Mr. 9/11 to release campaign Ads that don’t mention 9/11
Keep your eye on the ball.
In three new radio ads debuting today in Iowa and New Hampshire, Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani touts his record as a conservative mayor in liberal New York City - but doesn’t mention 9/11.
OK, lets forget for a second that Rudy mentions 9/11 in every other sentence that dribbles out of his mouth and remember that HE MARRIED HIS COUSIN, LIKES TO DRESS LIKE A WOMAN AND HAS HAD TWO FAILED MARRIAGES. Not to mention that he has very close ties to a priest that likes to molest children.
July 24th, 2007 at 9:14 am
No 9/11? What about 9/11??? 9/11, 9/11, 9/11!!!!!! AAAAA!
JMJ
July 24th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Second cousin, dork. By the way, any idiot "liberal" leftist that tries to make a values issue out of Giuliani while practically commending the Clintons for having no values is beyond hypocrisy. By the way, that priest was never convicted of anything in a court of law, including child molestation, and just goes to show more leftist hypocrisy: guilty until proven innocent. What are you all, French?
July 24th, 2007 at 11:51 am
Steve, second cousin is still disgusting!!!! One doctor calculated that "almost 10,000 children will be stillborn or born with birth defects this year in the United States from first-cousin marriages. Not marrying a cousin is a more potent remedy than many of the medications we prescribe for heart attacks."
Is it worth the risk?
And I never commended Clinton’s actions, so don’t change the subject. See the problem you have there is that your party runs around preaching your moral values and then Wham! Someone from your party becomes a hypocrit. Stop preaching and I’ll stop pointing it out.
And guilty by association is good enough for me when it comes to kid touchers. That man had dozens of accusations but could not be brought to justice because of statutes of limitations. Does that make his actions OK Steve?
Are you saying you support child molestation as long as the perp can make it past the statutes of limitations?
July 24th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Steve O, if I accuse you of being a "kid toucher" twenty years ago, knowing that you couldn’t be prosecuted for it and without evidence or with made-up evidence, does it mean it’s true? I don’t think it is. And does it mean you’re guilty? Again, I don’t think so. That groups says they have evidence of something, but nothing is named outright. (And when did you guys start linking in stuff from Newsmax? I don’t even do so without a disclaimer on it.) Second, and as far as the Giuliani marriage issues, I didn’t change the subject. I incorporated it. Remember, Clinton was the guy who put in the Democratic sponsored "Don’t ask, don’t tell" policy. Third, saying that marrying a second cousin is like marrying a first cousin, then quoting from the NYT about the problems with offspring from a mating of first cousins, kind of kills your argument. Second cousins are not first cousins, period. If you have something that talks about offspring from second cousins, fine; don’t be linking in crap that is irrelevant.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
SteveIl’s right SteveO - hey the Russian Czars and Czarinas used to do it, so it must be okay! I mean, they weren’t all fucked up, were they?
JMJ
July 24th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Nixon was never convicted of anything in a court of law either SteveIL. I suppose he wasn’t guilty of anything either, right?
What othe innocents does history have for us?
Hitler? Never convicted in a court of law. Must be innocent too.
Stalin? Never convicted. Innocent by SteveIl standards.
(I can do this all day…)
July 24th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Steveil - I have no problem with Giuliani, thought I can not see how a "Conservative" would vote for him. I do question how you can say "Steve O, if I accuse you of being a "kid toucher" twenty years ago,
knowing that you couldn’t be prosecuted for it and without evidence or
with made-up evidence, does it mean it’s true? I don’t think it is.
And does it mean you’re guilty? Again, I don’t think so. That groups
says they have evidence of something, but nothing is named outright. " when you agree with bushes handling Guantanamo Bay and other terrorist suspects.
July 24th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
Damn straight I agree with Gitmo and our handling of the terrorist "suspects", Chris. Did you read about this terrorist (who wasn’t a suspect, but a real terrorist) who received justice the other day when he blew himself up? This filth should have never been allowed to leave Gitmo while we are still at war with the Islamofascists in Afghanistan. But no…the leftist jackasses who claim this clown and others like him deserve American "rights" (even though the terrorist had probably never been to America, nor would be protected by its rights) forced the U.S. to let him go to murder again. Did you forget there is a war on?
July 25th, 2007 at 4:37 am
Hey SteveIL finally said something smart. We shouldn’t let any of these guys out, ever. I mean after being locked up for years without any access to representation or anything, being treated like animals and not human beings, that letting them out just guarantees another person who wants to blow us up. Better to lock em up forever, hey or better yet lets just kill em and be done with it.
Then because we have created even more enemies, we can go ahead and round up their families, who are probably incensed by the treatment of their family members and we should lock them up too - certainly they are likely candidates to hold a grudge right? Better do what Machiavelli taught and eliminate the entire family so that no one is left to seek vengeance (that guy was pretty smart). Since families there are often pretty interwoven and extended, the best policy would be to round the entire lot of Muslims up and just shoot them. Or maybe gas them. We are at war right? They are the enemy - no treatement is to bad for the enemy. Kill em all and we are bound ot be protected…
Thank the lord most of don’t feel that way and realize that Gitmo is an abomination and directly flies in the face of everything America stands for. Most of us understand that it was an attempt by an Executive Branch to skirt every possible law concerning the treatment of prisoners and a blatant violation of the judicial process.
The sad part, the part people with your limited ability to comprehend beyond your own bellybutton is that Gitmo has done more damage to America than anything it protected us against would have done. It is a rallying cry and recruitment tool. It is another selling point for our enemies to demonstrate why they hate America. Yet you support it SteveIL.
I have to wonder, why do you hate America?
July 25th, 2007 at 5:10 am
Admin, did you actually read any of the links I provided? This guy was a terrorist already as a member of the Taliban when they ran Afghanistan. This guy was already our enemy when he and the other filth in the Taliban became complicit when we were attacked on 9/11. Hundreds of others that went through Gitmo were very much the same; yet, like regarding domestic crimes, leftists are more concerned with making the guilty innocent and punishing the innocent with death. We (the U.S.) didn’t do anything to cause the 9/11 terrorist attacks to be brought on, so the notion that "we created the terrorists" is as much a bullshit lie now as it was then. So I have to ask you; why do you hate and care not for America or Americans, or the Constitution and freedom?
July 25th, 2007 at 5:12 am
Admin, let me ask a simple question. How many German POWs (real POWs, since they wore uniforms when captured, unlike these terrorist vermin) had representation while incarcerated here after they were captured?
July 25th, 2007 at 5:40 am
One other thing that leftists here probably won’t take note of. The idea that we, the U.S., is creating more terrorists, as told by the so-called "reality-based community", seems to fly in the face of reality in the latest Pew poll (and reported in this AP piece) that shows support for suicide bombings and jihad dropping dramatically in the Muslim world, and I mean the whole Muslim world.
July 25th, 2007 at 5:45 am
And yet the number of them blowing up in places like Iraq (where it actually matters) or Afghanistan, or Britain, or the rebuilt Al Qaeda seems to show that there are more than enough people signing up.
Oh also where is America’s popularity? Higher or lower since 9/11?
July 25th, 2007 at 6:30 am
Popularity is higher. You know, it’s funny. Hitler and the German people seemed to get madder and madder at the U.S. after we started bombing Germany in WWII, and more Germans volunteered (those that weren’t conscripted) to fight America and the Allies as we loosed death and destruction on Germany. Maybe we should have just ignored Hitler’s declaration of war on the U.S. since he and the Nazis didn’t attack us. What do you think? Or is thinking a foreign concept to the "reality-based community"? Do you actually read any of the provided links, or do you just like to rant stupidly just to say you said something?
July 25th, 2007 at 7:08 am
Steve So basically you say that guilty until proven innocent only applies to the people you want it to apply to and you accuse the left of being a hypocrite. Since there is a war on if I shot you and told the police that you were a terrorist it would be alright by your standards.
July 25th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Chris, childish responses will get you nowhere.
July 25th, 2007 at 9:40 am
SteveIL, you are not American.
JMJ
July 25th, 2007 at 11:26 am
Jersey, that’s rich coming from a confirmed Stalinist like you.
July 25th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Thats not a childish remark, that is a logical extension of your arguments.
July 25th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
No Chris, it was childish. And there was no logic to it.
July 25th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
you defend an alleged child molester by saying that it was never proven ( which is absolutely right) and then defend Guantanamo where they are doing exactly that. It is you who has a problem with logic.
July 26th, 2007 at 5:35 am
SteveIL, don’t be a liar. Didn’t your mommy ever tell you that it was bad to lie? I never "confirmed" that I was a Stalinist, however, you made it perfectly clear that you are in fact a Stalinist with your support of warrantless wire taps, GITMO detentions, extraordinary renditions, imperial war, and authoritarianism. I’m a liberal, in true, great American tradition. You are a Stalinist, in true, miserable Soviet tradition.
JMJ