Testicular Democrats
Rudy Giuliani — playing the partisan, as top-tier presidential candidates reaching out to the base tend to do — said this week in New Hampshire that “[t]he Democrats do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us” and hence that the country would be better off with a Republican in the White House after ’08, preferably the mayor himself.
The message was clear: Democrats are not to be trusted with protecting the homeland: “I listen a little to the Democrats and if one of them gets elected, we are going on defense. We will wave the white flag on Iraq. We will cut back on the Patriot Act, electronic surveillance, interrogation and we will be back to our pre-Sept. 11 attitude of defense.” (Correct me if I’m wrong, but Bush was in office before 9/11, was he not? No matter. Giuliani here is at his most viciously authoritarian. For him, the so-called war on terror, hyped up to turn each and every day into a possible 9/11, requires aggressive executive power, domestic spying (perhaps without warrants but certainly without much oversight), avoidance of the Geneva Conventions (interrogation equals torture), and endless war in Iraq. In other words, the use of fear to justify just the sort of police state where Giuliani would feel right at home.)
But have the Republicans — Bush and his pre-midterm rubber stampers in Congress — made America safer? And would they make America safer than the Democrats would? Would a Democratic victory in ’08 open America’s doors to terrorism, to more 9/11s? For this is what Giuliani is saying.
Like Kevin Drum, I find Giuliani’s remarks all so predictable. Still, the debate is worth having. If Republicans want to make the case that they have made America safer and are best entrusted with the task of protecting the homeland, I’m more than happy, like many others, to make the opposite case, that they have waged the war on terror recklessly and without due regard for the Constitution, weakened America both at home and abroad, and put the homeland at great danger.
But how have the leading Democratic contenders responded to Giuliani? As Kevin suggests, like “wimps” — “[w]ith the usual whining”. (He’s referring to Obama and Clinton.)
And that’s just not good enough.
Now is the time for partisanship, for explaining why us and not them, which is just what Giuliani was doing. (Although his attack may also be a sign of desperation, as Steve Benen argues, a reflection of profound ignorance and incompetence on his part.) Democrats need to stand up for themselves and fight back. “Until they do, Rudy and the Republicans are going to win every round of this fight.”
**********
I acknowledge that much of the above gives Giuliani far too much credit. I just don’t think that he or his campaign attacks can be ignored. Whatever his own personal popularity, his attack here is very much in line with what Republicans often say about Democrats. For an excellent critique of Giuliani’s “2008 electoral identity,” displayed in this attack, see Andrew Sullivan: “We have to ask ourselves: after the next terror attack, what powers would a president Giuliani assume? And what would be left of the constitution after four years of the same? Give Rudy the office that Cheney has created — and America, already deeply altered, will become a new political entity altogether.” And much for the worse.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
24 Responses to “Testicular Democrats”
As a Democrat, I’d support Rudy Giuliani for President over most of the current Democratic candidates. I’m quite unhappy with the way our new Democratic Congress is handling this war.
The republicans have hyped Rudy Giuliani way out of place even after the first days after 9/11. The scene of Rudy leading his staff out of the debris was more pathetic than heroic. I felt sorry, but I was not inspired by any act that Rudi did. I don’t get the hero worship here. Its all political IMO.
I would never vote for Rudy Giuliani, ever. Certainly never over a Democrat. I mean really, any it was an idiot decision to put the emergency command center within the world trade center complex in the middle of south Manhattan. Ground zero for any number of attacks or disasters. He was warned but of course he didn’t listen. Rudy is simply not qualified.
Furthermore I agree 100% with how our Democrat Congress is dealing with the President’s failed policy in his “handling” of this war. I KNOW Congress is NOT “handling” this war, because I KNOW the President is the only one HANDLING this war.
Well, the people will ultimately decide. The fact is that Democrat’s have always had a tough time on national defense with the public in general. Rudi is just playing to that perception. The current crop of Democratic candidates are, to put it mildly, not exactly strong national defense candidates with the possible exception of Richardson who, sadly, doesn’t have a snowball’s chance of winning the nomination. Hillary has been pretty centrist as far as national defense goes, which is politically smart as long as she doesn’t piss off the nutroots too much with it.
You might as well get used to it, because you’re going to see a lot more of this kind of talk from Republican candidates.
Did Giuliani do anything between the first WTC bombings and the second to keep NYC safer? For example he put the Response Center on the 24th floor of the WTC building- not in a separate location as others had recommended.
I would look at what New Yorkers are saying about how he handled 9/11 instead of how the rest of the country feels – because they mostly saw his leadership afterwards- instead of his disaster preparation between the two bombings.
In any case, I should probably admit that I’ve had enough of GOP rule – I think I would still be afraid of another executive who didn’t respect constitutional limits, and who played to his base. Today’s Republican party is run by ideological zealots- not the pragmatic cloth coat Republicans of my youth. So I’m voting Democratic even if its for Dennis Kucinich!
Harry Reid wants to surrender.
The WAR is lost. Not the Battle. The WAR.
The Democrats have surrendered. All that is left is to sign the armistice.
The Democrats are crafting the surrender documents right now. They keep sending these withdrawal deadlines to Bush because 20 percent of the country (antiwar) now comprise 100 percent of the Democrats position.
The Blue dog Democrats turned as I knew they would into Jelly in front of Reid, Murtha and Pelosi.
The WAR is lost.
Draft the surrender Papers. Mabey the French can move the Train to Baghdad where we can officially sign them.
Of course Holly isn’t happy, we haven’t bombed Iran…..Syria…..Lebanon…..Egypt…..and most importantly the PA in the last 6 months the Democrat’s have had a slight majority in congress. Of course Bush is blockading the war room doors from anything at all being done anyways, but thats the Democratic congresses fault….or so thinks Holly.
Not enough war for Holly, we needs us some more, so vote for the warmongeringist freakbag you can for Holly’s sake!
You aren’t a Democrat Holly, you’re for whomever wants more war be that GOP, Democrat, or Independant/ Joe Lieberman for Joe Lieberman party.
“The WAR is lost.
Draft the surrender Papers. Mabey the French can move the Train to Baghdad where we can officially sign them. ”
Actually the war was over when we toppled Saddam from power. Whats been going on in the meantime is the country has been trying to put itself back together ITS way and not our way. You spout the typical BS of “Surrender” as if the US actually loses anything by pulling out, which is rediculous since we never had a national stake in that country anyways. Iraq was not going to attack us then, and they are incapable of attacking us now. There is no surrender, only letting Iraq put itself back together.
And when it does, its going to be a Theocracy. But lets be honest, anyone not a neocon knew that going in.
Nobody- Planet zoom zoom is calling.
Pyst,
Being strong on national defense does not equate to a pro-war stance. A strong national defense is much, much broader than wars of choice.
White Agent. I know. Did you buy your ticket yet?
Democrats plan on terror.
SURRENDER
This blog is actually quite clever in its agenda…….tie up the participants every day on Iraq and one-off quotes from Republicans……so that things like this can go unnoticed………
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/04/congressional_d.html
Democrats in Congress appear to be taking full advantage of the “pay to play” system they said led to a “climate of corruption” under Republicans, an ABC News investigation has found.
One of the Democrats’ biggest fundraisers, held at a private estate in suburban Washington, required lobbyists and other big donors to pay as much as $28,000 to have dinner and access to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic House leaders.
During last year’s campaign, Pelosi strongly criticized Republican fundraising efforts.
“The Republicans have turned Congress into an auction house, for sale to the highest bidder. You have to pay to play,” she said as the Democrats announced how they planned to reform Congress.
Lobbyists say little has actually changed in Washington, other than with the Democrats in power, they are in a position to collect the largest share of the contributions.
Holly:
I would support almost any candidate over Giuliani. I might even give Bush another term over that guy. Even Gonzales is better than Kerik.
carpeicthus in NYC.
Giuliani…
Adamantly supports the Iraq War…
Adamantly supports the USA Patriot Act…
Adamantly supports the NSA electronic surveillance program…
Adamantly supports the War on Drugs…
Adamantly supports gun control…
Sounds like a real winner…if you think the government has a role in policing the world and eroding our civil liberties.
“This bill for the first time gives the president of the United States an exit strategy” from Iraq, said Rep. David Obey (news, bio, voting record) of Wisconsin.
Yes it does.
HELP!!! RUN!!! WE GIVE UP!!
“Washington looks pretty much the same as it always did,” said Ellen Miller of the Sunlight Foundation, despite Democratic promises of reform.
Yep they not only want to Surrender but they want a nice nest egg to go with it. Gotta love those Democrats. Those ETHICAL PILLARS that the USA can lean on when times are dire.
One of the Democrats’ biggest fundraisers, held at a private estate in suburban Washington, required lobbyists and other big donors to pay as much as $28,000 to have dinner and access to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic House leaders.
Say it ain’t so. The Democrats only believe in the little guy. None of them are rich are they?
Why you mean democrats are millionaires too? Why them rascals. Here all this time I thought they were poor people who felt sorry for the little guy but instead of donating to charity to help the needy they donate 28,000 dollars to Nancy Pelosi?
Say it ain’t so!
he doesn’t get my vote- let me explain:
I was on my way to my office this morning when I see hizzonner walking down the sidewalk past me, flanked by two men. I said in a loud and clear voice “Hey Rudy!” in some what of an excited tone- the kind you take when you see someone famous. He totally ignored me- not a hand wave, a head nod…nothing.
Granted, I may not have used his “official” title, but many poets priests and politicians call him thusly.
He fails to see the man on the street- he’ll fail to see the real issues. He’s dead to me.
Entropy, maybe you need to know Holly’s background and outright hatred for every country in the ME except Israel. Then you’d know what I was talking about.
nicrivera- Holy crap…..I wish you would pick a side and stick to it. You are making me dizzy.
Pyst- lol…Joe Lieberman, a Party of One.
Adamantly supports the Iraq War…
Adamantly supports the USA Patriot Act…
Adamantly supports the NSA electronic surveillance program…
Adamantly supports the War on Drugs…
I support these and I propose that when Im finally made the Department of homeland security that all registered Libertarians should be the first to receive wire taps so we can find out who their “dealers” are.
Secondly that all antiwar should be tapped so we can get the goods on them.
Thirdly all Gays should be tapped so we know who they are.
Fourthly all Abortionists should be tapped so we can monitor their activities.
Fifthly we should install Monitors in every bedroom in America so that all Sexual activity that is not expressly Acceptable by the Christian Coalition should be severely penalized. We only support the MISSIONARY STYLE.
Sixthly we propose that all people over the age of 12 be indoctrinated into the Religious Rights brainwashing program.
Seventhly we will insure that all other forms of Religion are banned from America and any practioners are rounded up and put in the Gulags.
Eightly we demand accountability of all firearms and want to be sure that every member in America has Machine guns, assault weapons and hand grenades so that it makes it easier for us to take over the country.
Adamantly supports the Iraq War…
Adamantly supports the USA Patriot Act…
Adamantly supports the NSA electronic surveillance program…
Adamantly supports the War on Drugs…
Adamantly supports gun control…
and lastly.
Fear mongering. If you vote for Guilani he will take away all your rights and turn the USA into a Gulag.
And you say only the Republicans use Fear Mongering in their tactics.
If it is a choice between Hillary and Rudy my vote will go to the Jonestown Party. This little tidbit from the Newhogg crowd shows Bill and Hillary to be pandering just like Rudy.
http://cernigsnewshog.blogspot.com/2007/04/clintons-predict-911-scale-attack.html
“Testicular Democrats”? Hillary, #1 in that department, would join her counterparts beside the true Democratic flag these days (Dems and the US flag have long been an oxymoron). That is, the white flag.
Be aware that the “Dimmies are soft on terrorism” was alive and well in 2002 and 2004, but not in 2006, or was overridden by dissasfaction with Iraq and the GOP.