At what point is Rudolph G. just going to start showing up for press conferences dressed in an elaborate Twin Towers costume?
September 11th has persuaded him that gun rights are necessary. He said:
“I also think that there have been subsequent intervening events — September 11 — which cast somewhat of a different light on the Second Amendment and Second Amendment rights. It doesn’t change the fundamental rights, but maybe it highlights the necessity for them more.”
Because a plane flew into the 106th floor of an office building, people on the streets should have guns? Why, so they can shoot up at the plane? What the hell does this even mean?
I know we are all members of the 9/11 generation and everything, but Rudolph is turning it into a catch-all for every societal issue, much like how everything for Tancredo is about immigration. It’s embarrassingly poor logic.
Then again, this is coming from a man who thinks we can balance a tax cut with another tax cut.
Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani said Friday that the alternative minimum tax — which is expected to generate as much as $1 trillion over the next 10 years — could be eliminated over the long term by balancing it out with even more tax cuts.
Giuliani’s remarks prompted a bewildered response from his audience of technology executives. Both Republicans and Democrats said they assumed that the candidate must have misspoken as he responded to a question about the tax and its affect the middle class.
But a Giuliani spokeswoman said later that Giuliani meant what he said — tax cuts could replace the lost revenue from the AMT by boosting the overall economy.
…and anyway, after 9/11 I learned that less revenue actually means more, and maybe if you were patriotic like me, you would too. Also everyone knows my name, so shut up.
9 Responses to “9/11 Changed My Mind On Fees In National Parks”
I agree. Today Rudy Giuliani BROUGHT the *&^%ING PANDER. He is now officially the KANYE of pander. Y’all TRF pander-haters were all, this guy’s got nothing, he’s just 2001, the pander game belongs to Fitty-Cent-Mitt now. Then Rudy shows up with a four-lane all-sirens-blazing traffic-gridlocking Hizzoner PANDER-CADE. And now if you get thinking he laid down so much pander he’s got nothing left, well $%^& that, he ain’t even dropped Jesus Walks yet…
Rudy could be right about tax cuts. If they are targeted in directions that will increase taxable activity, tax cuts can indeed increase revenue.
Rudy is pandering to the NRA. It’s good to have him join the right side of the issue — better late than never to defending all constitutional rights, not just the make believe rights the leftists in this country support, but actually rights WRITTEN in the Bill of Rights….
You are right — the NRA wasn’t what this was about. I was responding to the first post. The individual has a right to free speech, to bear arms, etc. I’m glad someone understands that. Of course, individuals have rights under the first and fourth amendments, too. I’m still trying to find that right to privacy…. Hmmmm, I keep reading the constitution and can’t find that darned word ANYWHERE.
Supply-siderism has been invalidated by what history? Cutting taxes has spurred economic growth in this country for two decades. Even Bill Richardson says it works. Higher taxes do not always equate to higher revenue. Go back to econ 101. The “Totality of history” argument is a rather broad stroke and sounds a little too dismissive to be valid.
You hit Giuliani on two points — being Mr. 9/11 and for balancing tax cuts with tax cuts. On the first count, he needs to move on. On the second count, he could be right, depending what cuts he intends to make. History validates cutting taxes on job creators. Check out today’s economy and compare it to the 1970s…. Hmmmmm. What’s the difference? Reagan’s tax cuts spurred the growth of small businesses and, thus, increased economic activity and tax revenue. History validates some tax cuts being able to create tax revenue. You can disagree but many credible economists agree and history speaks for itself.
Rudy means that if all the passengers on the planes were allowed to carry guns, then 9/11 could have been prevented. Which makes perfect sense!
All people should be allowed to carry guns on planes to protect themselves, just like all college kids at Virginia Tech should be armed to protect themselves. Then, with everyone armed, it will all balance out and no one will get shot.
What could possibly go wrong with that?
Noah is making sense.
[...] difficult to determine how these supporters came up with the idea. Their candidate is someone who relates 9/11 to absolutely every issue imaginable, who uses the imagery in every speech, who indeed has made it the centerpiece of his [...]
[...] In Giuliani’s defense, that was before 9/11 and we all know, 9/11 changed everything. [...]
Something to say?
‘waaaaaaa rudy got a standing ovation at the NRA waaaaa, bu-bu-but they are supposed to turn on rudy waaaaaa the right wing is supposed to keep him from winning waaaaaaa’
rudy got alot of applause, alot of laughter, and a standing O from the toughest crowd he’ll face in this election cycle. he shoots…he scores!
Left by matt
September 21, 2007 at 3:56pm