the medical examiner's office in New York City announced that it will add Felicia Dunn-Jones to the official list of victims from the September 11 attacks, nearly six years after the twin towers fell.

From Independent:

Almost six years after terrorists tore a hole in Lower Manhattan, the medical examiner's office has stirred controversy by determining that a woman who died months later from a rare lung disease after inhaling toxic dust from the collapsing Twin Towers will be added to the official list of victims.

Felicia Dunn-Jones, a civil rights lawyer, worked in a building a block from the World Trade Centre and inhaled pulverised particles of cement, glass, lead and asbestos as she fled the area of destruction on September 11 2001. Within a few weeks she developed a cough and died in February 2002.

A spokeswoman for the office, Ellen Borakove, said the case of Ms Dunn-Jones was the only 9/11-related fatality it had formally been asked to review, and the only one definitely linked to the collapse of the towers, but indicated others might be considered. "We certainly never turn anybody down," she said.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - the media had better not give Giuliani a pass on his 9-11 record and decisions as the primary race heats up, and especially if he wins the Republican nomination (which I highly doubt).

I predict that he WILL get a pass, though. It's just not patriotic to question America's Mayor about 9-11. He did it heroically, competently and without making any mistakes. Take this one to the bank - 9-11 is Rudy's "franchise," and the right-wing media will attack anyone with the audacity to question Rudy's 9-11 activities and decisions.

It's a kick to see the disgraced Bernie Kerik (and best buddy of Giuliani's) in the footage. Even though Kerik and Giuliani have long, historical ties, Rudy's been trying to distance himself from Kerik for months. I think Gary Condit has a more credible reputation than Kerik.

H/T to C&L

McCain drops Cheney bomb during immigration meeting

"#!$%&#!! you!" GOP Presidential Candidate John McCain is reported to have yelled at Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) during a meeting to discuss immigration legislation. "I know more about this than anyone else in the room," intoned McCain.

According to WaPo, Cornyn "started voicing concerns about the number of judicial appeals that illegal immigrants could receive, according to multiple sources," when McCain got into a heated discussion with him.

Things really got heated when Cornyn admonished McCain for dropping in at the last minute from the campaign trail. "I've been sitting in here for all of these negotiations and you just parachute in here on the last day. You're out of line." said Cornyn to McCain, according to the WaPo article.

That's when McCain dropped the bomb.

I haven't read enough about the immigration bill to offer up much commentary yet, but the political stakes are very high for both parties, so it has been fun watching everyone posture to get their thoughts and positions on the record.

McCain has so many things to be angry about these days, it's tough to know what's really bugging him - his lagging poll numbers, his sub-par fundraising, or the continued fallout over his Mission McComplished stroll through a Baghdad market.

I'm not going to try and hide my pleasure at McCain's meltdown.

What's even more telling than McCain's meltdown at someone who disagreed with him is this, and I can't believe it doesn't get more press (it's the last paragraph of the WaPo article):

After making a few comments, McCain left the Capitol to head to New York for presidential campaign events. Later that day, McCain missed his 43rd straight vote, this on the $2.9 trillion budget outline.

Of course, the profanity and confrontation is bigger news than McCain not doing the job that the people of Arizona sent him to Washington to do - participate in making law, and VOTING when the Senate has a vote.

Something had really ought to be done about this. Senators or House Reps. who are running for president should take a leave of absence or something - it stinks that they can criss-cross the country campaigning, leaving their constituents out in the cold on important matters like, oh, a $2.9 trillion budget, and the War in Iraq.

America's Mayor Millionaire knows preciously little about foreign policy

I really got a kick out of this one last night - it's Rudy Giuliani showing the world that he knows next to nothing about foreign policy.

Rep. Ron Paul sounded as good as anyone on the stage when it came to the War in Iraq, terrorism and 9-11. There is a fundamental difference (and flaw) about what people like President Bush, Giuliani and John McCain think about Iraq and Al-Qaeda. They think we were attacked because "they hate our freedom; they hate our way of life." Certainly that no doubt plays a part in it, but the real decision to attack America came following Desert Storm. Remember that war? That was the war that was over in a few months, resulting in less than 400 American combat deaths. It was a war we had a lot more legitimate reason for fighting. (And even that could be argued, looking back on it.)

Osama bin Laden has said so - the reason to attack America was because American troops were based in Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden, right or wrong, considered this a violation of the Muslim holy land. (A footnote to that - in 2005, President Bush removed U.S. troops from Saudi soil. I wonder why?)

Anyway, what really surprised me, at least a little, was how quickly Rudy pounced on Paul's answer. Really, I shouldn't have been surprised - 9-11 is Rudy's sacred cow, his baby. No one could possibly know more about 9-11 and the reasons behind it than America's Mayor. He arrogantly intoned that "having lived through 9-11" he was offended at Paul's remarks.

Too bad Paul's points come directly from the bi-partisan (but flawed) 9-11 Commission Report.

Paul's campaign manager wasted no time jumping on the mayor.

"Rudy Giuliani has tip-toed around the issues of abortion, guns and marriage. The only issue he has left is security, and he doesn't even get that right," said campaign chairman Kent Snyder. "It is clear from his interruption that former Mayor Giuliani has not read the 9-11 Commission Report and has no clue on how to keep America safe."

I can guarantee you one thing - Giuliani was no more offended last night at Paul's remarks than I was when Rudy attempted to postpone the New York City mayoral election in 2001 so there could be a "transition period," to which all of the candidates for mayor suggested he was off his rocker. He was.

I don't question the fact that 9-11 is Giuliani's strength, and that he did a good job managing the crisis. But, there are a whole lot of warts concerning the mayor's behavior before, during and after 9-11 that had better come up during the campaign. Why? Because, just like when Kerry ran as a Vietnam Vet during '04, Giuliani is going to run on 9-11, 9-11, 9-11 and 9-11 with a little salad dressing of other issues to go with the appetizer, first course, second course, salad and dessert, which will all be 9-11. If Rudy chooses to do that, so be it, but he'd better be prepared to answer some questions about 9-11 then.

I'll go on record right now as saying I don't think the press will do it, though. Thus far, the press coverage of Giuliani has been identical to that of President Bush's in his first term: "He took us through 9-11, and he's doing a good job. Let's move on."

America ill-afford to suffer through such piss-poor press coverage. Stay tuned on that one, and we'll see how it plays out.

Rudy has historically told some whoppers since 9-11, and it gets virtually ignored in the "liberal" press. My favorite one was during his keynote speech at the 2004 Republican National Convention, when he was describing what he told then-NYPD Commissioner Bernie Kerik: "I said, 'thank God George Bush is our president.'" Too bad, as Al Franken points out, there's not one mention of it in his autobiography. In fairness, I'm yet to read that book (it's pretty far down on my reading list), but Franken's books are researched pretty thoroughly, and I've no reason to doubt him.

We'll see how far the Bush cheerleading goes into this campaign.

I for one won't let Rudy's already outrageous quotes be forgotten, most notably how if a Democrat is elected to the White House in 2008 we'll "be on defense" in the War on Terrorism, but if a Republican is elected, "We'll remain on offense." No word on what he calls invading Iraq in the wake of 9-11, a country that had nothing to do with the attacks.

We might as well have invaded Antarctica.

Rudy's Planned Parenthood problem

We'll see if the American public buys this explanation. Actually, Republican voters will first voice whether they buy this or not. I don't believe they will.

America's Mayor is imploding.