A blow to Giuliani?
I wonder what kind of Secretary the former New York City police commissioner would have made? As Wellington said of his own troops, "I don't know whether they frighten the enemy, but by God they frighten me.''
Anyway it was not to be: politically the issue now is not whether the Kerik court case will damage his mentor (a little but not enough to make a difference, is the answer) no, the issue is what the whole Kerik debacle does to relations between and Giuliani, if indeed the former New York mayor wins the Republican nomination.
I have it on good authority that the president has already made it clear that he regarded the recommendation from Rudy that Kerik was the right man for the Homeland Security job as a major blunder, a blunder that calls into question Mr Giuliani's suitability as a presidential candidate.
So if, for the sake of argument, calls on the White House for help in his hour of need during the primaries, I wonder if it might be forthcoming in the form of sources letting it be known that the current administration feels the former New York mayor is flawed? Would it matter? Would anyone take any notice? Would it even assist Giuliani for a rift to open up?
Hello, I'm 
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
Is there anyone left in the Solar System who cares what the Bush Administration thinks? I very much doubt it.
If I was an American I'd probably be a Democrat but as it is, I think both Giuliani and McCain are both gents and would both make much better presidents than the current occupier of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Oh, come on. Nothing will damage Rudy in the eyes of the Conservatives if the Democratic candidate turns out to be Hillary. The "Christian" far right is willing to gulp down the camels of gay and abortion rights even. And they look with favor on serial adulterer Newt in comparison. All of the "sins" the far right heaps at the doors of the Democrats are easily found in Republican homes and offices: sexual misconduct, financial shenanigans, hideous overspending, pork barrel deals. Yet the Republicans excuse their own misconduct while loudly condemning the Left, leaving them open to the charge that sticks like glue. Hypocrisy, thy name is Conservative.
Justin,
McCain and Giuliani are anything but gents. McCain might have been at one time. His "maverick", as the press here calls it, reputation was, at one point, well deserved. But after getting slimed by the Bush campaign in 2000 he made a decision to curry favor with those in power. In doing that he gave away whatever sanity or independence he once had.
These guys are authoritarians at heart, Giuliani by nature, as is well attested by his history in New York, and McCain probably by what he sees as necessity in getting the support of the 24% of the electorate who still love Bush.
Giuliani would be worse because he's smarter than Bush, but then my two year old nephew is smarter than Bush.
And McCain has been sold his soul in his attempt to become president.
It just occurred to me that "gents" might have an ironic meaning over there so this whole post might be moot.
If Bush thinks proposing Kerik disqualifies Giuliani, what does that say about his own decision to nominate Harriet Myers? Or Gonzales for that matter. I wouldn't let Gonzales defend me on a parkling ticket.
Anyhow, any overt help from Bush would almost certainly be a negative. McCain should refuse it if offered.
The Bush administration calling Giulani "flawed" ? Wouldn't that be the pot calling the kettle black ?
To #2: Some Republican politicians are the screw ups. Democrats aren't entirely clean either. Just because someone is a conservative politically doesn't make them a hypocrite. To judge all conservatives like that makes you the Hypocrite, not me.
About the article: The guy hasn't even had a trial yet. It still is "innocent until proven guilty" in America. Also I wouldn't buy anything Bush does in regards to Rudy Giuliani because they represent two entirely different types of Republicans. Bush is ban everything(i.e abortion and gay marriage) under the guise of close-mindedness. Guiliani is more a Republican with Libertarian ideals(i.e. let states handle their own business and keep the federal gov. out of people's private matters). If Bush had his way, McCain would be leading the polls. Bush supported the McCain immigration bill, which has damaged McCain more that anything in regards to the White House run.
Just another embarrassment for the Republicans really. If the Republicans win the election this time around, then I give up on the people of the USA. It was depressing enough to see that Bush idiot re-elected because of his support of right-wing religious "values", but to see a third term of republican dimwittery is beyond forgiveness.
I keep getting told by various American friends that it isn't the right-wing Christian conservatives which make up most of the American population, but they are the loudest. Well, since when did votes get measured in decibels? Either the majority of American people support the right wing discriminatory practices which go against most Western values, or they don't.
Seriously, the world needs more leaders. It struck me reading through this article that we lack leaders if Giuliani, McCain, Hillary, etc are the candidates available for the race to lead the most powerful nation on earth. What assurances do we have that we won’t end up with another Bush, since no one can do worse than he has? It is a shame, and it tells alot about our society if this is the best we have to offer.
Guiliani would be better than the majority of Republican choices we have so far. I for one would far prefer to have him - and Kerik, than the folks we have now. The Homeland Security patrol of a dozen or so police cars and vans wandering around NYC in a long chain daily is ridiculous, and would almost be funny if the situation were not so serious.
I didn't vote for Bush and I'm Republican. I'm also not conservative in my views, an evangelical or right wing. I'm looking for someone to represent the way I think and my values. At this point that looks to be Barack Obama. He's younger and has less baggage than Hillary. She's smart, but I have reservations about her integrity, much as I would like to see a woman become President. So, I'm watching Barack with interest, but Guiliani is clearly on my radar.
Guiliani is a fake! He's an opportunist in the worse way. If there was no 911 he would not be able to run for president. I've lived in New York all my life and during his mayoral tenure we had some of the worse abuse by police that had not been seen here since the 1970's. With regards to Kerik he recently said that 'if he makes the same balance of right decisions and incorrect decisions as president, the country would be in pretty good shape.' Well history has shown that all it takes is one wrong decision to negate all the so called good ones one has made and vice-versa. Its not how many good decisions in comparison to bad ones one makes, but which ones. Such a statement smells of arrogance and shows that he's counting.
To # 5. Nope. It's still you. Condemning others for what they are doing qualifies the far right as 'guilty as charged'.
I - personally - do have my flaws [lascivious smile] but falling for the Bush administration's lies (twice!) and making my political judgments based on their public statements are not among them.
This will not tarnish Giuliani if he winds up running against Hillary Clinton. She has so many indicted people around her, she makes Giuliani look like a saint.
And I can't imagine her challenging anyone on ethics,especially Giuliani.
Speaking of indictments, dear 12, no one administration has ever had as many people indicted or convicted as Reagan did and he's still a shining star to the Republicans.
It's hard to tread the halls of power without getting a little tarnished, apparently, but making a career of it is reprehensible.
Right you are, 10.
While the Kerik indictment will continue to dog Giulaini during the primaries and maybe into the election run (if he is the Republican's candidate of choice), I don't think it will ultimately make a difference.
Change is in the air in this country and Americans are looking more inward while keeping a close eye on their security. More of us worry about the economy, the falling dollar, housing, and of course, health. These will be the issues that will ultimately decide the election if there is no major terrorist attack on the U.S.A. during that time.
With those factors, the Kerik indictment becomes a moot point except to add more ammunition to the Democrats in their run for the White House.
As a New Yorker when Rudi was mayor, I would not vote for him for the local dog catcher. He is a bully. His way or the highway. I don't think it's a coincidence that some of the worst police brutality occured on his watch, or that he's best buddies with Kerik or whatever that bum is called.
He had his moment of glory on 9/11 and I don't deny it.
What can you say about a man who announces he is leaving his wife in a press conference, and whose children are estranged from him (his son listed a Democrat as his candidate on his website until it got picked up by the media)?
Like some wag said, his entire campaign consists of noun, verb, 9/11.
He isn't even a contender. I like his gay-friendly, pro-choice stance. Republicans will hate that. (Don't know why: they seem to be more gay-friendly than I, but then, I'm hetero, not Republican).
It would take a very deluded woman to vote for a man who treats his ex and kids like that. Rudi does not have a chance.
Republicans are generally either stupid or scared. The minority who prove the exception believe in economic liberty. Rudy is no libertarian--no libertarian would support the Patriot Act. Rudy is a fearmonger and tactful opportunist with a brilliant understanding of the American electorate. He has taken a page from Lee Atwater and Karl Rove. Gays and pro-choice judges have been superceded by Islamic extremists. And, of course, Rudy knows all about these guys, given that he saved the day on 9/11. The strategy is simple: Pick a target, establish your credentials, create fear, manipulate the morons. Never underestimate the stupidity of Americans, or human beings. I agree with the Dems 75% of the time, but they were castrated long ago. Long live Wellstone. I am a proud American, incidentally.
I can't even figure out how Giuliani got to be in this race for President.
9/11 should have put him down the tubes, with the radios and the command center in the top place that terrorist want to hit, is this a smart man or are the Republicans just plain nuts to want a man that had at least 6 years to get radios that worked and to put a command center where he could walk to it, which I don't think he ever did. What are these people thinking? There has to be something being put in the water that makes the masses ignore the truth.
I have a water filter in my house so I'm not effected.
Having lived the first 30 years of my life in NYC, I've already experienced Rudy firsthand; I even made the mistake of voting for him the first term. Libertarian? Give me a break! Totalitarian opportunist is more like it. He held a somewhat pro-gay, pro-choice stance, not because it's something he believes in, but because he ran for mayor in NYC and being pro-life, anti-gay rights is a political death sentence there.
His entire campaign is based on fear mongering and how many times he can mention 9-11 in a single sentence. I'm not even going to get into the idiotic blunders he made regarding the handling of 9-11 that probably cost the lives of many victims and rescue workers, but as someone who CLAIMS to care so much about what happened on 9-11 and terrorism in general he didn't bothered to show up to even one meeting of the Iraq study group (and finally got booted for nonattendance), and didn't even bother to read the report.
If he actually made it into the White House he would be so incredibly in over his head. While he's a more intelligent human being than Bush (so is my pet rock, big deal), he really is willfully ignorant about foreign affairs and his close circle of advisers has some genuinely evil people in it--he could be an even worse disaster abroad than Bush.
Ron Paul gets my vote this time.
Outside the mainstream media (including the ´óÏó´«Ã½) the big story is the massive support Ron Paul is receiving on the internet and on the ground.
Why do mainstream sources ignore Ron Paul?
Because he says he will abolish the Federal Reserve and get the USA to return to creating its own money?
Dangerous stuff!
Who owns the Federal Reserve?...why the same bankers that have lent money to the likes of Murdoch allowing him to buy up the mainstream media.
When Murdoch dies you can bet he will be found to be a minor shareholder in his own companies. The real power is with the people who lent him the money. These guys won't let Ron Paul anywhere near real power.
These are the real government.
As a lifelong Republican I'm totally dismayed by "Fear/Terrorism" obsession that dominates the current GOP offering. The UK lived with the Ulster situation for 30 plus years without generating a fear-oriented atmosphere. Why can't Americans dismiss all this hype from the Bible, Flag & Gun crowd, as exemplified by Rudy Guiliani, Dick Cheney and John McCain,and learn to live with the situation?
The continuing US and British presence in Iraq just makes the situation worse. Why can't we focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan, where we had worldwide support, and stop this neocon nonsense of taking (Iraq) or threatening to take (Iran) unilateral action?
It would be useful to hear John Bolton's comments