Friday, November 20, 2009
Rudy's End
Any slight chance that New York might get a Republican governor next year basically ended with Rudy Giuliani's apparent decision not to run for the office in 2010. There's still some discussion in Hizzoner's camp that he might run for senate against incumbent Kirsten Gillibrand.
|
It's not likely that Giuliani would win a race against Gillibrand. He demonstrated back in 2000 that his heart isn't really in a senate race. Besides, the idea floated -- that he would run against Gillibrand and, if successful, would look at a presidential run in 2012 -- is a perfect way to sabotage the Senate run!!
Why would anyone vote for Giuliani knowing that he would turn around in two years and run for president? Given how presidential campaigns are organized, the race would begin in 2011 -- right after a "Sen. Giuliani" had just been sworn in. Sorry, there's no way that New York voters would elect someone into office under those circumstances.
It's safe to say that Rudy's political career is over. There's nothing wrong with admitting that. He had his major moment in New York city politics -- and it was a remarkably successful one. Arguably, that impact is still being felt, considering Mike Bloomberg would never have become mayor were it not for Giuliani (and the after-effect of 9/11).
It's fine for Rudy to settle into an elder statesman role in Empire State politics.
Labels: Rudy Giuliani
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
The NY GOP Blues
The Post's estimable State Editor Fred Dicker analyzes the battle for the chairmanship of the New York state GOP -- an interesting mix of familiar faces pushing a not so-well-known candidate and a cross-section of district chairs backing the son-in-law of a former president (yeah, that one).
|
But given the state of the New York state Republicam Party, this has been the most exciting contest in years.
Labels: Ed Cox, George Pataki, Rudy Giuliani
Friday, February 01, 2008
Rudy's Achievement
One for the record books:
|
The failed campaign of Rudolph W. Giuliani can claim one distinction: the worst bang for the buck of any delegate winner in presidential politics history.Or, as the Comic Book Guy might put it, worst...campaign...EVER. (Far worse than, as Josh Marshall helpfully points out, long-time record holder John Connally.)
The former New York mayor, who dropped his Republican bid for the presidency this week, disclosed Thursday in a filing with the Federal Election Commission that he raised $58.5 million and spent $48.8 million in 2007.
With his donors' money, Giuliani captured a single national delegate, in Nevada. At that rate, it would have taken close to $60 billion in spending to capture the 1,191 delegates needed to win the nomination.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Bye, Bye, Rudy
CNN, Fox and AP call Florida for John McCain.
With his third-place showing in Florida this evening, Rudy Giuliani's campaign is officially toast.
Time's Mark Halperin reports Giuliani will endorse McCain as early as Wednesday -- if true, a huge boost for McCain going into Super Tuesday.
UPDATE: Further confirmation on Rudy's plans here and here. The post-mortems begin.
|
With his third-place showing in Florida this evening, Rudy Giuliani's campaign is officially toast.
Time's Mark Halperin reports Giuliani will endorse McCain as early as Wednesday -- if true, a huge boost for McCain going into Super Tuesday.
UPDATE: Further confirmation on Rudy's plans here and here. The post-mortems begin.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani
Monday, January 21, 2008
No Love For Hometown Boy...
...from hometown folks.
Siena Poll has McCain surging ahead of Rudy Giuliani in New York.
It's still two weeks from Super Tuesday, but McCain shouldn't even be in the same zip code as Rudy, let alone leading him. But this tracks with other results in the tri-state area -- where Rudy should be strong. The Hartford Courant this weekend showed McCain beating Giuliani by more than 2-1. Given Joe Lieberman's strong endorsement of McCain, the lead shouldn't be a total surprise, but the margin is rather remarkable. At this point, Giuliani's best news seems to be in New Jersey where one poll had him comfortably ahead of McCain, while the other had him trailing. Things are really going poorly when a split decision is consisered progress.
Of course, the Giuliani strategy has been to base everything on Florida (next Tuesday) and then take advantage of the big states on Super Tuesday. However, it is looking increasingly likely that even if Giuliani wins Florida (an increasingly unlikely prospect), that his apparent dithering and embarassing string of lossess in all races thus run has only helped portray him as, well, a loser.
No one likes to back a loser. McCain, despite his still formidable problems with the base, has won two primaries (including the one that has proven the bellwhether for selecting every Republican nominee going back to 1980) and finished second in a third. Romney has wins in Wyoming, Nevada and Michigan. Huckabee has one solid win (whether there will be others is open to question). But, regardless of where these men actually place, they are all in the broader conversation -- because they've been "on the field" scrapping with one another. Giuliani keeps removing himself from the field, seeking more promising ground later on. Alas, in doing that, he leaves the field -- and the "debate" to his opponents. The once-frontrunner now gets even less Zeitgeist discussion than Ron Paul.
The Weekly Standard's Matthew Continetti, a journalist sympathetic to Giuliani's candidacy, contributed a rather sound analysis of what went wrong with America's Mayor's campaign.
|
Siena Poll has McCain surging ahead of Rudy Giuliani in New York.
It's still two weeks from Super Tuesday, but McCain shouldn't even be in the same zip code as Rudy, let alone leading him. But this tracks with other results in the tri-state area -- where Rudy should be strong. The Hartford Courant this weekend showed McCain beating Giuliani by more than 2-1. Given Joe Lieberman's strong endorsement of McCain, the lead shouldn't be a total surprise, but the margin is rather remarkable. At this point, Giuliani's best news seems to be in New Jersey where one poll had him comfortably ahead of McCain, while the other had him trailing. Things are really going poorly when a split decision is consisered progress.
Of course, the Giuliani strategy has been to base everything on Florida (next Tuesday) and then take advantage of the big states on Super Tuesday. However, it is looking increasingly likely that even if Giuliani wins Florida (an increasingly unlikely prospect), that his apparent dithering and embarassing string of lossess in all races thus run has only helped portray him as, well, a loser.
No one likes to back a loser. McCain, despite his still formidable problems with the base, has won two primaries (including the one that has proven the bellwhether for selecting every Republican nominee going back to 1980) and finished second in a third. Romney has wins in Wyoming, Nevada and Michigan. Huckabee has one solid win (whether there will be others is open to question). But, regardless of where these men actually place, they are all in the broader conversation -- because they've been "on the field" scrapping with one another. Giuliani keeps removing himself from the field, seeking more promising ground later on. Alas, in doing that, he leaves the field -- and the "debate" to his opponents. The once-frontrunner now gets even less Zeitgeist discussion than Ron Paul.
The Weekly Standard's Matthew Continetti, a journalist sympathetic to Giuliani's candidacy, contributed a rather sound analysis of what went wrong with America's Mayor's campaign.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani
Friday, January 18, 2008
Rudy Meltdown Watch
Giuliani takes the fifth. Fifth place in California, that is.
The RAG prediction that Rudy doesn't win a Super Tuesday state outside of New York and New Jersey is looking pretty good right now (though NJ could prove me wrong yet).
|
The RAG prediction that Rudy doesn't win a Super Tuesday state outside of New York and New Jersey is looking pretty good right now (though NJ could prove me wrong yet).
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani
Friday, January 04, 2008
Johnny One-Note
Rudy Giuliani on his Iowa loss:
"None of this worries me - Sept. 11, there were times I was worried."
Joe Biden departed the scene last night, but his basic comment from a debate earlier this year still ring true:
"Noun, verb, 9/11."
My friend Karol -- who I love and respect dearly -- disagrees.
|
"None of this worries me - Sept. 11, there were times I was worried."
Joe Biden departed the scene last night, but his basic comment from a debate earlier this year still ring true:
"Noun, verb, 9/11."
My friend Karol -- who I love and respect dearly -- disagrees.
Labels: 9/11, Rudy Giuliani
Thursday, January 03, 2008
A Sly Nuanced Political Ad...
...which will undoubtedly have people pondering its subtleties for years:
Oh, OK, I get it: These images show the latest installments in "the terrorists war on...um, themselves!"
Right?
(Thanks to my witty colleague John Wilson for the above line.)
|
Oh, OK, I get it: These images show the latest installments in "the terrorists war on...um, themselves!"
Right?
(Thanks to my witty colleague John Wilson for the above line.)
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Money, Love & Headaches
As the Iowa and New Hampshire votes loom over the next six days, Ron Paul has the money -- evidently blowing away the Republican field in fundraising in the last quarter of '07. Of course, if he doesn't translate that into votes, it will only become only a footnote in the '08 primaries (a la Howard Dean in 2003-'04). On the other hand, a third-party run was never an option for Howard Dean. It is for Paul.
And, things are perfectly falling into place for that to happen, because...
John McCain appears to have the love as the only candidate viewed favorably by a majority of voters .
Simultaneously, he's now surged to a full-fledged tie in New Hampshire with Mitt Romney and is leading the GOP pack nationally for the first time in more than a year. GOP strategist (and one-time Rudy activist) Patrick Ruffini now predicts a McCain "blow-out" next Tuesday.
This leaves headaches for Mitt Romney -- whose campaign will be effectively dead if he loses both Iowa AND New Hampshire (indeed, a loss in the latter state alone would be fatal) -- Rudy Giuliani and, oddly, Hillary Clinton.
Mike Huckabee is poised to win Iowa -- though his nutty "attack ad/non-attack ad" press conference on New Year's Eve may have been self-inflicted wound that a candidate wants to avoid during the last 48 hours of any campaign. (If Romney ekes out an Iowa win, he can thank both Huckabee's gaffe and Fred Thompson mild resurgence among social conservatives.) And the latest Zogby tracking poll has Paul ahead of Giuliani! Given early debate exchanges between the two -- and Rudy's demagoguing Paul -- such a result would have to be only too sweet for the wacky libertarian from Texas. Meanwhile, Giuliani's recent comments on Pakistan even received a slap from a usually friendly source.
With strong pro-war candidate John McCain emerging after next Tuesday as the de facto GOP frontrunner, the likelihood increases that Ron Paul launches a third-party run for president. If Mike Bloomberg also throws his hat in, the twin pressures of both an avowed anti-war candidate and a lifestyle billionaire liberal would eat away at so much blue state support that the odds of McCain becoming the next president of the United States are looking a whole lot better than they were three months ago.
So, yeah, Hillary Clinton is popping the Excedrin right about now, too.
|
And, things are perfectly falling into place for that to happen, because...
John McCain appears to have the love as the only candidate viewed favorably by a majority of voters .
Simultaneously, he's now surged to a full-fledged tie in New Hampshire with Mitt Romney and is leading the GOP pack nationally for the first time in more than a year. GOP strategist (and one-time Rudy activist) Patrick Ruffini now predicts a McCain "blow-out" next Tuesday.
This leaves headaches for Mitt Romney -- whose campaign will be effectively dead if he loses both Iowa AND New Hampshire (indeed, a loss in the latter state alone would be fatal) -- Rudy Giuliani and, oddly, Hillary Clinton.
Mike Huckabee is poised to win Iowa -- though his nutty "attack ad/non-attack ad" press conference on New Year's Eve may have been self-inflicted wound that a candidate wants to avoid during the last 48 hours of any campaign. (If Romney ekes out an Iowa win, he can thank both Huckabee's gaffe and Fred Thompson mild resurgence among social conservatives.) And the latest Zogby tracking poll has Paul ahead of Giuliani! Given early debate exchanges between the two -- and Rudy's demagoguing Paul -- such a result would have to be only too sweet for the wacky libertarian from Texas. Meanwhile, Giuliani's recent comments on Pakistan even received a slap from a usually friendly source.
With strong pro-war candidate John McCain emerging after next Tuesday as the de facto GOP frontrunner, the likelihood increases that Ron Paul launches a third-party run for president. If Mike Bloomberg also throws his hat in, the twin pressures of both an avowed anti-war candidate and a lifestyle billionaire liberal would eat away at so much blue state support that the odds of McCain becoming the next president of the United States are looking a whole lot better than they were three months ago.
So, yeah, Hillary Clinton is popping the Excedrin right about now, too.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, John McCain, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani
Monday, December 24, 2007
Rudy's Shuffle Into Irrelevancy
Andrew Sullivan quotes Giuliani supporter Patrick Ruffini on the state of Rudy's campaign:
Ruffini continues:
UPDATE: The campaign shares its own misgivings.
|
Pretty brutal:Not to say that the past is prologue, but this isn't the first time that Rudy's commitment to a campaign has been called into question: The same speculation was raised back in 2000 when he was running for the Senate against, yes, Hillary Rodham Clinton.I hate to say this, but I don't think Rudy wants it badly enough. He has a bit of a Fred Thompson problem about him. He hasn't said anything particularly distinctive or memorable the entire campaign. His lows haven't been very low, and his highs haven't been very high. There is no one big thing his campaign is about - first, there were twelve, then there was a laundry list of his accomplishments as a Mayor; then, there were a series of issue spots that failed to move the needle in New Hampshire.Nothing memorable? 'Sanctuary mansion'? The most humanizing thing Rudy has done this whole campaign is catch the flu.
Ruffini continues:
But take a step back, and there are some fundamental problems with how Rudy is positioning his campaign with this strategy.As for the "humanizing thing" to which Andrew mentions in passing, well, that occurred back in 2000 too: After revealing that he was suffering from prostate cancer, Giuliani withdrew from the race.
First, it gives off the impression that he doesn’t want to win. That he’s looking for a TKO rather than a decisive knockout punch. That he won’t go mano-y-mano with any of the opponents who matter. And that he doesn’t care about retail politics (in fact, the IA and SC blowback alone has probably contaminated him in NH). Perceived electability is not just poll numbers in the general, but how someone conducts themselves in the primary. Do they fight, or do they try and win on a technicality? That’s a proxy for how they will perform against the Clinton machine, and voters pick up on those kinds of signals.
Second, it ignores the fluidity of the race. Rudy was never the frontrunner in any traditional sense. A fifteen point lead in the primary is not like a fifteen point lead in a general election. It can evaporate overnight. John Kerry went from 15 to 40 percent in the polls after winning Iowa. It was clear from the beginning that the situation was simply too fluid for Rudy to simply run out the clock.
Third (and I’ll concede this can be temporary until Florida & Feb. 5 is upon us) but Rudy has missed out on the publicity surrounding the Iowa and New Hampshire contests. The coverage of Romney vs. Huck in Iowa has created centrifugal motion around those two, with voters nationally aligning on both sides of the Iowa proxy war. The McCain surge in New Hampshire is not confined to one state, but creates a rallying effect around him nationally. Missing in all this is Rudy. Just as voters tuned in to the race in November and December, he was totally AWOL in the early state-centric coverage.
It may be that we need to revise our theory of the early states. Momentum isn’t just about winning the early states, but also about competing in them. By building a proof-of-concept first in Iowa or New Hampshire, you demonstrate strength before the concentrated national press corps, and if it’s for real, word will spread nationally long before Iowa.
UPDATE: The campaign shares its own misgivings.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Dogging The Republicans
Forgive me if I sound like I'm, ahem, bitching about this, but it looks like Andrew Sullivan missed another significant GOP pooch-abuse incident -- as my Post colleague Dan Mangan discovered earlier this year:
And, yeah, there is an obvious joke involving a certain Democratic candidate, but I'm too much of a gentleman to make it.
|
Judith Giuliani once demonstrated surgical products for a controversial medical-supply company that used dogs - which were later killed - in operations whose only purpose was to sell equipment to doctors, The Post has learned.Geez, given that this was the Michael Vick year, Republicans are not exactly putting themselves in good stead with dog lovers.
"It was a horribly cruel, outrageous program," Friends of Animals President Priscilla Feral said about the demonstrations of medical staplers on dogs conducted by U.S. Surgical Corp. employees during Giuliani's tenure there in the late 1970s.
And, yeah, there is an obvious joke involving a certain Democratic candidate, but I'm too much of a gentleman to make it.
Labels: dog cruelty, Judith Giuliani, Rudy Giuliani
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
U.S. To New York (Candidates): Drop Dead
New York son and, uh, adopted daughter, start to feel the non-love from the rest of the country.
Already trailing in Iowa, Sen. Hillary Clinton's lead in New Hampshire collapses -- and Obama's Oprah-fying of the black vote causes him to blast by her in South Carolina.
Meanwhile, Huckamania sweeps the GOP as Mayor Rudy Giuliani's support shrinks to its lowest point of the year.
(By the way, the fact that Hillary has a 30 percent lead nationwide in the Post/ABC poll is irrelevant. That lead will evaporate quickly if Obama wins the first three contests.)
UPDATE: I missed this Frank Rich column last week. Since Rich is usually predictable (though a good writer), I rarely cite him. However, he identifies what might be the animating spirit between the Obama and Huckabee "insurgencies" that threaten both Hillary and Rudy:
|
Already trailing in Iowa, Sen. Hillary Clinton's lead in New Hampshire collapses -- and Obama's Oprah-fying of the black vote causes him to blast by her in South Carolina.
Meanwhile, Huckamania sweeps the GOP as Mayor Rudy Giuliani's support shrinks to its lowest point of the year.
(By the way, the fact that Hillary has a 30 percent lead nationwide in the Post/ABC poll is irrelevant. That lead will evaporate quickly if Obama wins the first three contests.)
UPDATE: I missed this Frank Rich column last week. Since Rich is usually predictable (though a good writer), I rarely cite him. However, he identifies what might be the animating spirit between the Obama and Huckabee "insurgencies" that threaten both Hillary and Rudy:
What really may be going on here is a mirror image of the phenomenon that has upended Hillary Clinton’s “inevitability” among Democrats. Like Senator Obama, Mr. Huckabee is the youngest in his party’s field. (At 52, he’s also younger than every Democratic contender except Mr. Obama, who is 46.) Both men have a history of speaking across party and racial lines. Both men possess that rarest of commodities in American public life: wit. Most important, both men aspire (not always successfully) to avoid the hyper-partisanship of the Clinton-Bush era.
Though their views on issues are often antithetical, Mr. Huckabee and Mr. Obama may be united in catching the wave of an emerging zeitgeist that is larger than either party’s ideology.
.....
The fact to remember about Mr. Huckabee’s polling spike is that it occurred
just after the G.O.P. YouTube debate on CNN, where Mr. Romney and Rudy Giuliani vied to spray the most spittle at illegal immigrants. Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado, the fringe candidate whose most recent ads accuse the invading hordes of “pushing drugs, raping kids, destroying lives,” accurately accused his opponents of trying to “out-Tancredo Tancredo.”Next to this mean-spiritedness, Mr. Huckabee’s tone leapt off the screen. Attacked by Mr. Romney for supporting an Arkansas program aiding the children of illegal immigrants, he replied, “In all due respect, we’re a better country than to punish children for what their parents did.” It was a winning moment, politically as well as morally. And a no-brainer at that. Given that Mr. Tancredo polls at 4
percent among Iowan Republicans and zero nationally, it’s hard to see why Rudy-Romney thought it was smart to try to out-Tancredo Tancredo.
....
Mr. Obama’s campaign, though hardly the long shot of Mr. Huckabee’s, could also fall short. But the Clinton camp’s panic over his rise in the Iowa polls shows that he’s on the right tactical track. The more polarizing and negative a candidate turns in style, the more that candidate risks playing Nixon to Mr. Obama’s Kennedy. That Mrs. Clinton’s minions would attack Mr. Obama for unseemly ambition because he wrote a kindergarten report called “I Want to Become President” — and then snidely belittle the press for falling for “a joke” once this gambit backfired — is Rudy-Romneyesque in its vituperative folly.
Labels: Dem 2008 Presidential, GOP 2008 President, Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
The End is NIE?
The big news of the last two days is the release of the National Intelligence Estimate suggesting that Iran's nuclear weapons program has been dormant since 2003. The president interpreted the report today as a "warning signal." It certainly gives those wary of banging the war drums for Iran some powerful talking points. But that's the policy question.
What does the existence of the NIE entail for domestic politics? Until this week, the leaders in the two respective party presidential fields -- Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton -- have been, at least rhetorically, the most hawkish. Now, at a moment when both candidates are seeing serious dips in their popularity, it will be interesting to see if the hawkish sensibility continues to carry the day.
Iraq seems to be stabilizing and now the tenor against Iran seems off the high boil it was at just a few weeks ago. Such developments could benefit those candidates for whom security or foreign policy "experience" are not the leading parts of their portfolio. In other words if the issue matrix is turned upside down, an Obama or Edwards (on the Democratic side) or Romney or Huckabee may seem even better suited to running the country one year from now. Yes, this is but one moment. Much can change in the next month or six weeks, but the NIE release could have a subtle ripple through the campaign.
|
What does the existence of the NIE entail for domestic politics? Until this week, the leaders in the two respective party presidential fields -- Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton -- have been, at least rhetorically, the most hawkish. Now, at a moment when both candidates are seeing serious dips in their popularity, it will be interesting to see if the hawkish sensibility continues to carry the day.
Iraq seems to be stabilizing and now the tenor against Iran seems off the high boil it was at just a few weeks ago. Such developments could benefit those candidates for whom security or foreign policy "experience" are not the leading parts of their portfolio. In other words if the issue matrix is turned upside down, an Obama or Edwards (on the Democratic side) or Romney or Huckabee may seem even better suited to running the country one year from now. Yes, this is but one moment. Much can change in the next month or six weeks, but the NIE release could have a subtle ripple through the campaign.
Labels: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Official YouTube Cheap Shot
Capping a not-so-good week for America's Mayor, here's a quite amusing, though mildly unfair (to McCain) clip:
|
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani, satire, YouTube
Friday, November 30, 2007
Ray of Light
Concluding a fun week into the world of Rudolph Giuliani: Current Police Commissioner Ray Kelly declines to corroborate the Rudy team's alibi explanation that the odd accounting was necessary to speed up credit card reimbursements to the members of the security detail:
ABC's Blotter also revealed this week that Giuliani's security contract with the Gulf state of Qatar was overseen by the government minister who once harbored Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the mastermind behind 9/11. With those connections, you'd wonder why Qatar would feel it would even need security "advice" from the former mayor.
Well, this might just turn out to be one of those less-than-six-degrees-of-separation issues. However, it sure does make one wonder what other Giuliani clients might cause embarrassment if their names are revealed. Guess that's why Giuliani is trying to keep that info on the hush-hush.
UPDATE: Dick Polman effectively summarizes why some people -- including this and other Republicans -- believe that the driving-to-Miss-Judy story is important as a spotlight into Rudy Giuliani's character. I will only disagree with part of this statement: "On the other hand, if the guy has been spending the taxpayer's money and squirreling it away in obscure public agencies in order to lead that checkered private life...well, that makes it the public's business."
This is half-right: Polman is wrong to imply that the transgression here is that the mayor was "spending the taxpayer's money" with his trips to Long Island. Giuliani is correct when he says that as mayor, he had 24/7 security. Where he goes, his security goes. It's going to be paid for by the taxpayers regardless.
The issue is the hiding of the money trail. There's a reason why the phrase "follow the money" came out of Watergate: When public figures try to keep the source or destination of a certain amount of money hidden, it is for some specific reason -- either to influence someone or something or to keep under wraps the reason for the expenditue. That's what was going on here. If that wasn't the reason, what was?
Polman is absolutely right in noting that Rudy's five "explanations/ alibis/excuses" in 48 hours speaks volumes as to heart of this matter. And yes, that does make it the public's business.
|
"I don't recall anybody, any statements about delay," Kelly told reporters.Meanwhile, Team Rudy has decided the best way to handle this story -- is to stop responding to questions:
He said all bills for the police details for Dinkins and now for Mayor Mike Bloomberg are handled directly "through the police department."
In South Carolina today, Giuliani declined to offer any further explanation, saying, "We've already explained it."Geez, talk about taking a page from the Clinton book of scandal damage-control.
Giuliani's staff made "a concerted effort" to keep reporters from coming near to the candidate, according to ABC News reporter Jan Simmonds.
"At least three Giuliani press staffers loudly instructed the press to stay within their cordoned-off area and were warned not to approach the candidate," Simmonds reports.
ABC's Blotter also revealed this week that Giuliani's security contract with the Gulf state of Qatar was overseen by the government minister who once harbored Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the mastermind behind 9/11. With those connections, you'd wonder why Qatar would feel it would even need security "advice" from the former mayor.
Well, this might just turn out to be one of those less-than-six-degrees-of-separation issues. However, it sure does make one wonder what other Giuliani clients might cause embarrassment if their names are revealed. Guess that's why Giuliani is trying to keep that info on the hush-hush.
UPDATE: Dick Polman effectively summarizes why some people -- including this and other Republicans -- believe that the driving-to-Miss-Judy story is important as a spotlight into Rudy Giuliani's character. I will only disagree with part of this statement: "On the other hand, if the guy has been spending the taxpayer's money and squirreling it away in obscure public agencies in order to lead that checkered private life...well, that makes it the public's business."
This is half-right: Polman is wrong to imply that the transgression here is that the mayor was "spending the taxpayer's money" with his trips to Long Island. Giuliani is correct when he says that as mayor, he had 24/7 security. Where he goes, his security goes. It's going to be paid for by the taxpayers regardless.
The issue is the hiding of the money trail. There's a reason why the phrase "follow the money" came out of Watergate: When public figures try to keep the source or destination of a certain amount of money hidden, it is for some specific reason -- either to influence someone or something or to keep under wraps the reason for the expenditue. That's what was going on here. If that wasn't the reason, what was?
Polman is absolutely right in noting that Rudy's five "explanations/ alibis/excuses" in 48 hours speaks volumes as to heart of this matter. And yes, that does make it the public's business.
Labels: Rudy Giuliani, scandal
Best Laid Plans
In noting the NYC Comptroller Bill Thompson charge that Rudy Giuliani "stonewalled" his auditing probe into the reallocated security billings back in 2002, Andrew Sullivan echoes my pre-debate observation. Rudy's hope/strategy to let Mike Huckabee be a stalking horse for Mitt Romney in the early states may backfire:
UPDATE: Rudy's creative "accounting" gets mega NYC tabloid love here, here and here.
|
But it's a sign of what may well be coming with the Giuliani candidacy: so many skeletons from so many New York City closets that he begins to become a liability. People talk of how Huckabee could weaken Romney and allow Rudy to win. But what if Rudy and Romney so destroy one another that Huckabee comes up between them. He's been rising in South Carolina all year as well. And Giuliani has been sliding there constantly in the past nine months.Josh Marshall's Muckraker task force also points out that Giuliani defenders are already in "changing story" mode.
UPDATE: Rudy's creative "accounting" gets mega NYC tabloid love here, here and here.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, sex scandal
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Actually Driving Miss Judy
In addition to the security details of his trips to meet the then-Judith Nathan being hidden in city agency accounts, Rudy Giuliani also provided a police driver and city-owned car for Ms. Nathan's personal transportation. The former mayor, of course, calls the original story a "hit job" that may have originated from "the Democratic side."
General memo to all candidates for political office: There will undoubtedly be a fair bit of negative information about you that will come to light during the campaign. Some of it may come from industrious reporters. A great deal -- maybe even the majority -- of the negative information will be coming from your opponent(s). Either directly or indirectly.
In other words, where the information came from is completely irrelevant. Politicians have enemies who are more than happy to embarrass or fatally wound their opponent. Whining about it -- particularly if you don't know who the source was -- makes one sound like a rank amateur (or worse, like a certain First Lady decrying the machinations of a vast right-wing conspiracy).
In Giuliani's case, so what if the accounting story may have originated from a political foe (be shocked, completely shocked!!)? What must be resolved is whether or not the questions raised -- was the misdirecting of funds appropriate? Was it done to hide evidence of the mayor's affair? Did the mayor know that this was going on? Who authorized it? -- are reasonable to be asked of a man running for the presidential nomination of the Republican Party.
|
General memo to all candidates for political office: There will undoubtedly be a fair bit of negative information about you that will come to light during the campaign. Some of it may come from industrious reporters. A great deal -- maybe even the majority -- of the negative information will be coming from your opponent(s). Either directly or indirectly.
In other words, where the information came from is completely irrelevant. Politicians have enemies who are more than happy to embarrass or fatally wound their opponent. Whining about it -- particularly if you don't know who the source was -- makes one sound like a rank amateur (or worse, like a certain First Lady decrying the machinations of a vast right-wing conspiracy).
In Giuliani's case, so what if the accounting story may have originated from a political foe (be shocked, completely shocked!!)? What must be resolved is whether or not the questions raised -- was the misdirecting of funds appropriate? Was it done to hide evidence of the mayor's affair? Did the mayor know that this was going on? Who authorized it? -- are reasonable to be asked of a man running for the presidential nomination of the Republican Party.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani
Devils In the Detailed Billings?
The Politico bombshell of Rudy Giuliani's disguised security costs will undoubtedly be an interesting topic -- particularly in New York -- for a while.
However, one thing jumped out that may be nothing. It could also be just an odd coincidence -- or evidence that someone has a deliciously evil sense of humor.
Consider what is at the heart of this story -- the suggestion that the costs of Giuliani's security detail were buried in the budgets of various city agencies to hide the fact that the mayor was visiting his mistress in the Hamptons. So, of all the possible city agencies where these billings could be hidden, which ones were selected?
The billing practices, however, drew formal attention on Jan. 24, 2002, when Thompson, the city comptroller, wrote the newly elected mayor, Michael Bloomberg, a confidential letter.
One of his auditors, he wrote, had stumbled upon the unexplained travel expenses during a routine audit of the Loft Board, a tiny branch of city government that regulates certain apartments.
Broadening the inquiry, the comptroller wrote, auditors found similar expenses at a range of other unlikely agencies: $10,054 billed to the Office for People With Disabilities and $29,757 to the Procurement Policy Board.
The next year, yet another obscure department, the Assigned Counsel Administrative Office, was billed around $400,000 for travel.
One security billing is hidden in the budget of "The Loft Board...that regulates certain apartments" (like -- a hideaway apartment?)
Another security billing is buried in the budget of "the Procurement Policy Board." Now, the word "procurement" has a specific meaning in the context of government -- related to purchasing and contracting. However, there is also another earthier meaning -- as in procurer is another word for pimp.
And another billing is charged to the budget of "the Assigned Counsel Administrative Office." That is pretty straightforward. Though "assigned" isn't too far from the word "assignation" -- meaning a surreptious romantic liaison.
Now, I candidly admit that I can have a dirty mind -- and all readers of this blog know of my love for puns and word play. But this doesn't seem like that much of a stretch. (And, yeah, the disabilities office doesn't quite fit the theory.)
Of course, it will be interesting to see where the other billings were buried. It will also be interesting to learn exactly who was responsible for deciding which account a given billing would be charged to -- and what the criteria was. Was it random -- or was someone sending a subtle message with some "creative" accounting?
Labels: Rudy Giuliani, scandal
Be Like Mike
I agree with Ed Morrissey that, overall, this was a pretty good broad debate. The questions CNN selected from YouTubers seemed far more substantial than the Democratic version.
My views on the various winners and losers pretty much parallel Ryan Sager. I'm not a Giuliani fan, but I thought he did quite well for himself. As Morrissey said, the "sanctuary mansion" line was a personal cheap-shot at Mitt Romney -- but it was damn effective. Rudy's greatest skill is knowing his audience and how to play/demagogue to it. Romney's explanation on why illegal immigrants were working on his house (they were subcontractors hired by the company Romney hired) makes perfect sense.
However, there is an adage in politics -- "If you're explaining, you're losing." Rudy trapped Romney into "explaining" the issue and thus pushed him into a defensive situation. Good move by CNN of putting Romney and Giuliani side-by-side. You kinda got the feeling that they would have started whaling on each other if the cameras weren't on. Anyway, that opening exchange kind of set the tone: Romney was unable to truly help himself in any major way. He had a good line at the end gibing Giuliani for his Red Sox moment in the World Series, but that was about it.
Giuliani, on the other hand, of course, did quite well while discussing his New York crime reduction record. He also did well in reminding the audience of his record in reducing welfare as well. However, tellingly, one of his few stumbles of the night came in an area where conservatives don't trust him -- guns. He stumbled over the name of a judge who made a decision on the regulation of guns. Notably, his answer on guns was the only time Giuliani received clearly-heard boos. Giuliani, by the way, does deserve credit for candidly saying that he wouldn't sign a federal law banning abortion. He correctly said that, were Roe v. Wade overturned, the states would make their own decisions on the practice.
As if to demonstrate that that certain political adages don't always hold, Mike Huckabee -- the real winner, in my view, "explained" his policy of allowing the children of illegal immigrants to go to college in Arkansas. But, as much as Romney tried to pin him, Huckabee didn't seem defensive in stating his case. His describing those immigrant offspring as "God's children" struck the perfect note; it must have gone over well with his social conservative base, regardless of how they thought about illegal immigration.
His best moment came while responding to the question of what government agencies would he cut. He was into the answer when Cooper told him he had just thirty seconds left. Huckabee didn't hear it at first, so Cooper repeated it. Huckabee just smiled, said "Oh, OK" -- reiterated a comment about shutting down the IRS and just stopped. Huckabee also had a good moment after a YouTube question on whether the candidates believed "every word" in the Bible was true. The question went first to Giuliani who paused before responding. Huckabee piped up and asked Rudy if he needed help answering the question. Rudy chuckled along and invited Huckabee to "help."
[I can't be the only person, however, who cringed a little bit when Rudy said of the Holy Book, "The reality is, I believe it, but I don't believe it's necessarily literally true in every single respect." Given Rudy's interesting marital history, that statement makes an awkward moment. Related to that, given how he responded to Anderson Cooper when the Politico story came up, it looks like Giuliani will deal with it by saying that he had no say in how security costs were billed in his administration. This was the one moment where one wished this was a normal, reporter-driven debate, because Cooper was clearly either unprepared or uncomfortable going to the logical follow-up, "Mr. Mayor, so you are saying that these costs weren't hidden to hide the fact that you were making visits to your now-wife while you were still married to your previous wife?"
Without that context, the issue loses much of its salience -- as Ryan Sager admitted in his take. However, it will be interesting to see what happens as the New York media explores the scandal in days ahead.]
Anyway, not surprisingly, Huckabee hit Bible question out of the park -- but not in just the obvious way. Yes, he spoke of it as the "word of revelation" from God. But he didn't come across as a scary religious freak. He said that certain things can't be taken literally -- such as plucking out one's eye. He then added that "there are parts of it I don't fully comprehend and understand, because the Bible is a revelation of an infinite god, and no finite person is ever going to fully understand it. If they do, their god is too small." He immediately came across simultaneously as devout (good for the religious conservatives), reasonable (good for the secular types) and humble (good for just about anyone wary of politicians). This man is damn good.
Political analysts need to head to Arkansas sometime soon. The water there must be tested -- to find out how one state could produce two natural master politicians like Bill Clinton and Mike Huckabee in one generation. Over the course of several months of campaigning, Huckabee has transformed himself from just being the guy who "gives good debate" -- into the a real force to be reckoned withr. He didn't get the most questions or get the most time, but every time the camera and the microphone were on him, he was on. Flawless. He came across as relaxed, human and engaging. To my fellow economic and libertarian conservatives, I can only say, beware. If he is as good as the previous Man from Hope, he will confound and frustrate you -- even as he bounds past you, keeping his eye fixed on the finish line.
In the miscellaneous category: McCain had an "OK" night. He was at his best defending his support of the Iraq War -- and taking down Romney on the is-waterboarding-torture issue. However, there was no breakout moment for him.
Similarly, Fred Thompson showed that he knew his policy positions; he got in some good digs at both Giuliani and Romney. Ultimately, however, he often sounded like the cranky grandfather. I just don't see him gaining any traction from his debate tonight.
Ron Paul should have learned by now that there is no way to "win" in answering a question about the Council on Foreign Relations or the Trilateral Commission. You'll end up sounding nutty. Paul is far more cerebral than the other candidates and he obviously doesn't have Huckabee's political gifts. Thus, it was obvious that he was frustrated in not getting enough time as the top four/five candidates. As a result, he would tend to rush and stammer through many points -- even if his view was technically right. He was fortunate though that CNN gave him a gift at the end of the night with a clip from a supporter who was encouraging him to run as a third party candidate in the general election. That gave Paul the opportunity to share with the audience his Republican bona fides, including that he had been elected 10 times as a Republican. That may not have won back any fans turned off by his demand to "bring the troops home" (though that statement did get some scattered applause and cheers).
If there is one question I would have liked asked, it's this one: "Name three good decisions George W. Bush has made that you agree with -- and two that you don't." It is amazing that seven years into a Republican administration, the name of the incumbent president was not uttered once. Indeed, only John McCain even mentioned a Bush appointee, albeit disparagingly -- former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Final comment: I watched the debate in a room of politically-active liberals in Tribeca. They "voted" at the end on "If Fred Thompson's shotgun was pointed at your head, which Republican would you 'vote' for based on this debate?" Giuliani, Huckabee, McCain and Paul made it on the first round (measured by applause). The liberal audience then judged Huckabee the "winner."
I asked the room which Republican "scared" them the most. I was surprised to find that Romney was the runaway "winner" in that category.
|
My views on the various winners and losers pretty much parallel Ryan Sager. I'm not a Giuliani fan, but I thought he did quite well for himself. As Morrissey said, the "sanctuary mansion" line was a personal cheap-shot at Mitt Romney -- but it was damn effective. Rudy's greatest skill is knowing his audience and how to play/demagogue to it. Romney's explanation on why illegal immigrants were working on his house (they were subcontractors hired by the company Romney hired) makes perfect sense.
However, there is an adage in politics -- "If you're explaining, you're losing." Rudy trapped Romney into "explaining" the issue and thus pushed him into a defensive situation. Good move by CNN of putting Romney and Giuliani side-by-side. You kinda got the feeling that they would have started whaling on each other if the cameras weren't on. Anyway, that opening exchange kind of set the tone: Romney was unable to truly help himself in any major way. He had a good line at the end gibing Giuliani for his Red Sox moment in the World Series, but that was about it.
Giuliani, on the other hand, of course, did quite well while discussing his New York crime reduction record. He also did well in reminding the audience of his record in reducing welfare as well. However, tellingly, one of his few stumbles of the night came in an area where conservatives don't trust him -- guns. He stumbled over the name of a judge who made a decision on the regulation of guns. Notably, his answer on guns was the only time Giuliani received clearly-heard boos. Giuliani, by the way, does deserve credit for candidly saying that he wouldn't sign a federal law banning abortion. He correctly said that, were Roe v. Wade overturned, the states would make their own decisions on the practice.
As if to demonstrate that that certain political adages don't always hold, Mike Huckabee -- the real winner, in my view, "explained" his policy of allowing the children of illegal immigrants to go to college in Arkansas. But, as much as Romney tried to pin him, Huckabee didn't seem defensive in stating his case. His describing those immigrant offspring as "God's children" struck the perfect note; it must have gone over well with his social conservative base, regardless of how they thought about illegal immigration.
His best moment came while responding to the question of what government agencies would he cut. He was into the answer when Cooper told him he had just thirty seconds left. Huckabee didn't hear it at first, so Cooper repeated it. Huckabee just smiled, said "Oh, OK" -- reiterated a comment about shutting down the IRS and just stopped. Huckabee also had a good moment after a YouTube question on whether the candidates believed "every word" in the Bible was true. The question went first to Giuliani who paused before responding. Huckabee piped up and asked Rudy if he needed help answering the question. Rudy chuckled along and invited Huckabee to "help."
[I can't be the only person, however, who cringed a little bit when Rudy said of the Holy Book, "The reality is, I believe it, but I don't believe it's necessarily literally true in every single respect." Given Rudy's interesting marital history, that statement makes an awkward moment. Related to that, given how he responded to Anderson Cooper when the Politico story came up, it looks like Giuliani will deal with it by saying that he had no say in how security costs were billed in his administration. This was the one moment where one wished this was a normal, reporter-driven debate, because Cooper was clearly either unprepared or uncomfortable going to the logical follow-up, "Mr. Mayor, so you are saying that these costs weren't hidden to hide the fact that you were making visits to your now-wife while you were still married to your previous wife?"
Without that context, the issue loses much of its salience -- as Ryan Sager admitted in his take. However, it will be interesting to see what happens as the New York media explores the scandal in days ahead.]
Anyway, not surprisingly, Huckabee hit Bible question out of the park -- but not in just the obvious way. Yes, he spoke of it as the "word of revelation" from God. But he didn't come across as a scary religious freak. He said that certain things can't be taken literally -- such as plucking out one's eye. He then added that "there are parts of it I don't fully comprehend and understand, because the Bible is a revelation of an infinite god, and no finite person is ever going to fully understand it. If they do, their god is too small." He immediately came across simultaneously as devout (good for the religious conservatives), reasonable (good for the secular types) and humble (good for just about anyone wary of politicians). This man is damn good.
Political analysts need to head to Arkansas sometime soon. The water there must be tested -- to find out how one state could produce two natural master politicians like Bill Clinton and Mike Huckabee in one generation. Over the course of several months of campaigning, Huckabee has transformed himself from just being the guy who "gives good debate" -- into the a real force to be reckoned withr. He didn't get the most questions or get the most time, but every time the camera and the microphone were on him, he was on. Flawless. He came across as relaxed, human and engaging. To my fellow economic and libertarian conservatives, I can only say, beware. If he is as good as the previous Man from Hope, he will confound and frustrate you -- even as he bounds past you, keeping his eye fixed on the finish line.
In the miscellaneous category: McCain had an "OK" night. He was at his best defending his support of the Iraq War -- and taking down Romney on the is-waterboarding-torture issue. However, there was no breakout moment for him.
Similarly, Fred Thompson showed that he knew his policy positions; he got in some good digs at both Giuliani and Romney. Ultimately, however, he often sounded like the cranky grandfather. I just don't see him gaining any traction from his debate tonight.
Ron Paul should have learned by now that there is no way to "win" in answering a question about the Council on Foreign Relations or the Trilateral Commission. You'll end up sounding nutty. Paul is far more cerebral than the other candidates and he obviously doesn't have Huckabee's political gifts. Thus, it was obvious that he was frustrated in not getting enough time as the top four/five candidates. As a result, he would tend to rush and stammer through many points -- even if his view was technically right. He was fortunate though that CNN gave him a gift at the end of the night with a clip from a supporter who was encouraging him to run as a third party candidate in the general election. That gave Paul the opportunity to share with the audience his Republican bona fides, including that he had been elected 10 times as a Republican. That may not have won back any fans turned off by his demand to "bring the troops home" (though that statement did get some scattered applause and cheers).
If there is one question I would have liked asked, it's this one: "Name three good decisions George W. Bush has made that you agree with -- and two that you don't." It is amazing that seven years into a Republican administration, the name of the incumbent president was not uttered once. Indeed, only John McCain even mentioned a Bush appointee, albeit disparagingly -- former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Final comment: I watched the debate in a room of politically-active liberals in Tribeca. They "voted" at the end on "If Fred Thompson's shotgun was pointed at your head, which Republican would you 'vote' for based on this debate?" Giuliani, Huckabee, McCain and Paul made it on the first round (measured by applause). The liberal audience then judged Huckabee the "winner."
I asked the room which Republican "scared" them the most. I was surprised to find that Romney was the runaway "winner" in that category.
Labels: debates, GOP 2008 President, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Driving (To) Miss Judy
Security for a sitting mayor of New York can be costly.
It's especially costly when you're heading out to the Hamptons for trysts with your lover.
If you can't keep costs down, what do you do? Well, if you were Rudy Giuliani, you would bury the financial trail in the budgets of various city agencies.
Politico has the fun details.
|
It's especially costly when you're heading out to the Hamptons for trysts with your lover.
If you can't keep costs down, what do you do? Well, if you were Rudy Giuliani, you would bury the financial trail in the budgets of various city agencies.
Politico has the fun details.
Labels: GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani
