Rudy Giuliani seems to be seeking to edge out Tom Tancredo for the Least Classy Republican Presidential Candidate Award (Sponsored by Windex Glass Cleaner). This quote from the New York Times is a real winner.
“When I say to you that we should reduce taxes to stimulate the economy, I’ll say it to you because I did it and I saw it work,” he said. “When I say we have to bring peace and security as sort of the beginning of anything, whether it’s in Baghdad or in other parts of the world or here at home, I’ll say that to you because I saw that happen in New York, and I made it happen. I did it.”
Three points.
First, comparing the city where you cut your teeth as an executive, the city whose successes you will trumpet throughout your presidential campaign, to Baghdad mid-civil war is a poor tactic. It won’t earn you many friends in New York and before long, there will be many profile pieces on Giuliani’s tenure as mayor. Giuliani’s popularity in New York, real or perceived, will have to be one of his selling points to the Republican Party. Undermining that support by making the Big Apple out to be a war torn clusterfuck – when it clearly wasn’t (and isn’t now) – isn’t a wise plan.
Second, New York is not the same as Baghdad. In fact, beside the fact that the two are both cities that people reside in, they have nothing in common. All you have to do is ask someone who lived in New York in the mid-late nineties and tell them that you heard back in the day NYC was a real shit hole, complete with beheaded bodies appearing every morning, until Rudy showed up.
No, Giuliani focused on quality of life issues as mayor, notably moving sex shops out of Times Square (mostly), two or three blocks west onto Seventh and Eighth Avenues. So while it’s less likely that your teenage boy will walk by dozens of female mannequins clad in latex and leather when visiting Times Square these days, it doesn’t have much bearing on whether or not he’s going to be the victim of a car bombing. In New York, no. In Bagdad, very likely. Censoring pornography is not a legit law and order qualification for handling the civil war in Iraq.
Third, basing his qualifications on handling a civil war in Iraq on dealing with smut in New York City suggests that Giuliani thinks the bar for being qualified to handle pulling our country out of a war and pulling Iraq out of civil war is incredibly low. I’d hazard that the time I spent playing Halo on XBox in college doesn’t qualify me for bringing security to Baghdad, though at least I have “experience” blowing lots of things up and killing indiscriminately.
On a different note, Giuliani has some, um, interested thoughts on what it will take for us to achieve victory in Iraq.
“We hope and we root for and we pray for a successful outcome in Iraq,” he said. “But our ultimate victory is not going to be a military victory. Our ultimate victory against terrorism is going to be a victory of ideas.”
So, ideas like Iraqis should stop killing each other? And they shouldn’t kill us either while they’re at it? That’s sheer brilliance Rudy! It’s hard to believe that this man is considered a serious thinking on terrorism and security.
2 Responses to “Giuliani’s Low Bar”
[...] Singer thinks it is the downward trend – and not the gross numbers – for the top-tier Republican candidates that is most important in comparison to the Democratic numbers, which hold strong. While I agree that these numbers likely reflect a generic advantage for Democrats going into 2008, I think the shift in support is more likely connected to people getting to know McCain and Giuliani better and just not liking what they see. McCain is hated by the religious right and is a main proponent of escalating an unpopular war. Giuliani is considered too socially moderate for the Republican base and his recent propensity to equate New York City and Baghdad is pissing off more than a few voters. Both have marital histories littered with adultery, multiple marriages, and in Giuliani’s case, a borderline incestuous marriage. [...]
Something to say?
The battle of ideas is something the U.S. fell behind in long ago.
Remember the cliche saying, “if you do/don’t do ‘x,’ the terrorist win”?
The minute the Bush administration started rolling back civil liberties in favor of anti-terrorism, the minute we started losing the battle of ideas.
The only way to “win the war on terror,” (and don’t get me started on that…) is by sticking to our constitution and proving we can defeat the enemy without giving up freedoms here and there.
Left by Matt Ortega
January 28, 2007 at 4:40pm