Mr. 9/11

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fenian_Bastard
  • Start date Start date
Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

F

Fenian_Bastard

Guest
Boy, nothing gets by the NYP, does it?
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11192007/news/regionalnews/giuliani_playing__9_11_card_702998.htm

Question -- does this sudden flash of insight on the part of Mr. Murdoch's struggling little tab constitute a dog-whistle signal to Rudy, Bernie, Ms. Regan or all of them?
 

Here is my favorite part:
While Giuliani's supporters have long boasted about his performance after the attacks, he himself had not, until now, mentioned it as prominently.

I had to scan back up to the lede to learn, with surprise, that it was written today. Color me shocked. I can only surmise that Carl Campanile was either living under a rock since the actual date of 9/11/01 or was in a coma since the actual date of 9/11/01.
 
Let's try and keep in mind the actual day of Tuesday September 11, 2001 and remember that while George W. Bush was out of his mind and **** Cheney was out of sight, that the only official who showed any real courage and talent was Rudy. No one knew whether the planes hitting the Towers was the first of numerous attacks in NYC that day, but he showed character under true fire. While that may not be the sole qualification for office, he and McCain are the only candidates to actually be tested by serious threats and responded, without scripts, polls and analysts. I can only imagine Senator Clinton blaming Al Queda for picking on her because she's a woman or it's part of some right wing conspiracy.

For all Rudy's faults he has a resume of accomplishments. Some may not like his methods, politics or personality, but he did make NYC the most vibrant and relevant city in America and make into a place where people want to go, not flee. He took the city the Dinkins couldn't lead and changed it into a success. He prosecuted real criminals and Marc Rich as a US Attorney.

Obama, Edwards and Clinton are/were neophyte Senators with no real substantive accomplishments. It's a shame that the truly accomplished Democrats, Richardson, Dodd and Biden, are getting no air time while those who have done done nothing but play to the cameras are getting all the ink and face time.

Maybe the Post can give equal space to Obama's, Clinton's and Edwards' accomplishments? But then again, newspapers don't generally print empty pages like the visual media presents dead air.
 
What exactly are they supposed to be running on if not their relevant job experience. I can understand that many candidates don't have any, but those that do...
 
Guy_Incognito said:
What exactly are they supposed to be running on if not their relevant job experience. I can understand that many candidates don't have any, but those that do...


The problem with Rudy is that he's a dangerously loco authoritarian crazy-ass at a time when the Executive branch has been hyperinflated to the point where giving a dangerously loco crazy-ass is about the worst thing we could do as a nation.
As for 9/11 and his record in NYC, well, opinions differ. (Wayne Barrett has done some great work dismantling the myths that stands, as far as I know, unrefuted by Rudy and his FNC bootlickers.) He screwed up placing the disaster center where he did. He never listened to the firefighters about the radios. He gave a couple of speeches. If he wants to run on his record, let him run on the truth of it, and on the entirety of it.
 
Guy_Incognito said:
What exactly are they supposed to be running on if not their relevant job experience. I can understand that many candidates don't have any, but those that do...

Guy, what experience is that?
 
Fenian_Bastard said:
Hiring Bernie Kerik to run Homeland Security, I guess.
Pardoning Marc Rich was OK with Hillary, apparently. Not voting against Michael B. Mukasey was Hillary's idea, too. Besides, what standards can the American people use to judge Senators Clinton, Edwards and Obama?

And some folks may not like Rudy's approach to governing New York City, but that's a far from majority view.
 
Abbott, did you vote for Kerry last time? He showed a lot more courage than Bush did.
He has five medals. Even if the Swiftboat liars were telling the truth, he still served, while Bush had daddy pull strings to get in him the guard and STILL didn't fulfill his commitment.
Oh, it's about more than just their record under fire, huh? I see.
 
heyabbott said:
Fenian_Bastard said:
Hiring Bernie Kerik to run Homeland Security, I guess.
Pardoning Marc Rich was OK with Hillary, apparently. Not voting against Michael B. Mukasey was Hillary's idea, too. Besides, what standards can the American people use to judge Senators Clinton, Edwards and Obama?

And some folks may not like Rudy's approach to governing New York City, but that's a far from majority view.

The president's pardoning power is absolute -- which is why Scooter Libby is now as free as is Marc Rich, Scooter's former client.
Rudy's cowboy cops shot enough black people to suit you, 'yab? Fine. It's just not a good template for a national government.
 
heyabbott said:
And some folks may not like Rudy's approach to governing New York City, but that's a far from majority view.


Abner Louima, Amadou Diallo, Patrick Dorismond .... and countless thousands
 
heyabbott said:
And some folks may not like Rudy's approach to governing New York City, but that's a far from majority view.

Except in New York City.
 
spnited said:
heyabbott said:
And some folks may not like Rudy's approach to governing New York City, but that's a far from majority view.


Abner Louima, Amadou Diallo, Patrick Dorismond .... and countless thousands

The great Rudy moment in the Dorismond incident was when, in the course of smearing the dead guy and releasing his sealed juvie record, America's Mayor said, "This guy was no altar boy" when Dorismond had been, you know, an altar boy.
Crazy, crazy ****.
 
Fenian_Bastard said:
spnited said:
heyabbott said:
And some folks may not like Rudy's approach to governing New York City, but that's a far from majority view.


Abner Louima, Amadou Diallo, Patrick Dorismond .... and countless thousands

The great Rudy moment in the Dorismond incident was when, in the course of smearing the dead guy and releasing his sealed juvie record, America's Mayor said, "This guy was no altar boy" when Dorismond had been, you know, an altar boy.
Crazy, crazy ****.

Dorismond, in fact, went to the same Catholic school Rudy had.

And despite the court ruling that the shooting was accidental, the City settled the Dorismond family's wrongful death suit for $2.3 mill.
 
But the squeegee men are all in Perth Amboy now, so it's safe to come to the Hershey Store in Times Square.
 
spnited said:
heyabbott said:
And some folks may not like Rudy's approach to governing New York City, but that's a far from majority view.


Abner Louima, Amadou Diallo, Patrick Dorismond .... and countless thousands
well, at least 3. Which one did Rudy beat?
 
Up to 1990, the record for
consecutive-year declines in the number and rate of homicide was the 4-year decline
from 1981 to 1985. Those two records were broken from 1990 to 1998. Over that
period, homicides in New York City went from 2,245 (the most ever recorded) to 633
(Appendix table 1). The last time the city saw fewer than 633 homicides was 1965! The
633 represent the culmination of a record 8 consecutive years of drops in the number of
homicides. Similarly, over that same period, the homicide rate fell a record 8 years in a
row to .086 per 1,000 population (figure 1 and Appendix table 2). The last time the city
saw a rate lower than .086 was 1966!
http://samoa.istat.it/Eventi/sicurezza/relazioni/Langan_rel.pdf Bureau of Justice Statistic, US DOJ
 
Look, Rudy did a very good job as mayor, far better than that hack Dinkins or that clown Koch. He had the balls to take steps to improve day to day living in the city, which, along with the concurrent economic boom, improved the town greatly in many respects. He had a huge ego and a Schumer-esqe love for the TV cameras, but that never bothered me. And while the way that he treated his wife won't win him any awards, it is pretty ireelevant to me as long as he got the job as mayor done.

My arguments against him were that he was often petty and vindictive, going out of his way to alienate when there was no need to do so. He was absolutely hated by the time that 9/11 came around. His black and white way of looking at things seem far more dangerous in Iran as opposed to Washington Heights.

Was he heroic on that day? I guess -- he made himself the face of the tragedy and projected leadership. I thought at the time that he was a little too eager for the spotlight, but at the time it was reassuring. But what exactly did he DO? Prior to the event, he certainly did two things wrong -- first, he placed the command center in the wrong place (which really didn't turn out to be too big of a deal). Second, and more importantly, he never settled the pissing match between police and fire on emergency response. At a minimum, this led to chaos on 9/11. At worst, it led to the deaths of a lot of firefighters on 9/11 who didn't know that the north tower might fall and who had time to get out.

Personally, I'm disgusted as to how he's exploited the tragedy for his own gain. Whether it was trying to extend his mayoral term, his "thank God that W. is our president line" at the GOP convention (if he actually said that, I'll write a check to his campaign) or his reference of everything in his stump speech to 9/11 (calls from his wife, gun control).

What I don't get is how his actions on that day would help him as our President.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top