January 25, 2008
NY Times Really Hates the Idea of President Rudy Giuliani
The NY Times' editorial board has made its endorsements for the upcoming primaries. While the Times' selection of Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama is interesting (the Times cites experience), we're very taken with the editorial about the Republican candidates.
The Times thinks John McCain is the best Republican candidate and notes some problems with him. But the heart of the editorial is an evisceration of former mayor Rudy Giuliani:
Why, as a New York-based paper, are we not backing Rudolph Giuliani? Why not choose the man we endorsed for re-election in 1997 after a first term in which he showed that a dirty, dangerous, supposedly ungovernable city could become clean, safe and orderly? What about the man who stood fast on Sept. 11, when others, including President Bush, went AWOL?SNAP!That man is not running for president.
The real Mr. Giuliani, whom many New Yorkers came to know and mistrust, is a narrow, obsessively secretive, vindictive man who saw no need to limit police power. Racial polarization was as much a legacy of his tenure as the rebirth of Times Square.
Mr. Giuliani’s arrogance and bad judgment are breathtaking. When he claims fiscal prudence, we remember how he ran through surpluses without a thought to the inevitable downturn and bequeathed huge deficits to his successor. He fired Police Commissioner William Bratton, the architect of the drop in crime, because he couldn’t share the limelight. He later gave the job to Bernard Kerik, who has now been indicted on fraud and corruption charges.
The Rudolph Giuliani of 2008 first shamelessly turned the horror of 9/11 into a lucrative business, with a secret client list, then exploited his city’s and the country’s nightmare to promote his presidential campaign.
The Daily News' Michael Goodwin suggests that the Times' "political hit job" made Giuliani seem more sympathetic, when NBC News' Brian Williams asked him a question about it during last night's debate. Of course, is sympathy enough to bring Giuliani out of fourth place in national polls and into leading positions in Florida, NY, NJ and Connecticut?
|
I don't really think Guiliani was ever really serious about running for president. Just like his Senate run a few years back when he was running against Hillary.
Up until the election process started, no one outside the greater NY metropolitan area knew who he was.
So maybe he was just bored one night and said 'You know, f-it. I'm gonna run for president.'
Ooooooookay Rudy. If you say so.
despite the NYT's gushing endorsement of Mrs. Clinton, I agree with what Mitt Romney had to say last night:
the last thing this country needs is Bill Clinton in the White House with nothing to do again.
hahaha
Sure, After all the Clinton years SUCKED compared to the GW years...
Sure, After all the Clinton years SUCKED compared to the GW years...
Hate double posts...
So, the NYT is saying he's a 9/11 Whore??
This is why I don't read the NYT anymore. The NYT is just an expensive version of the NY Post, Newsday, and the Daily News -- Tabloid.
Rudy cleaned NY. You take the bitter with the sweet, and Rudy gave a lot of sweet to NY and a lot of bitter to the squeegee men and criminals.
The only people worried about the aggrandizement of police power were the criminals.
@GOP
He'd still be a shit president, though.
I thought the Times nailed it on the head. The guy that GOP is describing above is not the guys we're seeing now.
Well, actually, I think he is. Seriously. Some would argue that it required a real asshole to straigthen the town out, and we got the man for the job. And you know what? I'll buy that. Because if you look at how everything played out, he came in, he straightened stuff out, and then he went back to being what he was.
I do take issue with the last line of #6. From Elizabeth Kohlbert's New Yorker piece of a couple of weeks back:
"Presidential candidates are, of course, full of bluster, and a rational voter might well dismiss Giuliani’s more exaggerated claims—about himself, about New York, and about the world at large—as so much posturing. But that would probably be unfair. For all the reasons that he mentions—the fall in crime, the drop in the welfare rolls, the general change of mood in the city—Giuliani was an unusually accomplished mayor. What made him remarkable was that he didn’t settle for these achievements. In addition to muggers and drug dealers, he eventually went after cabdrivers, jaywalkers, hot-dog venders, street artists, museum curators, strippers, and people who were just insufficiently civil—in short, practically everyone in New York. The same mayor who urged calm on September 11th two weeks later sought—unsuccessfully—to declare a sort of municipal state of emergency in order to extend his term in office."
I always thought that Rudy did a good job locking up the criminals, then when they were locked up he had to find others to lock up.
Anyway, yes, the editorial was a hit job. With a most deserving target.
"The only people worried about the aggrandizement of police power were the criminals."
Yeah, like that Eeeevil Criminal Masterminds, Abner Louima and Amadou Diallo...
Does this guy have ANY redeeming qualities, seriously?
The Times' endorsement of Hillary comes as no surprise, given the Times' Op-Ed editor, David Shipley, was her speechwriter during the Clinton administration.
Goodwin in the News writes, "Giuliani was the mayor who cleaned up New York and helped guide the nation out of the chaos and fear of 9/11." What exactly did Giuliani do to lead the nation out of the chaos? And he "cleaned up" New York with the likes of Bernie Kerik, an admitted criminal with proven Mob ties. And let's not forget Russell Harding who looted the NYC Housing Development Corporation. Giuliani's administration was corrupt from top to bottom. I wouldn't call that "cleaning up" New York. Cleaning out New York's coffers is a more apt description of the Giuliani years.
If he ran for governor in 2006, he could have won easily. Could have, not should have.
As for the often-cited drop in crime, people who have actually studied this (as opposed to some of the posters on this site) know that there was a similar drop in crime nationwide. There was also a much better and effective use of the Police, thanks to Chief William Bratton (whom Rudy fired because HE wanted the credit for everything good happening in NYC) and his strong right hand man, Jack Maple. There were more Police on the streets of NYC because Bill Clinton, along with balancing the Federal Budget, allocated funds for more than 100,000 more cops in America. (One of dozens of campaign promises he either met or exceeded... as opposed to the last few repug presidents, who have never kept a promise. George W. refused to renew the funding for those policeman, which is why new recruits to the Police Department had to accept a $10,000 per year cut in their starting salaries... but, of course, to repugs, it's more important to give tax cuts to the oil companies than it is to pay policeman, isn't it?) It was David Dinkins went after these funds and put them into the NYPD... but, of course, Rudy claimed that it was HE who got that funding. Check the timeline and you'll see that Rudy is, as usual, lying about his accomplishments.
"A small man in search of a balcony."
- Jimmy Breslin
That should be on Rudy's tombstone.
Thanks, Sommelier, for mentioning both Jimmy Breslin AND Jack Maple.
Maple (who invented CopStat) was the real brains behind the drop in crime, going all the way back to when he and Ray Kelly were lieutenants in the Times Square precinct during the bad old sad old days. And unlike most, he was too self-effacing to ever seek out the credit he deserved.
How did I learn this? Read it in Breslin.
Funny Esquire piece:
http://www.esquire.com/features/rudyisanasshole
Rudy did not clean NYC. The process was initiated before he became mayor. One of the most important reasons for NYC and many other large cities to make a comeback was due to no small part by... the INTERNET. Yeah, that's right, the internet. It enabled people to get their sexual fix from the privacy of their homes. It sounds wierd but it's true! Give credit where credit is due.
and to add to @cannedand's comment...so we can thank the godfather of the world wide web, Al Gore for cleaning up the crime in NYC. Brilliant!
ps. ihaterudy.com is an available domain name
If NYT really wanted to damage Rudy, they should've endorsed him instead. NYT is to conservatives, what Limbaugh is to liberals.
Besides, who takes Times seriously?
The best thing about Rudy Tooty is the multi-millions of dollars his consulting firm made
when he went around the world charging countries
for post 9-11 advice, another version of Crime does
pay.The NYT was correct this man is an egomaniac and
will say anything even if untrue to defend himself
as he did once on the radio station WQXR "Opera quiz"broadcast some years ago,He said he was a great opera lover but could not answer a simple question on the opera"Tosca"from his interviewer,he copped out(sorry Bernie) Oh to have a copy of that radio show now to hear Rudy grovel .
Yes, Rudy should be crowned King of Hyperbole...