Oh, Rudy Giuliani. How inadequate I think you are! How terrified I am that you might become president! Your main claims to fame seems to be that you didn’t wet yourself on the morning of 9/11 and that you weren’t scared to appear on Saturday Night Live. The fact that you seem to think the Constitution was nothing more than a frat prank produced by some eighteenth century freemasons has little bearing on whether or not you should be president, according to some folks. You talk a good game and look good on the teevee.
Speaking of “on the teevee”, I guess there was another debate that I missed. (We have a lot of paint drying around here that I simply must keep an eye on.) In that debate I hear from folks that you laid a smackdown on my preferred candidate, Dr. Ron Paul. Now, I like Dr. Paul because even in the areas where we disagree he at least honours the intentions of liberty. If Toms Paine and Jefferson had a very old, very pale baby he would be Ron Paul. So I like the guy not only for what he will do for me but what he won’t do to me.
Anyway, back to the circus debate.
Dr. Paul says that we were attacked on 9/11 because we had too large a military presence in the Middle East and we don’t fully understand the “irrational politics of the Middle East.” Now, this is one area where we differ. I think Ron Paul is maybe a bit too kind toward the nutbars who think that the best way to express your displeasure about life is to blow up a few thousand innocent bystanders. As with serial killers, I think “mommy didn’t hug me” and “you have a military base in my hometown” are poor reasons for killing babies.
But here’s my issue. Dr. Paul’s point of view is a common one. I first heard it standing in the bathroom of my office building on 9/11. I was refreshing my makeup after having cried a little bit. Another woman doing the same thing said pretty much what Dr. Paul said–“they did this because we are in their country”–and I politely smeared my lipstick all over her face disagreed. Since that day, I think I’ve heard or read that view of things approximately nineteen thousand and forty-six times. I still disagree.
Yet Rudy Giuliani–a man who wants to be in charge of our foreign policy–claims to have never before heard “that excuse”. That the first time he ever laid ears on a non-interventionist opinion was during the debate with Dr. Paul.
Scary.
Why?
Well, either Giuliani is so ignorant of foreign policy that he hasn’t heard the rationale of 50% of the country OR he’s so eager to have a good TeeVee moment that he’ll lie just to hear the applause.
Either way, that is NOT presidential material.
Just Another Pretty Farce 
Very nice article!
I would however, like to point out that there is more to the opinion that “they did this because we are in their country”. You cannot, without being untruthful, deny that this was ONE of the contributing factors. Certainly their religious fervor is another more significant one. But, most of all, as stated by Ron Paul and former President Reagan, “we don’t understand the Middle East politics at all”.
What is being proposed, as you’ve so eloquently stated in your article, is that we start looking at other alternatives since our current policy of bomb, bomb, bomb, is having even greater unintended consequences.
I’m not entirely convinced, based on my own lack of understanding of the Islamic faith, that we could do anything at all to change the course of current hostilities. But, the best analogy I’ve read thus far is this:
If you poke around in an anthill with a stick and refuse to remove the stick from the anthill, you shouldn’t be surprised when the ants swarm up the stick and start furiously biting you.
Great article, love your insight!!
would however, like to point out that there is more to the opinion that “they did this because we are in their country”. You cannot, without being untruthful, deny that this was ONE of the contributing factors.
Oh I agree. I’m sure it was a contributing factor at least as much as “they were murderously savage”.
Because, let’s face it. We aren’t ants. I said it with Sinn Fein/IRA and I’ll say it now.
As bad as a police presence is in your country it’s no excuse to kill innocent bystanders. You wanna blow up the military base? Okay. You wanna attack the USS Cole? Okay. Now we’re at war. Fine. We in the USA know how to do standard war. You know, where you attack our army so we attack your army etc.
But “I’m mad at you so I’m gonna get on a plane full of families going to disneyland and fly that plane into an office building full of mommies and daddies who are doing their non-military jobs” is not an appropriate response.
It’s crazywrong. Period.
[…] on the morning of 9/11 and that you weren’t scared to appear on Saturday Night Live.” -Katherine Coble Spread It Around: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and […]
Kat, our shock and awe, a PRE-EMPTIVE strike, killed plenty of babies. Murderously savage indeed.
Now, to the point of your post, I used to think Rudy G might be ok, because he seemed realistic about wedge issues. But I have to agree, if I hear him reference 9/11 again, I’ll tear my own hair out. His pandering to the Right Wing base isn’t necessary, and will prove to be his undoing.
I won’t be voting for Rudi, not because of anything to do with 9/11 or terrorism or Iraq. Those are now being used as props by every single American politician (even Paul) to prove whatever point they’re trying to make. I’m sick of it from the lot.
I’ve said it before, though: I can’t vote for Rudi, because any man who could callously, publicly humiliate his wife in the fashion he did is most likely a sociopath and certainly cannot be trusted in other matters.
That aside, I refuse to pay attention to the ’08 election until , er, ’08. What a novel idea!
Mack, if you mean that Giuliani is a social liberal, you’re right. But he also ran NYC by setting groups against each other in really ugly ways, mostly by ethnicity but sometimes also by class, and has complete disrespect for any civil liberties, so I don’t think you’d have been happy with him in any other way. The city got angrier and angrier during his mayoralty; I’ve never lived through anything else quite like it. I mean, I’m not crazy about Bloomberg as mayor, since he tends to be more autocratic than I’d like, but compared to Giuliani he positively shines because he refuses to play that kind of polarizing politics.
I don’t entirely “get” Guiliani, either. There’s a bit of a gap between ‘inspired the nation on 9-11’ and now, especially since his tenure as mayor was a little ooky at times and before the halo was so firmly attached to his brow. I don’t hate the guy, but I often feel like there’s a sentence missing that ends with ‘…so he should be President.’ Some kick-ass mayoring after a mildly spotty tenure 6 years ago just isn’t enough for me.
I agree with Slarti. It’s not the divorce. Divorces happen. It’s the almost bizarre lengths he went to to publicly humiliate his wife… it’s almost beyond callous into sociopath and I wouldn’t trust him with the country.
Added to that, I wonder if you caught this over at the Agitator today: Guiliani, Mr. “Terrorists Attacked my City,” his PR firm represents the Saudi Government.
Maybe it’s just the way the world works, but I’m kind of tired of Presidents with close links to Saudi Arabia.
It’s the almost bizarre lengths he went to to publicly humiliate his wife… it’s almost beyond callous into sociopath and I wouldn’t trust him with the country.
Here’s where I admit that I know nothing about his divorce or his treatment of his wife.
I’m kind of tired of Presidents with close links to Saudi Arabia.
Yeah. Me, too. Which is another thing that bugs about these long campaign cycles. In order to hold one’s own in what has become a constant election cycle, you’ve got to have a pantload (sorry, mom) of money.
And right now there’s pretty much only one legal way to get a pantload of money and that’s to have some connection to oil money and through that, ties to Saudi Arabia.
Can you become president of the US without those ties? I’m beginning to think not.
Sure, Paul may be my midlife-crisis candidate. I’m still young enough to be naive but old enough to have felt betrayed in the past. But at least I feel like I can say “here’s a guy who believes in a lot of what I believe.”
f I hear him reference 9/11 again, I’ll tear my own hair out. His pandering to the Right Wing base isn’t necessary, and will prove to be his undoing.
It’s all he’s got. Period. Full stop. What else is he going to run on? The Disney remodel of Times Square?
That aside, I refuse to pay attention to the ‘08 election until , er, ‘08.
Yeah. I tried that, and it’s still my method of choice. But when obviously dumb stuff (“I’ve never heard of Blowback Theory before”) gets passed of as a cool smackdown, I’ve got to mouth off.
>I think “mommy didn’t hug me” and “you have a military base in my hometown” are poor reasons for killing babies.
Don’t confuse “A explains B” with “A excuses B”.
I think I wrote Rudy Guiliani off when I heard his interview where he was asked “Should the President be able to detain a US Citizen without charges/trial?” and his response was “I’d prefer to see that power used as little as possible” (no, I didn’t look it up to get the exact quote but that’s as accurate as my memory serves).
There’s no clause in the Constitution that states that it should be violated “as little as possible.” It’s the law of the land, period. It should never be violated. Any man who doesn’t at least know enough as to CLAIM to believe that in public, DEFINITELY should not be sitting in the White House.
I also second what Jon says.
Unless Ron Paul wins, which he won’t, the GOP is pretty much dead in the water.
Here’s a start
Giuliani’s first marriage was to his second cousin, Regina Peruggi. They were married for 14 years, before Giuliani had their marriage annulled by the Catholic church. His second marriage was to Donna Hanover, a reporter and sometimes soap-opera actress. Havover was the city’s First Lady while Giuliani was mayor, but she stayed farther and farther out of the public spotlight as Giuliani was widely whispered to be swiving his press secretary, Cristyne Lategano. After Lategano left City Hall, Giuliani took up with a divorced nurse, Judith Nathan. Never one for subtlety, Giuliani and Nathan marched side-by-side in the St. Patrick’s Day parade, where the city’s mayor traditionally walks with his wife.
Slarti, there wasn’t much to choose between them if it comes to lack of class or consideration for oh, say, dignity or their children’s feelings or anything like that as they were breaking up. And Hanover had the last laugh, after all; she locked him out of Gracie Mansion. I’m fairly sure that that’s the first time the mayor of NYC has been locked out of the official residence by a spouse.
[…] of the best is no doubt Katherine Coble’s piece exploring Giuliani’s apoplectic reaction to Ron Paul’s anti-interventionist warning cry […]
[…] at Coble’s blog I said: “Unless Ron Paul wins, which he won’t, the GOP is pretty much dead in the […]
In one sense the “because we’re in their country” is exactly the reason that 9/11 happened. Osama Bin Laden was insanely upset over infidel (US) troops in the land of the prophet (Saudi Arabia). The fact that we were there by invitation didn’t seem to matter much.
One of the reasons that I respected Giuliani was the way he returned Saudi money given to the city after some off-color remarks were made by one of the royal princes. To hear that he’s got moneyed ties with them now disgusts me. Yes, I know we can’t tar everyone with the same brush, but Saudi money funds Al Qaeda, Saudi money is promoting wahabism and radicalising Muslims all over the world creating the conditions for fervor and terror.