The right man at the right time.

Giuliani in '08!!!

But did he serve in Vietnam?/channeling Kerry off

FYI, here is the transcript of today's Meet The Press with Tim Russert and Rudolph Giuliani:

[Link: www.msnbc.msn.com...]
 

#4 William

Your link goes nowhere.

#2 Paladin

Giuliani in '08!!!

Yes indeed! In a heart beat!

Thanks for the Hat tip!

By the way, last Wednesday GWB gave a speech that the media of course ignored, but which covered some substantive issues.

An excerpt:

The momentum of freedom in our time is strong, but we still face serious dangers. Al Qaeda is wounded, but not broken. Terrorists are testing our will in Afghanistan and Iraq. Regimes of North Korea and Iran are challenging the peace. If America shows weakness and uncertainty in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This will not happen on my watch. (Applause.) This nation is strong and confident in the cause of freedom. And, today, no friend or enemy doubts the word of the United States of America. (Applause.)

America and our allies gave an ultimatum to the terror regime in Afghanistan. The Taliban chose defiance, and the Taliban are no longer in power. (Applause.) America and our allies gave an ultimatum to the terror regime in Iraq. The dictator chose defiance -- the dictator now sits in a prison cell. (Applause.) September the 11th, 2001, taught a lesson I will never forget: America must confront threats before they fully materialize. (Applause.)

In Iraq, my administration looked at the intelligence information and we saw a threat. Members of Congress looked at the intelligence and they saw a threat. The United Nations Security Council looked at the intelligence and it saw a threat. The previous administration and Congress looked at the intelligence and made regime change in Iraq the policy of our country. In 2002, the United Nations Security Council yet again demanded a full accounting of Saddam Hussein's weapons programs. As he had for over a decade, Saddam Hussein refused to comply. So we had a choice to make: either to take the word of a madman, or take action to defend America and the world. Faced with that choice, I will defend America every time. (Applause.)

My opponent admits that Saddam Hussein was a threat. He just didn't support my decision to remove Saddam from power. Maybe he was hoping Saddam would lose the election in Iraq. (Laughter and applause.) We showed the dictator and a watching world that America means what it says. Because our coalition acted, Saddam's torture chambers are closed. (Applause.) Because we acted, Saddam's weapons programs are ended forever. Because we acted, nations like Libya have gotten the message and renounced their own weapons programs. (Applause.) Because we acted, an example of democracy is rising at the very heart of the Middle East. Because we acted, the world is more free, and America is more secure. (Applause.)

...

On national security, Americans have the clearest possible choice. My opponent says he approves of bold action in the world, but only if other countries don't object. (Laughter.) I'm all for united action, and so are the 34 coalition partners in Iraq right now. Yet America must never outsource America's national security decisions to leaders of other countries. (Applause.)

Some are skeptical that the war on terror is really a war at all. My opponent said the war on terror is "far less of a military operation and far more of an intelligence-gathering, law enforcement operation." I disagree. Our nation followed this approach after the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993. The matter was handled in the courts and thought by some to be settled -- but the terrorists were still training in Afghanistan, plotting in other nations, and drawing up more ambitious plans.

After the chaos and carnage of September the 11th, it is not enough to serve our enemies with legal papers. (Applause.) With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States of America, and war is what they got. (Applause.)

[Link: www.whitehouse.gov...]

OT A sinking ship

Losing authority
'My husband is the victim of anarchy," murmured Um Fadi, the widow of Khalil Zaban, a prominent Palestinian journalist and human rights activist who was murdered in Gaza City on Tuesday. "He never did anything bad to anyone. I never imagined that the situation would deteriorate to such a low level."
Her daughter, Zainab, was more blunt: "These are gangs, a Mafia. I'm not afraid to say so. My father served the Palestinian cause for 40 years, and this is what he received in response."
Zaban, who also served as a special adviser to Palestinian Authority Yasser Arafat on human rights affairs, is the latest victim of lawlessness and anarchy sweeping the West Bank and Gaza Strip in recent months. Some Palestinians believe the state of chaos, together with a severe financial crisis, could lead to the collapse of the Palestinian Authority and degenerate into civil war.

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

#5 you must have some web browser issues, when I click the link I see the full transcript:

Meet the Press

Transcript for March 7

Guests: Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, Mary Matalin and James Carville.

[Link: www.msnbc.msn.com...]

#9 William

I'm using Netscape 7.1. All I get is a blank screen that says 'Done."

Paladin,

The link works for me. I'm using IE.

Bill Clinton never ever ever went to the World Trade Center in 1994. Never! never!

I'm glad we have a man like Rudy on our side. I'm sure the Bush team is glad too.

Even if Rudy isn't going to be W's veep, I wish the Administration would hire him on in some capacity. Like how about director of the CIA or FBI. Maybe he could help them clean up their act. Having been there on the scene in NY on 9/11, he's got the motivation.

Well, here's a pretty one by Mike Larkin at Blogcritics letting us all know that a country under Bush is not worth defending from terrorists.
[Link: blogcritics.org...]
Check it out. This guy is an asshat and should just head out to Canada now instead of making idle threats.

#7 William

Because we acted, an example of democracy is rising at the very heart of the Middle East.

That got my laughter!

What I find amusing is that GWB's detractors never mention anything about how the enemies of the United States and its' citizens have gained political currency from the images of 911.

These pond scum are able to freely distribute images, videos and lurid descriptions of their debauched machinations perpetrated against the United States but the Democracts never let out so much as a peep in public asking for action against such activities.

If it were so Internet-Haganah would have branch offices on every major continent in the world and a budget to thwart such pernicious propaganda.

Every patriotic American and champion of liberty should hear the clarion call and stand shoulder to shoulder to defend the memory of all those who were murdered on the fateful day of 9/11/2001.

We have a moral duty to honor their loss by holding them in the forefront of our national conscience. To let those images fade would be the gravest abdication of our duty as a free nation.

May God damn the others.

#16 Kina

From that blogger:

[if Bush re-elected] Religious extremists will reign.

Well, call me weirdo but at this point I prefer Christian extremists to Muslim extremists.

JHS:

Thank you so much for the article! It would be great if President Bush would choose Mayor Guiliani as his VP candidate this year, thus saving the White House for the next 12 years!

I am sure that a VP Guiliani would go on to win in '08 and '12, thus stopping Hil in her conniving tracks.

I hope some from the GOP read this site and reconsider.The former Mayor of NY still has a tremendous amount of respect across the entire country on his own merits in the handeling of the 911 tragedy.He's also forthright when it comes to dealing with terrorist doubletalk. He's a leader.

What ever happened to the speculation that Guiliani might run against Queen Hillary for the NY senate seat in 2006? If he could beat her there that would be a real kick in the a** to her presidential plans for 2008.

#21 bigel-I think electoral concerns don't figure into the GOP's VP choice. Take Cheney, for instance. He's from Wyoming.

#8 ralph

This is serious.

Some Fatah officials have joined the campaign calling for reining in the unruly gunmen. Jibril Rajoub, a senior Fatah official and national security adviser to Arafat, talked openly at the meeting of the need to dismantle all the militias, including the Aksa Brigades. But Arafat and the council refused to discuss the issue. The Aksa Brigades, for their part, sent a clear warning to Arafat and the Fatah leaders that they would never surrender their weapons.

Explains a senior Fatah official: "Arafat considers the armed men to be his soldiers on the ground. He relies on them more than the security forces. That's why he pays them salaries and stays in touch with them. Sometimes he personally speaks to the leaders of the Aksa Martyrs Brigades in Jenin, Nablus, and Tulkarm. This is Arafat's way of surviving."

A prominent businessman in Nablus, whose family has been frequently targeted by the armed groups, described the situation in the city as catastrophic.

"What we have here is a Mafia," he remarked, insisting on anonymity. "We have tens of competing armed groups that have replaced the PA. Each group has a leader who is directly linked to another more senior official. Every day I hear about armed robberies, rapes, kidnappings and extortion. The security forces say they are afraid of them and there is no judicial system."

Bush says Cheney will be his Vice President; I believe he means what he says.

There may be an opening for a new Attorney General - Rudy would be great. It would keep him in the public eye.

I certainly hope that as we get closer to the fall, RNC will have Guiliani do some nationally televised ads for Bush. And campaign appearances, of course.

OT: "Chavez to U.S.: Don't Invade
Venezuelan leader vows '100-year war' if Washington ever tried"
[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

He must be taking "scary rhetoric" lessons from Saddam.

This whole manufactured campaign ad controversy is political crap, and anyone with half a brain can see through it.

The Democrats know Bush has heroically led America to great victories in the War on Terror and in Iraq in the greater campaign to pacify, stabilize, and democratize the Islamic world.

They know their only shot at winning is to take 9/11 and issues of national security completely off the table.

It's not going to work. I am a conservative, who has been puzzled by Bush's spending and domestic policies at times, but I am basing my vote on President Bush almost completely on national security concerns. I trust him to keep the national boot on our enemies' necks. I don't trust Kerry to do that. It's just that simple for me. And I KNOW a lot of people who think the same way.

Jetstorm (#29): Look at it another way--Bush is drawing out these inevitable attacks into the open now, so they're stale by the time the 9/11 ads begin to run for real (and when the same idiots whine during the 9/11 themed convention).

Rudy for State. Now he could clean house.

Rudy for AG ... the perfect position for a great prosecutor who cannot be painted as an extremist zealot.

As for senate, I just don't see how Rudy runs in '06 promising to serve out his term and then turns around and runs for President in '08.

OT, but relevent:

From a Time Magazine interview with John Kerry.

Money quote: "I suggested that all the evils of Saddam Hussein alone were not a cause to go to war"

Man, does this guy have any morals ?

#32 Matthew Kirk

In a sense, he is right. There are other countries where very bad things are going on. The difference is that we had other reasons for taking Iraq. Stopping the abuses was a added benefit.

This was written by the sister of the pilot of the plane that was crashed into the Pentagon.

In the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on our country, the families of those who perished on that day became forever linked through our shared anguish and grief. But "the 9/11 families" are not a monolithic group that speaks in one voice, and nothing has made that more clear than the controversy over the Bush campaign ads.

It is one thing for individual family members to invoke the memory of all 3,000 victims as they take to the microphone or podium to show respect for our collective loss. It is another for them to attempt to stifle the debate over the future direction of our country by declaring that the images of 9/11 should be off-limits in the presidential race, and to do so under the rubric of "The Families of Sept. 11." They do not represent me. Nor do they represent those Americans who feel that Sept. 11 was a defining moment in the history of our country and who want to know how the current or future occupant of the Oval Office views the lessons of that day.

The images of Ground Zero, the Pentagon and Shanksville have been plastered over coffee mugs, T-shirts, placemats, book covers and postage stamps, all without a peep from many of these family members. I suspect that the real outrage over the ads has more to do with context than content. It's not the pictures that disturb them so much as the person who is using them. This is demonstrated in their affiliation with Moveon.org, a rabidly anti-Bush group that sponsored a rally they held last Friday calling for the president to pull his ads off the air. But by disingenuously declaring themselves "non-partisan" and insisting that it is a matter of "taste," they retain a powerful weapon that they have learned to exploit to their advantage. They are "9/11 family members" and therefore enjoy the cloak of deference that has been graciously conferred upon them by the public, politicians and, most significantly, the media.

The leader of a lobbying group advised individuals at a 9/11 family meeting shortly after the attacks: "Make no mistake, you have a lot of power. Politicians are more afraid of you than you know." They know. As "relatives of 9/11 victims," they are virtually immune to challenge on the issue of who should have the loudest voice regarding the legacy of this national tragedy.
But this was a tragedy that was experienced and felt not just by us, but by all Americans. The American people responded to the horrors of that day with unflinching courage and an outpouring of love, support and empathy, the memory of which fills me with a gratitude that I can never repay. We families received cards, letters, homemade quilts bearing the names and likenesses of our lost loved ones, hand-lettered drawings from whole classrooms of children, and an unprecedented amount of charitable funds that sustained and continue to sustain those in need more than two years later.

These Americans, most of whom I will never have the privilege of meeting, also gave us something even more precious. When the planes hit the buildings and the towers fell, some of their sons and daughters balled up their fists and determined then and there that they wanted to "do something" about it. Those who donned the uniforms of our Armed Forces in order to fight the war on terrorism are not offended by the images of Ground Zero. On the contrary, they are moved and inspired by them.

Whatever these 9/11 families may think of the president's foreign policy or the war in Iraq, I ask them to reconsider the language and tone of their statements. We should not tolerate or condone remarks such as those of the 9/11 relative who, so offended by the campaign ads, said that he "would vote for Saddam Hussein before I would vote for Bush." The insult was picked up and posted on Al-Jazeera's Web site. In view of the sacrifice our troops have made on our behalf, this insensitivity to them and their families suggests a level of self-indulgence and ingratitude that shocks the conscience.

George W. Bush says that his presidency is inspired by an enduring obligation to those who lost their lives on that brutal September morning. The images of that day stand as an everlasting example of our country's darkest day and finest hour. They are a vivid reminder of the strength and resilience of our great country. They belong to us all--including this president. Let the candidates make their own choices. I trust the American people.

Ms. Burlingame, a life-long Democrat, is the sister of Charles F. "Chic" Burlingame, III, captain of American Airlines flight 77, which was crashed at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Our 9/11: The attacks happened to us all.

Giuliani --- socially moderate, fiscally responsible, stands up to America's enemies ... why can't this guy be running for president this year!!!

Money quote: "I suggested that all the evils of Saddam Hussein alone were not a cause to go to war"

Partially, technically true... only because there is one major difference between the regime of Saddam Hussein and those of Kim Jong-il, Fidel Castro, and other dictators as bad if not worse than Hussein: Hussein was in defiance of 17 UN resolutions, Castro, Kim, and the others are not. This is a "nuance" conveniently forgotten when loopy leftist lobotomoids try to argue that unless the USA makes war against all dictators, we are not allowed to make war against any dictators.

#32

Sorry guys, I should have elaborated more in the comment.

9-11 was the crest of hate and evil. I, as if I needed reminding, recognized it. President Bush recognizes it, Tony Blair got it, Rudy Guiliani sure as hell understood it.

What Saddam represented was the focal point of depraved evil. Him and his two bastard sons.

Even though he understood what the world was up against, the one thing the President and Adminstration failed to do was to convince the world that totaltarinism and authortarian governments are the root of evil. At the very least, they allow it to flourish.

Just seems like all the UN resolutions etc seemed like a secondary reason for going to war.

What John Kerry has failed to do was to recognize what evil is. And that simply amazes me.

Sometimes I just wonder what President Bush would say if he went to the UN:

" Today, we as a united coalition of democratic nations, will no longer allow oppressive dictitorial, and authortarian regiems to enslave thier peoples..."

Use 9/11 and you are a naughty person, don't use it and you are insulting the victims.

Who bar a few politicised victim's relatives using their relative's corpses to make political capital cares?