My Meeting Rudy Giuliani

Several months ago, I wrote, “Why Rudy Giuliani is Right.” I was, and he absolutely still is, more than ever.

On Friday, September 28th, I had the pleasure of meeting Rudy Giuliani. About 100 people attended a private home to hear what he had to say. It was a joy to be one of them.

It is one thing to read other opinions of a person. It is still better to hear politicians speak on television. To be in the same room watching their facial expressions and looking into their eyes truly does add insight into the process. The bottom line is that after having met and spoken with Rudy Giuliani, his status as the top tier Presidential candidate is absolutely deserved.

The people that came to see him were a diverse group. Despite those who continue to denigrate the republican party as a “White, Christian Party,” there were plenty of Jewish supporters in attendance. Those who love to write about the gender gap would have a tough time explaining why the crowd was half male and half female. Geographically, the crowd ranged from Southerners to Midwesterners to Californians to very proud New Yorkers such as myself. People from several countries from Africa, Europe, and the Middle East were in attendance. There were social conservatives, libertarian republicans, and former democrats all there because they cared enough to attend a serious presentation of life and death issues in an adult manner.

Mayor Giuliani spoke for approximately 30-45 minutes, and unlike other tightly scripted political candidates, Hizzoner actually took questions. The audience were not Giuliani sycophants. They were serious individuals who wanted substance. He delivered.

Some people who prefer to live in what the Jayson Blair Times refers to as a “9/12 world (What is better described as a 9/10 world),” criticize Rudy Giuliani for spending virtually 100% of his time on the War on Terror. I personally wish he would do this. Nevertheless, his speech was 50% foreign policy followed by 50% domestic policy.

As an olive branch to liberals and their world view, I will cover the Mayor’s remarks backwards.

Mayor Giuliani’s understanding of economics is brilliant, which is to be expected of somebody who saved a city on the brink of economic collapse. He brought up two very important economic points, and he mentioned each one more than once.

First of all, he stated that, “When you take money away from rich people, rich people leave.” The second point he made is that, “Money is more mobile than ever before.”

Too many individuals who worship at the redistribution altar of Keynes think that rich people will just accept whatever is thrown their way. This is nonsense. Rich people will do what is best for them, because all people do this. Liberals complain about companies outsourcing jobs to India and other global places, but what should CEOs do, settle for higher costs and lower profits? When businesses leave, economies collapse. After 9/11, companies had to choose between staying in New York City, or relocating to New Jersey, Connecticut, or even overseas. Wall Street is doing better than ever, and the friendly business climate Mayor Giuliani created helped turn around New York City.

Yes, he cut taxes 23 times. Yes, revenues went up. Yes, welfare rolls went down. This is not a miracle. It is Economics 101. He referred to rich people during his speech as “productive people.” When you punish those who are productive, they lose incentives to produce. Everybody loses.

He spoke about health care, and he had justifiably tough words for Hillary Clinton’s health care plans. For one, the idea of giving $5000 to each child was shredded. He pointed out that this was an idea with many holes. He inquired, “Would Bill Gates’s’ children be given $5000 apiece? Would the children of illegal immigrants, as U.S. citizens, be given $5000 apiece?” He blountly declared her plan what it was…”stupid.”

This is not the language of a tightly scripted man afraid to offend anyone in an effort to please everyone. This is a man who speaks plainly. On a very simple issue he contrasted himself with Hillary Clinton. He told a story of being asked to wear a baseball cap that was half Yankees, and half Mets. He refused to do so, because he is a lifelong Yankees fan. Mets fans would refer to him as a “bum,” and “much worse,” but as the Mayor pointed out, “Many Mets fans respected my honesty and voted for me.”

If he ever asked my opinion, I would tell him that I prefer football, and find baseball incredibly boring, a three hour nap disguised as a sport. He would disagree with me, but would respect my not trying to ingratiate myself to him in a phony manner.

Hillary Clinton has said that she would not choose between the Yankees and the Mets. When asked if she would choose the Yankees over the Cubs, she demurred.

This is not about baseball. It is about an unwillingness to take clear stands on anything. If a person cannot take a clear stand on a sports team, how can they be trusted to be taken seriously on hard policy issues?

Rudy Giuliani can be lighthearted, but he is a serious policy person. As he reminded his audience, it is one thing to talk about theoretically doing things. It is another to have a record of having successfully done them. Gotham City is now a world class city again, and it is because of him.

His record on crime is legendary, but he did not spend time discussing it. The first half of his speech was a clinic on foreign policy expertise. Unlike wavering republicans, the one time the Mayor mentioned President Bush, it was to reinforce that going into Iraq was proper. He spoke with authority on Iran, and made it clear that force was an option.

Yet the War on Terror itself was where he, as always, shined. He reminded the audience that, “Terrorism did not begin on 9/11.” He also pointed out that, “We were attacked five times during the Clinton presidency. We were attacked in 1993 the first time the World Trade Center was bombed. We were attacked when the Khobar Towers were hit. We were attacked when U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed. We were attacked in 2000 with the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole. These were acts of war, and were never treated as such.”

At the 2004 republican convention, Giuliani connected the dots even further. The 1985 murder of Leon Klinghoffer was an act of Terrorism. The 1972 murder of Israelis at the Olympics was an act of terrorism. In 2007, Mayor Giuliani continues to refer to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the late Yassir Arafat as terrorists. He mentioned them at this event.

Rudy Giuliani is the frontrunner in this race. He did not mention his republican primary opponents by name, with the exception of a brief mention of how much he respected John McCain. He stated that the reason why he did was because Senator McCain, “does not change his positions to please other people.” While this could have been seen as a veiled swipe at fellow republican opponents, there was no mistaking that the democrats running for the White House were the recipients of his overt ridicule.

Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack O’Bama were criticized on their lack of experience. There were no personal attacks. He went after them on policy, or more specifically, their lack of understanding of domestic and foreign policy.

He also defended General David Petraeus, and made it clear that when the New York Times and combined to smear a respected military hero, he immediately spoke up. He did remark that Hillary Clinton was still deciding what her position was on the issue.

The Mayor took several questions ranging from social security reform to the falling dollar to possible military action against Iran. He did not give sound bites. Every question that was asked was given a several minute response. The questions were not scripted in advance. The people allowed to ask questions were not chosen in advance. It was an actual, real, thoughtful question and answer session.

I asked him a question myself.

“Mayor Giuliani, I deliberately flew to New York on 9/11…” The Mayor then interjected.

“Thank you for doing that.” I replied, “Thank you sir,” and continued.

“I had the pleasure of seeing you at the Freedom Concert on 9/11, and was inspired by the crowd. My question is this…besides raising money and voting for you, what can I and my friends do as private citizens to help you win the War on Terror? What can we do to help defeat guys like Armageddonijad and others?”

(The people who caught that I said “Armageddonijad laughed, but the truth is I just used to have trouble saying and spelling his actual name)

I listened intently, and the first thing Mayor Giuliani did was say, “For one thing, people need to fly on 9/11. I think it’s great that you did that.” Yes, it feels good to be complimented by somebody, even someone who has every incentive to do so. However, he did not stop with that. He then again reminded everybody of the various serious worldwide threats.

He took several minutes to remind everybody that before any of us can do anything, we need to know who we are fighting against. If we are going to fight back, we have to openly acknowledge who and what we are fighting. He reiterated that Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah all need to be dealt with, and that “they declared War on us.” He reminded the audience that he “wanted peace, and most people want peace.” He just made it clear that the steps to get to a true, lasting peace are not always peaceful.

After he thanked the crowd, he did something else that I was not expecting. He stayed. I have seen politicians dash out of a side door of a room, before anybody can ask them anything. Mayor Giuliani spoke with several of the people, took pictures with them (in addition to the picture he took with every attendee before his speech), and most importantly, looked people in the eye when he shook their hands and spoke to them.

I have met several of the other candidates, and his republican challengers are all fine men. After meeting Rudy Giuliani, and hearing what he had to say, and looking into his eyes, I can say that he is more than a fine man. At this time in history, with civilization itself hanging in the balance, Rudy Giuliani is the right man.


86 Responses to “My Meeting Rudy Giuliani”

  1. Jersey McJones says:

    So, Giuliani never answered your question?


  2. mike volpe says:

    The thing that most conservatives love about Rudy is he loves political fights. He spent his entire mayoral stint battling the Times, the ACLU and every other left wing outfit that found any number of his ideas to be beyond the pale. Republicans have gotten the well deserved rep as wimps and he is not a wimp.

    That said, what do you think of Dobson et al saying they will try and form a third party if he wins.

  3. Jersey McJones says:

    I don’t remember Giuliani spending “his entire mayoral stint battling the Times, the ACLU and every other left wing outfit that found any number of his ideas to be beyond the pale.”

    Where’d you get that from???


  4. mike volpe says:

    you don’t. How did the ACLU, the Times, and their cohorts feel about his new tough policies regarding criminals. They sure didn’t like it. Did he stop? Did he back down? If you don’t remember it it is because you weren’t paying attention? They battled every single police crackdown on civil rights grounds. It sounds like you are trolling here looking to pick a fight.

  5. micky2 says:

    Mike !
    I could not of said it better.

    Eric ! Thanks alot dude.
    I’ve been telling my wife how smart you are.
    I also told her 6 months ago that she was crazy if she thought Giuliani even stood a chance.
    You saying he’s the right man is not helping.

    Actually I didnt pay much attention to him till a couple months ago. Since then he has defined himself a lot better. But I’m still in the background watching

  6. Jersey McJones says:

    C’mon Mike, the ACLU does what it does, the NYT is the New York (as in City) Times. Eth yare two different things. They have no “cohorts.” Guiliani was a good mayor. Liberals were very hard on him. But not everything he did is either widely known nor right . If you lived there, or even around there, you know all this.

    If you happen to be old enough to remember just how bad things were getting in NYC prior to Guiliani, then you’d have to either be really into the ambulance chasing media or have hung out in some pretty seedy places. I remember neighborhoods throughout the borroughs, where the cops wouldn’t even go. NYC was a disaster, especially after the insanity of the eighties. And then, all of a sudden, in cities all over the country, crime started to decline. Guiliani rode a wave. He was among the best mayoral surfers out there. But was it all what the GOP conservative wanted? And was it all him? The NYT reported all this. The ACLU kept and eye on it. Giuliani fought with them once in while. That’s what they do.

    Community Policing was not a new idea, but it was wasn’t hip with the GOP. It worked. Giuliani bucked the GOP and did the right thing. Extra federal money for just that was a great investment. Giuliani bucked the GOP and went for it. Giuliani first ran as a “Liberal Repubican” and the second time (well, third) he did it without notable affiliation. Already, by then, there were rumlings about some of the crap going on with Giuliani, Whitman, Pataki, and the rest of the new GOP faces on the NY area scene. Giuliani pushed crime into the Outer Burroughs – and CT and NJ – as much as he squelched it. Giuliani backed Mario Cuomo against a victorious George Pataki. The NYT reported all this. The ACLU kept and eye on it. Giuliani fought with them once in while. That’s what they do.

    Abortion was probably the number one reason crime dropped in the 90’s. It’s too coincidental. At exactly the age kids usually start to commit crime, in every demographic,, in every class, race, etc, crime started to drop. On top of that, it was juvenile crime, teenage preganacy, drug abuse – all starter problems of the young – where you see the drop first. Giuliani didn’t accomplish that. Roe v Wade did that. Unfortunately, The NYT barely reported all this. The ACLU kept and eye on it. but hey, that’s what they do.

    You should fear the NYT and the ACLU. They’re not your enemy but if you think they are just remember – they’re not your master. If you vote for Giuliani, you may well be voting for both. Myself, I think Giuliani might make a good president. I think you’d hate him. For all his talk about terrorism (which, may I presume is a hugely huge issue for you?), I think maybe he’d back off the failed GWOT. Giuliani knows how to fight crime without wasting thousands of soldiers and trillions of dollars. Or does he?


  7. Mike Volpe says:


    I do not know who you are but you certainly know how to spend a lot of time saying nothing of substance.

    I did not say that either the ACLU or the NYT were bad. They challenged Rudy. That is it.

    Here is what you said,

    Guiliani was a good mayor. Liberals were very hard on him

    That was my point and that he did not back down despite their constant criticism. Thus, I do not know what your argument is if you are agreeing with me.

  8. Jersey McJones says:

    It’s the “constant” thing that bothers me, Mike. Really, the ACLU and the NYT were not all that much of a concern to Giuliani. True Liberals were hard on him, but much more about economics and real estate than crime and services. That’s why I said that you might regret a Giuliani presidency more than I.


  9. infidel308 says:

    JM Says ‘wasting thousands of soldiers’

    Thanks. I guess I am just a waste of time, money and oxygen by being a soldier. I apologize for being in your world JM, as you are so much more knowledgeable about our failed GWOT than anyone on the planet, including people doing the actual work. If you are so smart, why are you blogging and not ruling the world from your golden throne? Soldiers always put America first. Simply put, we can be vindictive. I hope you never need protection.

  10. Jersey McJones says:

    No, sordidly named “infidel308.” Wasting something is different than being in and of yourself a waste. I have no problem with soldiers. Can’t you get that? What? Are you a “Phony Soldier?”


  11. Carole says:

    Hey, G. Thanks for this. I had to skim – too tired for the details – but just wanted to say I think the sturm and drang about his social ‘liberalism’ is way over the top. My husband is unhappy with his previous gun control stance, but I tell him that is really a secondary, if not a tertiary, consideration in light of his strengths that matter right now…particularly in the matter of national security. I’m impressed.

  12. infidel308 says:

    And I suppose you are going to say “I support the soldiers but not the war”. Not a single one of us believes that. I would suggest you not use that phrase, because we realize that you don’t support us when you say that. Can’t you get THAT! We are just to polite to not punch you in the nose, that’s why there is a polite smile and we walk away.
    As soldiers, we don’t care if the war is in Iraq or Indiana. We do what we do. If we don’t like it, we get out. Are there some soldiers against the war? Sure. But name any corporation in the world with 1.4 million employees where 1.4 million are completely happy and believe in what they do. Why do the millions of us keep going back? Because we believe in what we are doing. So if you say you support us, then you support the war. So you may as well stop acting.
    So while you are busy at your job sipping a latte and hoping you don’t get a paper cut, there are millions of people out there that would die for you. So stop pretending that reading the Daily Kos will provide you with all answers to life. If you really want to learn, maybe you should join, go to Afghanistan or Iraq then you will be allowed to dissent, or approve. But maybe you don’t have a job and are taking a break from watching all that child porn in your mommies basement. Oh wait, it’s Jersey, where all the illegals freely rape, kill, and commit homocide while drunk.

  13. infidel308 says:

    The Koran says that Christians are infidels, so yes, I guess I am one.

  14. Carole says:

    Oh….and Mike….that third party thing with Dobson et al….is an example of the over reaction I mentioned. Not sure how G feels about it, but it disturbs me.

  15. Carole says:

    308! Rock on! Infidels unite! ;-> But then, according to the Islamist terrorists, anyone who doesn’t believe in Allah is an infidel.

  16. Jersey McJones says:

    Yes, Infidel, I get it that you can’t differentiate the job from the performer. Most jobs are decided by someone other than the performer of the job. Most people work for somone who tells them what they want done, gives them instructions to get it done, and informs them of the rules they must abide while getting it done. This is especially so of the military. So please don’t tell me that I, or they, or anyone else can’t second, or first, guess the deciders who put our soldiers to work. Who the heck is anyone to say, “You hate the woodworker because you don’t like the wood?” That’s silly.


  17. Carole says:

    Uh…I don’t think the anti war crowd is fooling anyone that they support the woodworker but not the wood. Nope. Nice analogy, but the egregious examples of treason by leaking by the liberal media, the plethora of blasphemy by the turncoat congressional defeatocrats and the general disregard of the true mission by those who object – purely for political reasons, ie, they don’t want Bush to succeed – screams louder than anything you could say. Your analogy is silly. The reality of the betrayal America and the troops experience by the political machine and the media is anything but.

  18. infidel308 says:

    This is NOT especially so of the U.S. Military. We follow the ‘Lawful Order of those appointed’ over us. If the order is torture, we don’t do it. Unless you are a redneck that lives in a trailer from some Guard unit. So you are allowed to second guess the deciders work, but we being the perfomers of the orders on the ground implement the work. So you are saying that “the failed GWOT” then, is my fault.
    I have never been to Jersey, would you like ME to tell YOU all about it? I see all about it on TV, and that must be the truth. I have never seen the TV say there is any colleges there or State Parks. Are there?
    If you can honestly tell me that you have been to Iraq or Afghanistan and that’s where you get these feelings, then I grant you all that you say. We will just differ opinions.

  19. Jersey McJones says:

    Carole, get over it. You can’t blame the failure of the GWOT, or the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanisatan, on “defeatocrats.” It wasn’t theirs’ to win or lose. You guys lost it. Too late to go back now and rewrite history with a liberal majority when there wasn’t one. Face it: The guys you trusted failed. The guys you never trusted predicted everything. We’d all rather not to have to say, “We told you so!” But we did. For once, please God, be a good conservative and say, “Okay, you were right. Next time I’ll think more conservatively – by not trusting sleazy Bush-types to wage international warfare.”


  20. infidel308 says:

    JMJ says “The guys you trusted failed”

    Meaning the 1.4 million U.S. Military

    Thanks again.

  21. Jersey McJones says:

    No. I meant Bush and the GOP failed.


  22. infidel308 says:

    But we were the wood workers, given orders by the shopmaster to carve something. So your post at 7:36 was wrong then.?

  23. Carole says:

    I don’t have to get over the truth. I’m not blaming people for anything but their actions. And the defeatist are the only ones that think there is a failure in the ‘GWOT’ The idea of a failed war is ALL yours and the anti-war group! And the biggest failure was your failure to listen to Bush when he spoke at in the beginning. All you heard was ‘weapons of mass destruction’. The rest of us heard the real problem; the enemy is terrorism, the war will be on many fronts, and it will take a while. Well, duh! So it is! I’m sorry, J, debating is one thing, but if you don’t know fact from fiction, there’s no chance of anything productive coming out of the discussion.

    I’m still reeling from your comment with your views of Bush being basically a moron, and then telling me you are a good judge of character. I guess that should have been my first clue of your basic take on reality.

  24. infidel308 says:

    Good night all

  25. Jersey McJones says:

    Infideland Carole, try to grasp this twig – soldiers don’t get to pick their wars. It’s not their fault. Not Abu Ghraib, not Guantanamo, not Iraq, not Afghanistan. None of that is our soldiers’ fault. It’s the fault of politicians that you all apparently voted for. Sleep with that. Lord knows our soldiers do.


  26. micky2 says:

    Stick around for a while and you’ll find out that JMJ is the Grand Poopa of all knowledge. He is allowed to state his own opinions as fact while telling others to ” get over” their own opinions.
    It was the Dems war ( both of em) as much as anyone elses. Remember that thing they did in congress called a vote ? Come election time the dem votes all of a sudden didnt count anymore. I did but I didnt and bla bla bla. But now I dont.
    J said;
    The guys you never trusted predicted everything.

    Thats why the majority of them voted for the war, because they were trying to tell everyone it would fail

    This arguement has been argued about 20 times across this blog by jersey and he gets shot down everytime. I guess he is just hoping one day he’ll find a live one that will buy into the hype.

  27. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, face it. the dems are not liberals, the GOP is not conservative, and you were taken in by partisan rhetoric.


  28. micky2 says:

    If you say so. I should face it because you say so ?
    I was taken in by facts and history and not emotion.

    The dems were trying to tell us it wouldnt work buy placing a majority vote to go in.
    Now they know what would of happened if we didnt go in.
    I want to know where they are getting all these crystal balls.

    Like I have said. I have had this debate with you before and you came up short for answers. You only have opinion based on hate.

    You see it all boils down to one very important fact.
    We have mountains of evidence to prove the threats against us are real. Not only in intention but history itself has displayed it to us in front of our own eyes. Even without WMDs we had almost 20 other valid reasons constituting acts of war to go after Saddam. This is documented proof I can show if necessary and not opinion or emotion.
    The other side has absolutly not one shred of evidence that there is no threat as they claim on the part of our enemies. ( wouldnt enimies with no threat be an oxymoron?) And they also have no evidence to prove all the conspiracy theories they say are in play.

    So they can yap all they want, but really ? How can anyone take them seriously when they cant really prove their point one way or another ?

  29. Jersey McJones says:

    No, Micky, don’t think anything because I “said so.” Think it because it is reality. We are not better off today than we were before you cons took the reins.


  30. micky2 says:

    Oh ! now your reality is gospel ? You say its reality so it must be. ( se what I mean infidel?)
    Thats as good as saying we are no worse off.
    Like I said, yours is all opinion, and Ive been down this road with you before so I thought I would show everyone else the short cut and spare them the monotony.

  31. Almost sounds like a cat fight in here today friend. Rudy’s positions, and actions in the past having to do with Second Amendment rights rule him out for my vote.

    Leopards never change their spots, period.

    While I do like his positions on terrorism, I have to remember that if, in 1983, while in Israel; “Rudy Law” would have had me dead, as well as my wife and others. I thank God for Galiel Rifles, rifles that we Americans are not allowed to own, without permission by some government puke. I have first hand knowledge of the religion of peace, and I choose to take up a weapon rather than submit to Dhimitude.

  32. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, you keep repeating yourself and yet say nothing. Why not proffer your opinion on the subject instead of me, for once.

    Patrick, America is not Israel. We do not need to live in a virtual police state.


  33. Kowboy says:

    The 2nd amendment. Nuff said.

    Not unless he’s the nominee will I vote for him. He’s nowhere near a conservative.

  34. micky2 says:

    Eric could be writing about carnival rides and you would turn it in to the same old arguement.
    Quite the contrary it is you who have already been told by one other person that you say nothing. Anyone who had seen you and I debate knows that I’m already hip to your garbage.
    Whay should anyone debate you ? We should just sit back and listen because you hold the answers to it all.
    Infidel, carol and mike have all expressed the same sentiment for you.
    Nobody wants to talk to you dude, unless you ease up on knowing the future and the sublime insults.
    Maybe Patrick still lives in Israel ? Maybe hes moving back or has family there?

  35. Jersey McJones says:

    I whole heartedly agree with the 2nd Amendment and I see nothing wrong with Giuliania’s application of it in NYC.

    Micky, bla bla bla. Sure fine, about Patrick. How does that affect what I said? We don’t need micro assault rifles on the streets of America. That’s just loony beyond the pail.


  36. Kowboy says:

    “I whole heartedly agree with the 2nd Amendment and I see nothing wrong with Giuliania’s application of it in NYC.”

    It’s not his application of it in NYC that turned me off. It’s his statement that he’d let the states individually make their decisions about it. There’s nothing for the states to decide. It’s the 2nd amendment. It’s part of the bill of rights. The constitution is federal, period.

    There are other issues he’s more liberal than conservative on besides that, but that’s the major one in my eyes.

    I couldn’t have said it better myself:

    “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.” – George Washington

  37. micky2 says:

    There you go again. You dont specify, you just make a ridiculous assumption that with Rudy in power the country will turn into a police state with automatic assault weapons on every corner of the country.
    That is loony.

    J said;
    “Sure fine, about Patrick.”
    And about Patrick, it makes my point that tyou speak out of your butt. And this effects everything you say. You jumped to another false conclusion by not asking or even “giving another scenario credit except for your own warped views.

    And of course the subject of homeland security on the part of Rudy will with you turn into the same old arguement with you that we have nothing to worry about in the GWOT

    J said;
    “Why not proffer your opinion on the subject instead of me, for once.”

    Once again you fail to be honest. If you refer yourself to comments 5, 26, 28, you will see that you are not the total focus of my presence here. ( as much as you would like to think its all about you, its not.)
    So by you saying “for once” is just proof again that you habitualy misrepresent just about everything with ridiculous exagerations.

    You’re the gift that just keeps on giving man. You never fail to make a clear example of what the radical left is like.
    Keep posting my man, I will just sit back and watch as the whole world gets a good look at what is comprable to our enemies in the cloak of the American flag.
    You have already degraded one soldier on this thread by telling him that you know more about his job than he does.

  38. Jersey McJones says:

    Kowboy, the constitution does not instruct who does the regulating, just that the militia (the armed citizenry) be regulated, There’s no reason why the states can not engage in that regulation.

    Micky, do you have anything in particular to discuss (besides me)? Your infatuation is starting to wierd me out.


  39. micky2 says:

    It would be nice to discuss someting on this blog once without you sticking your apendage in it every chance you get. Are you absolutly blind to the fact that its hard for antone to come here and not talk about you.
    You say all the crap you say and expect to get away with it ? Not if I can help it.
    Debate with you is useless, like talking to a broken record, but I will shred B.S at every opportunity I have.
    And since you’re so full of it WALLAH! you become the subject at my hands.

  40. Lord Nazh© says:

    Rudy is very good on foreign policy… other than that he is almost a Democrat in his social aspects. While he is for lower taxes, he’s against the 2nd Amendment (yes I read JMJ’s argument, it holds no water that the states should regulate the federal constitution) and his stance on abortion is very troubling.

    While i think he would be aces above the hildabeast or obama or brek girl, I hope he’s not the choice of the Republican’s to send to the general.

    While I would probably have to vote for him, it wouldn’t be fun.

  41. micky2 says:

    I wouldnt be to concerned at this point. It’s still very early in the race. Anythin could happen and it probably will. It just takes one sentence to put any one of these guys futher in or out. Nobody is really showing all thier cards yet.
    I myself am going to sit back and see how things play out for a while.
    I’m more concerned with at least having a concervative at this point more than anything else. My main focus would be to do my best to make sure the left doesnt get in the white house.
    Although some our conservative contenders lack a lot of what I would like to see. I would much much rather have the worst of them than the best of the left.

  42. infidel308 says:

    I was not trying to make any personal attack yesterday if you felt that way.
    I was, however, trying to point out that (as maybe a better example) the only thing I know about Paris, is that the students like to strike, old people die because of the heat (lack of air-conditioners) and the muslim population likes to riot and burn thousands of cars. Remember last summer? That’s all I saw on the news. So is it fair of me to brand something with complete knowledge if I only know about it on the TV? No. No one should have that right. Have an opinion, sure.
    The other point had to do with the soldiers work.
    If you had a loved one in the hospital for a heart condition and the Doctor ordered the Nurse to give them some medicine for that, lets say the Nurse accidentaly gave said loved one the wrong pill and they died. Applying your logic, you support the Nurse, and it is the Doctor’s and Hospital CEO’s fault.
    If you want to hate Bush & GOP for Immigration, Debt, Taxes, Schools, War Management, go right ahead. I might even agree on some of it. I cant stand it when he refers to Islam as the ‘religion of peace’. But to say the war is lost and declaring AlQueda the victor is wrong. These wars are not much different in the fact that it is groups of 30 to 100 soldiers ‘in the fight’ that will make the difference. It is not GWB and the GOP playing with a giant board game of ‘Risk’. I was hoping to somehow use the word strategery, but I couldn’t fit it in. So yes, I can laugh at Bush.

  43. Kowboy says:

    “Kowboy, the constitution does not instruct who does the regulating, just that the militia (the armed citizenry) be regulated, There’s no reason why the states can not engage in that regulation.”

    It’s called the “Bill of Rights” for a reason. I have a right to own a firearm, guaranteed by the Constitution of the United Sates and the state CANNOT take that away from me. Period.

    And no, I don’t mean howitzers and nukes. People have brought those bogus arguments to me before. And automatic weapons require costly permits. I mean firearms for hunting, recreational shooting, and yes, even self defense. Check history and you will find that the first thing every totalitarian regime in modern times has ever done is relieve the citizenry of its firearms.

  44. Kowboy, all rights – from speech (Fire!) to religion (Hey, let’s sacrifice a virgin!), to guns (I want to fire my @#$&*%$ shotgun from my back yard when I want to, @#$%^&* !) – have limits. And one Constitutional Right that happens to specifically mention “regulation” is “To Bear Arms.” So, can we at least talk about boundaries, states rights to set them, federal obligations, and your’s and MY desire to be able to carry an arm should we choose. Like I said, I have NO problem with the Second Amendment. ;)

    Infidel, I saw no attack from you. You’re a good debator. This said, I worked in int’l trade for a decade – life isn’t really all that different from place to place – especially if those places share common class. From what I understand, and I wouldn’t call it anecdotal, healthcare in most Developed Nations is just as good as ours, just as bad as ours, and a HELLUVA less expensive! ;)

    Micky, if I may, you guys should go with Huckabee or McCain. I’d settle for Giuliani, but either of the former would be better for you and I and all concerned. Just being pragmatic.


  45. Kowboy says:


    I think we’re basically on the same page here. I agree there are limits, but if the government has set limits on gun ownership, do the states have the right to increase those limits? I say no. Or if they do, there should be special circumstances involved.

    And just out of curiosity, are you from NJ? I was born there.

  46. micky2 says:

    What you think is best for me ? Give me a break, please.
    This is what I mean about you.
    You really must be fresh out of your mind if you think I would take any advice from you.
    Are you dreaming or high ?

    I’ve already stated that I think it would be foolish to put my devotion next to any candidate at this time. And when I do make that decision it will have nothing to do with anything you’ve ever said.

  47. Kowboy, the feds are supposed to do what the states are not, but should, per the Constitution. This is the rhetorical reasoning behind the marijuana fight in California, and the Right to Die north of there. You guys are a real bunch of party crashers. Yeah, for you.

    I was born in NYC, but grew up in Jersey. Northeast.

    Micky, you have a fair point. Given your political standpoint, if I were you then I would go with McCain. I’m not trying to bait you, and I’m not trying to push – If you like Ike and love Reagan then you’ll love McCain. Believe me, I don’t want McCain. But I’d settle for him over some others… :)

    Remember, I’m more pragmatic than dogmatic!


  48. micky2 says:

    I’m systematically automatic.

    Actually I’d like to see Ted Nugent in there. But only for a one year term. He could probably clean the slate in that time. Rules of engagement would be out the window along with quite a few moonbats.
    And then everyone would get up and look around and go hmmmm, that hurt ! I think we better start behaving.
    We need a leader that has balls and stops all the pussy footing around. None of these guys excite me. I want someone in there that fights a war like theres no friking tommorrow.
    I’m all for diplomacy, but it actually seems to be our worst enemy lately. We keep pulling everyones finger and they all keep farting, enough already.

  49. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, you shouldn’t blame the complete and utter failure in Iraq on the “rules of engagement.” That’s a cop-out. Firstly, you can’t fight a guerilla war with all-out engagement, in the fighting sense, unless, of course, you just want to murder every single Iraqi, which I presume you do not. Secondly, if we were to go all out, in the purely occupational sense, then we’d need tax increases and a draft – that’s why we did this half-assed: because Bush knew he couldn’t raise taxes or a sizeable army.


  50. micky2 says:

    This one of the major points about you that I dislike, and I have mentioned it repeatedly. You assume too much.
    The ROE would also apply to the political theatre , home and internationaly.
    The rules of engagement are just a portion of the reason our troops are so frustrated. The majority of them have made this clear by pointing to other soldiers that are dead because of what amounts to politically correct engagements. I have never fought a war in the field , have you ?
    But I will take the word if the guys who are actually doing the fighting. And it would be wise if both sides of the isle did the same.

    And actually its not quite as simple as it being “Bushs fault “. And there was really nothing standing in his way of raising taxes if he wanted to , first reason being that the Dems would of all voted yes on that one. Bush is commandre n chief but you need to give some credit to Rumsfeld for his “streamlined” army. We didnt screw things up on the cheap. We screwed things up on the projected dynamics. And this has been the case for every war in history, they never go according to plan.
    And then again, whos to say this wasnt the plan ? We have an embassy going up thats bigger than college campus. And bases also deamed permanent.

    Now, back to you and your assumptions.
    How do you know (o great one) that I feel Iraq is a complete and utter failure to blame on anything or anyone? ( there he goes again)

    I would be copping out if what you said was true.
    Do you understand that this is the very nature of your insulting manner ?
    Nobody is copping out because I do not first of all think its a failure and I do not blame our ROE for everything.
    I do not cop out. Never have.
    The bottom line is it needed to be done along with all the mistakes.
    And(god I feel like a broken record) its so easy for all the ones with BDS to sit back and critisize as opposed to having any constructive critisizm. This is the real” COP OUT”
    No matter what you or anyone else says or thinks we will move forward mistakes and all.

    And most of all you really need to invest in a sense of humor ( Ted Nugent) and some imagination so you stop percieving everything through a straw sized telescope.

    Its been a pressure, now leave me alone.

  51. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, I saw this ROE excuse coming for a while now. We’ve seen this before. Their’ll be more comin’…

    1) Blame the ROE, and by inference liberals, because the ROE are “politically correct.” The fallacy? Military rules of engagement are designed by the military to win wars – not appease “liberals.”

    2) Blame the media, protesters and the anti-war crowd, and again, by inference, “liberals.” But if the war was truly just, or at least going well, there would be little to no protest, no bad news to report, nothing to “anti.” And the fallacy? Liberals have very little power in America.

    3) Blame new congresses for denying further funding and support. But again, this would not be an issue if the war was just and winnable. And the fallacy? Defunding and support are not issues here, nor were they in Vietnam. Congress did not cut the funding for that war until after we were out.

    You of all people should know, Micky, that ROE are pretty much useless in a guerilla war. They’re fine for army to army fighting, but useless against a native uniformless enemy that is intertwined with the native population. What would you have them do? Shoot everyone? Round up everyone? Torture everyone? Would you have our soldiers commit a genocide in Iraq? Of course not. This war is unwinnable, but not because of ROE or our soldiers, but because we are occupying an unhappy people we don’t understand on their land. Had we initially gone in with a half-million boots, had we maintained the Iraqi army and physical and institutional infrastructures and reformed them, had we ignored the Chalabi-types and instead acquired honest, genuine intelligence and projections, then maybe we could have “won.” But it’s too late now.

    ROE are a lame excuse.

    Look at Vietnam – 3,000,000 dead Vietnamese, 58,000 dead American soldiers, countless people wounded, maimed, orphaned, insane. Billions of dollars wasted. We’re still paying for that war today – for the VA, crime, drug addiction, generational problems. We dropped more tonnage of explosives on Vietnam than was dropped in all of WWII. And still we lost. And to this day, the congnitive dissonant claim that it was the media, and liberals in congress, and hippy protesters that lost that war. What would winning have been? The murder of another 3,000,000 Vietnamese? All of them? And for what? To prop up a corrupt regime in an imaginary “South” Vietnam that was created by the French colonialists? Cheap labor? And here we are today, buying cheap labor products from a friendly Vietnam. It was all for nothing.

    Why can’t anyone just ever admit they were wrong?

    I saw Ted Nugent live back in the 80’s. He was some performer. In the 90’s, when I was in the auto biz, I used to travel to Detriot a lot. He had a big billboard with him and his radio crew on it. I listened to his show – for about ten minutes . It was lowbrow garbage. Wasn’t even funny. He should have stuck with music. And shooting little fuzzy animals with bows and arrows is just pathetic. Great guitarist – lousy thinker.


  52. micky2 says:

    “1) Blame the ROE, and by inference liberals, because the ROE are “politically correct.” The fallacy? Military rules of engagement are designed by the military to win wars – not appease “liberals.””

    I never said PC was only a liberal infliction, its a disease on both sides.
    (once again you assumed, and wrongly at that)

    “2) Blame the media, protesters and the anti-war crowd, and again, by inference, “liberals.” But if the war was truly just, or at least going well, there would be little to no protest, no bad news to report, nothing to “anti.” And the fallacy? Liberals have very little power in America.”

    liberals have been known to protest every war there is just out the nature of the beast.
    Liberal know theyre losing it, thats why they pull the crap they do, acts of desparation.
    They actually have a lot of power, they’re to stupid to know how to use it.

    “”3) Blame new congresses for denying further funding and support. But again, this would not be an issue if the war was just and winnable. And the fallacy? Defunding and support are not issues here, nor were they in Vietnam. Congress did not cut the funding for that war until after we were out.””

    If you see it as unjust and unwinnable, you’re screwed. And will adopt your appraoch.
    Support is a huge issue, where the hell have you been ?

    I’m not even going to argue the Vietnam thing, they were not attacking us or posing a threat, drop it please and dont insult my intelligence by making a comparison.

    You said;
    Why can’t anyone just ever admit they were wrong?”

    You got a lot of work to do.

    I want Ted Nugent running this country as much as I do you, lighten up.
    Although he does eat what he kills, and many of those animals would not be fuzzy.?
    Oooh, its fuzzy ( heartstring pulling) THEY”RE ALL FUZZY! unless its a fish.
    I never said I liked his music, although I do, but hes not a favorite.

    Hers my favorite, dedicated to you from me.

  53. Jersey McJones says:


    “I never said PC was only a liberal infliction, its a disease on both sides.”

    Well, at least you’re magnanimous!

    You didn’t really address my points though. What I’m saying is that the war is a mess, it’s the fault of a “conservative GOP that was running all branches of government and the military for most of the war, and now they have to make excuses for the failure. The hawks did the same thing with Vietnam.

    It get it that you were joking about Ted. Really. I just mentioned that I’m familiar with him.


  54. Jersey McJones says:

    And I know you want me to hate you, but I don’t. Heck, I barely even know you!


  55. micky2 says:

    I never denied or said it was not our administrations fault.
    But the left is making it a disater comprable to WW2 and Vietnam, this is ridiclous, childish and sensationalism only for attack purposes.
    lot of people dont hate me, but they might as well
    J said;
    ” I barely even know you! ”

    You know how many women I’ve had. I cant even find the answer to that one.

  56. Jersey McJones says:

    Hey, I was just guessin’! I was a pretty good looking guy – and a musician. Usually it’s a good guess. But hey, there are plenty of exceptions.

    It’s good that you seem to agree that the powers that be did a lousy job in the wars. I’m not sure what you mean about “left is making it a disater comprable to WW2 and Vietnam…” Perhaps you mean the Left is making things worse? Or perhaps you think they are framing the issues sensationally? Both? It’s an interesting argument. I could see a few mays of looking at it that are not necessarily exclusive of each other.


  57. micky2 says:

    …” Perhaps you mean the Left is making things worse? Or perhaps you think they are framing the issues sensationally?

    Both. And I dont want to go over that all over again. I wont. ( We’ve been there, remember ?)

  58. Jersey McJones says:

    Bush’s GWOT and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have produced nothing but failure. The Left is calling a spade a spade. They can’t make things any worse and they can’t say enough about the complete and utter failure of the GOP leadership in recent years.


  59. Lord Nazh© says:

    “Bush’s GWOT and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have produced nothing but failure.”


  60. micky2 says:

    The left couldnt tell the truth if their lives depended on it any more than you can speak for the right without blind hatred.
    You know damn well that there are a ton of success stories. It is a lie in itself that you close your eyes to this.

    “Nothing but” ?
    Complete and utter failure ?
    Look, if you want to keep saying the same thing over and over again you must “PROVE IT ” to be taken seriously. Untill then it is nothing more than an opinion. Which are in abundance like anal passages.
    Once you do prove it, you wont have to keep bringing it up over and over and over.
    Fair enough ?
    This is why I for one dislike you , You have once again insulted the deaths of and hard work all our soldiers have put out.
    That is a statement that covers every aspect of everything that has taken place since day one of this war. It is all encompasing abd ignorant to say such a thing. And degenerates the possibilty of you even having a soul.
    I DARE you to stand in front of only two or three Marines and say that crap and not get your ass kicked.
    In a sense you are saying for them to die was failure

  61. micky2 says:

    I tried , but once again you went down the stupid road.

  62. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, prove what? Is Iraq a succuess? Is Afghanistan? Could either gov’t stand on it’s own any time in the near future? Is terrorism down? Is anti-Americanism down? How much have we spent? How much more must we spend? How many more soldiers and families will be destroyed? If you could show me some measure of success, I’d love to see it. You could say, “Well, we weren’t attacked again,” but with 3,800 dead, tens of thousands wounded, at least 600 billion already spent, why would they attack us here? Seems like they got everything they wanted. You don’t prove negatives, you prove positives – and you’ve got nothing positive that has come from the wars so far.

    As for you penchant for over-the-top remarks (I dare you to stand up to two or thee Marines – I mean, what the hell kind of moron would stand up to two or three marines!), you really should knock it off. It’s infantile. Look, I worked for a marine Nam vet up north during the war up until a year ago – he hated Bush and thought the war was stupid. You don’t have to drink the neo-con Kool Aid to be a marine.


  63. micky2 says:

    I beg your pardon, but dont turn this around. You made the claim of complete and utter failure, it is upon you to back up your claim, not me.

    You said;
    “You don’t prove negatives, you prove positives ”
    Murder is a negative, and the accuser must prove it. Failure as a corporate CEO is a negative and the board must show the failures to back up its claim.
    So give a large freaking break , would you ?
    THAT! is a cop out, you claim failure but expect everyone to prove you wrong, thats a load of BS.
    I will prove the positives because I make that claim, but in this case I have not made that claim.
    You make the claim of COMPLETE AND UTTER FAILURE. In America the accuser must present and back up his claim in a court of law, not the other way around. And this system is in place for extremely logical reasons.
    If the accused in our country and this world had to run around and prove their innocence nothing would ever get done.
    You cant just run around saying crap all the time with no evidence and expect to be taken seriously.
    So untill then you’re pretty much a joke.

    You said;
    I mean, what the hell kind of moron would stand up to two or three marines!), you really should knock it off. It’s infantile.

    You’re real brave on the keyboard arent you ? You need to start acting as if people actually have form, emotionally and physically If you really believe something to be true then a real man would and should be able to say it in front of anyone.

    You said;
    he hated Bush and thought the war was stupid. You don’t have to drink the neo-con Kool Aid to be a marine.

    Talk about infantile ! LOL
    You bring one nam marine vet up and you think it proves some kind of point ? LOL
    Hell ! I’ll bet I could find a hundred that arent happy about things either.

    72% of our service people voted for Bush , so beat it.

  64. arclightzero says:

    “Bush’s GWOT and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have produced nothing but failure. The Left is calling a spade a spade. They can’t make things any worse and they can’t say enough about the complete and utter failure of the GOP leadership in recent years.”

    You certailny are a positive individual. In fact, it sounds like you just took a page out of the Daily Kos “How to Hate Bush and America” handbook. Who are you to say these things? You want to call a spade a spade? What would you like us to call you then? What about the left? Shall we call them what they really are? Babies? Brats? Disruptors? Liars? Thieves? Traitors?

    You, JMJ, are a stunning example of what is wrong with the left and why the left is in a disastrous nosedive. You get all of your speaking points from leftist extremism pop culture and choose to rant and rave but you really have nothing coherent or relevant to say. If perhaps you brought some new or tangible arguments to the table you might have the chance of being taken seriously, but that is just not the case, is it?

    Furthermore, you can rail on Bush and the administration all you want. It’s the lefty thing to do and I wouldn’t want you to feel left out of the party. However, your blatant disrespect for military personnel and veterans is staggering and reprehensible. As a veteran myself, I find my blood boiling as I read through some of your venomous diatribe, and I can’t help but to wonder what would possess you to take the attitude that you do. What are you so pissed off about? Did a conservative call you names when you were younger? Your hatred and anger is so blind that the only excuse I can think of for you is mental illness, but that would be something of an insult to the mentally ill!

    I have no problem with liberals, but its the ones like you that make the bile rise in my gullet. You have nothing but the same tired and overused arguments and talking points and you really have nothing intelligible to bring to the conversation. You offer no solutions as you point out the problems and you seem content to simply tear down anybody who challenges you (and I especially like your use of “big words” in your attacks that make you sound like a fancy-pants liberal who tries too hard). You accuse Micky of being infantile, but I would ask that you look to yourself before tossing out accusations. Seriously, JMJ, get a clue.

  65. Jersey McJones says:


    “I beg your pardon, but dont turn this around. You made the claim of complete and utter failure, it is upon you to back up your claim, not me.”

    Back it up? Where have you been these past 4 1/2 years?

    “Murder is a negative, and the accuser must prove it.”

    You missed my point, and my joke, about proving negatives.

    “You’re real brave on the keyboard arent you ? You need to start acting as if people actually have form, emotionally and physically If you really believe something to be true then a real man would and should be able to say it in front of anyone.”

    I do. And it’s gotten me into plenty of trouble over the years. But as you say, anyone can say anything in the blogosphere, so live with it and stop pointing it out. We all get it.

    “72% of our service people voted for Bush , so beat it.”

    I don’t give a rat’s ass who they vote for. I’d bet 72% off all poor, young, undereducated, rural white guys vote GOP. I don’t hold it against them, but nor do I put a lot of stock in the import of it.


    “You certailny are a positive individual.”

    Positivism is the opiate of the pie-eyed idiot.

    “You, JMJ, are a stunning example of what is wrong with the left and why the left is in a disastrous nosedive.”

    Right, that’s why the Dems are stomping the GOP at the polls.

    “Furthermore, you can rail on Bush and the administration all you want. It’s the lefty thing to do…”

    No, it’s a TWO THIRDS of the country “thing to do.”

    “However, your blatant disrespect for military personnel and veterans is staggering and reprehensible.”

    Please, don’t try that sleazy bait on me. Really, it just demeans you. I have never said anything negative about the troop. Their just regular guys and gals, mostly from working class who are doing what they are told. So please, stop the sleazy labelling.

    By the way, you didn’t make one single counter-point. Not one. All you did was attack me. Clues? I have plenty. Arguments? All you have is apparently just “bile.”


  66. micky2 says:

    What yo got J ?

    Absolutly nothing, STILL !

    “Back it up? Where have you been these past 4 1/2 years?”

    Once again, YOU MADE THE CLAIM ! UNDERSTAND!!!! ?

    “You missed my point, and my joke, about proving negatives.”

    Its not a joke. and it wasnt when you said it. You cant take that third grade excuse with me .
    Oh, I was just joking.
    And by claiming it was a joke, are you then ready to prove it ? You got your butt nailed on that one.

    “anyone can say anything in the blogosphere, ”
    True, but it is meaningless garbage unless you can prove it.

    “Positivism is the opiate of the pie-eyed idiot.”
    Are you not positive that you are right ? You are obviously positive that I am wrong, right ? So does that not make you a pie eyed idiot ?

    ” I don’t give a rat’s ass who they vote for.”

    Yeah I know, facts are a bitch arent they

    “Right, that’s why the Dems are stomping the GOP at the polls.”

    You’re still an example of whats wrong with the left.

    “Their just regular guys and gals, mostly from working class who are doing what they are told.”
    I don’t give a rat’s ass who they vote for. I’d bet 72% off all poor, young, undereducated, rural white guys vote GOP.

    Which one is it JMJ?, Are they poor undereducated and young, or regular guys and gals from working class who are doing what they are told ?
    Were they told to vote for Bush ?

    ” I have never said anything negative about the troops”

    You just called them undereducated ! (attention defacit?)

    Is that a generalization, or just the ones who voted for Bush ?

    ” All you have is apparently just “bile.”

    Once again, you have made some very strong claims with ABSOLUTLY nothing at all to back ANY of it up, just a bunch of mouthy BS, period. And a bunch of chicken sh^#
    You have been called out and you have failed miserably once again.

  67. micky2 says:

    Just for your education, heres how its done.

    You or any other person can make and spew all the crap you want.
    You claim utter and complete failure, PROVE IT !

    I claim success on many fronts, and it is provable. It is docomented and reckognized by a majority who have seen proof first hand, whether it be media or the population, it is all sustainable fact,

    1.2 million refugees have returned to Iraq since December.

    A second indicator is the pilgrim traffic to the Shi’ite shrines in Karbala and Najaf. Those pilgrimages all but dried up after Saddam bloodily crushed a Shi’ite uprising in 1991, and they didn’t resume until the arrival of the Americans in 2003. “In 2005,” writes Taheri, “the holy sites received an estimated 12 million pilgrims, making them the most-visited spots in the entire Muslim world, ahead of both Mecca and Medina.”

    A third sign: the value of the Iraqi dinar. All but worthless during Saddam’s final years, the dinar is today a safe and solid medium of exchange . Related indicators are small-business activity, which is booming, and Iraqi agriculture, which has experienced a revival so remarkable that Iraq now exports food to its neighbors for the first time since the 1950s.

    Finally, says Taheri, there is the willingness of Iraqis to speak their minds. Iraqis are very verbal, and “when they fall silent, life is incontrovertibly becoming hard for them.” They aren’t silent now. In addition to talk radio, Internet blogs, and lively debate everywhere, “a vast network of independent media has emerged in Iraq, including over 100 privately owned newspapers and magazines and more than two dozen radio and television stations.” Nowhere in the Arab world is freedom of expression more robust.

  68. micky2 says:

    I can do this all day long Jersey, partial failure, mistakes, yeah.
    But complete and utter failure ?
    Grow up already and stop with the ridiclous statements and you will be taken seriously and not treated like the fool you project

    The first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on active duty.
    Over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens.
    Nearly all of Iraq’s 400 courts are functioning.
    The Iraqi judiciary is fully independent.
    On Monday, October 6, power generation hit 4,518 megawatts, exceeding the prewar average.
    All 22 universities and 43 technical institutes and colleges are open, as are nearly all primary and secondary schools.
    By October 1, Coalition forces had rehab-ed over 1,500 schools – 500 more than scheduled.
    Teachers earn from 12 to 25 times their former salaries.
    All 240 hospitals and more than 1200 clinics are open.
    Doctor’s salaries are at least eight times what they were under Saddam.
    Pharmaceutical distribution has gone from essentially nothing to 700 tons in May to a current total of 12,000 tons.
    The Coalition has helped administer over 22 million vaccination doses to Iraq’s children.
    A Coalition program has cleared over 14,000 kilometers of Iraq’s 27,000 kilometers of weed-choked canals which now irrigate tens of thousands of farms. This project has created jobs for more than 100,000 Iraqi men and women.
    We have restored over three-quarters of prewar telephone services and over two-thirds of the potable water production.
    There are 4,900 full-service telephone connections. We expect 50,000 by year-end.
    The wheels of commerce are turning. From bicycles to satellite dishes to cars and trucks, businesses are coming to life in all major cities and towns.
    95 percent of all prewar bank customers have service and first-time customers are opening accounts daily.
    Iraqi banks are making loans to finance businesses.
    The central bank is fully independent.
    Iraq has one of the world’s most growth-oriented investment and banking laws.
    Iraq has a single, unified currency for the first time in 15 years.
    Satellite TV dishes are legal.
    Foreign journalists aren’t on 10-day visas paying mandatory and extortionate fees to the Ministry of Information for minders and other government spies.
    There is no Ministry of Information.
    There are more than 170 newspapers.
    You can buy satellite dishes on what seems like every street corner.
    Foreign journalists (and everyone else) are free to come and go.
    A nation that had not one single element — legislative, judicial or executive — of a representative government now does.
    In Baghdad alone residents have selected 88 advisory councils. Baghdad’s first democratic transfer of power in 35 years happened when the city council elected its new chairman.
    Today in Iraq chambers of commerce, business, school and professional organizations are electing their leaders all over the country.
    25 ministers, selected by the most representative governing body in Iraq’s history, run the day-to-day business of government.
    The Iraqi government regularly participates in international events. Since July the Iraqi government has been represented in over two dozen international meetings, including those of the UN General Assembly, the Arab League, the World Bank and IMF and, today, the Islamic Conference Summit. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs today announced that it is reopening over 30 Iraqi embassies around the world.
    Shiva religious festivals that were all but banned, aren’t anymore.
    For the first time in 35 years, in Karbala thousands of Shiites celebrate the pilgrimage of the 12th Imam.
    The Coalition has completed over 13,000 reconstruction projects, large and small, as part of a strategic plan for the reconstruction of Iraq.
    Uday and Queasy are dead – and no longer feeding innocent Iraqis to the zoo lions, raping the young daughters of local leaders to force cooperation, torturing Iraq’s soccer players for losing games, or murdering critics.
    Children aren’t imprisoned or murdered when their parents disagree with the government.
    Political opponents aren’t imprisoned, tortured, executed, maimed, or forced to watch their families die for disagreeing with Saddam.
    Millions of long-suffering Iraqis no longer live in perpetual terror.
    Saudis will hold municipal elections.
    Qatar is reforming education to give more choices to parents.
    Jordan is accelerating market economic reforms.
    The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time to an Iranian
    – A Muslim woman who speaks out with courage for human rights, for democracy and for peace.
    Saddam is gone.
    Iraq is free.

    Terrorists are being drawn to an arena in which our military can kill or capture them
    Sovereignty is restored to Iraq”

  69. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, you have way too much time on your hands! (Kidding! Kidding!)

    I can’t go point by point, because it’s just too much, and your first reply in this series was too pedantic. Let me just point out these facts to go with your’s (though I have to say I find quite a few of those dubious at best). These are from this year alone:

    1) Refugees and dsiplaced Iraqis:

    “Of the official count of 4.2 million displaced people, more than 2 million have been displaced inside Iraq, while another 1.4 million are believed to be in Syria and as many as 500,000 to 750,000 people in Jordan.”

    2) Iraqi Unemployment:

    “Unemployment is “rampant” among Iraq’s 7.7 million working-age males, said Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Paul Brinkley, director of the Pentagon’s task force on improving Iraqi industry. He said at least half of all Iraqi workers are unemployed.”

    3) Iraqi Schools:

    “Official figures from the Iraqi ministry of high education show that even before the escalation of sectarian violence in mid-2006, one in six Iraqi children did not attend primary school. Attendance is expected to fall by a further 15% this term.

    180 Iraqi teachers were killed and 3,250 fled between March 2003 and February 2006 (date of latest figures)
    School attendance expected to drop 15% this term
    Fewer than half of school-leavers passed final exams in 2006

    According to the Iraqi government, as of February 2006, nearly 180 teachers had been killed in Iraq since the US-led invasion, while another 3,250 had fled the country.

    A senior education ministry official said that the number of teachers who left last year was “almost double” those who left in 2005.”

    4) Iraqi State Corruption:

    “But Radhi in his testimony reiterated what he said in an interview with me several weeks ago: corruption is “rampant” within Iraq (perverting virtually every ministry and costing tens of billions of dollars); it’s undermining the entire government and has “stopped the process of reconstruction”; Maliki has consistently blocked corruption investigations (especially probes involving his associates and family); in some instances corruption is “financing terrorism” by funding sectarian militias; and the situation is getting worse. Radhi noted that of the 3000 corruption cases his commission investigated and forwarded to Iraqi courts for prosecution, only 241 have been adjudicated. Also appearing as a witness at the hearing, Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, echoed Radhi, testifying that corruption within the Iraqi government is the “second insurgency.” Bowen reported that corruption is on the rise in Iraq–partly due to Maliki’s protection of crooked officials. He quoted one Iraqi official who said that “corruption is threatening the state.””

    I could on and on. Not opinions, not generalizations, not patting ourselves on the back for killing a dictator but leaving a vacuum of doom in his place – just very serious problems that need to be addressed and so far have not and are only getting worse. Look up the healthcare stats. Look up women’s rights. Look up the project completion percentage and on-time records. All failures. Throw in thousands dead, maimed, lives ruined, just among Americans alone, and throw in the huge bill that you conservatives can’t even be bothered to pay, and this Iraq debacle is a complete and utter failure. And throw in the Afghanistan heroine trade, and the number of kids whose lives will be ruined by that, and I can say with perfect surity that Bush has failed in the GWOT and the wars.


  70. micky2 says:

    The major point is that you cannot truthfully and accuratly say that it is and or was a complete and utter failure.
    Period end of conversation. Any further conversation is pointless excess.
    I abundantly and clearly made my claim to be true, you still have not made your claim true.
    I never said that Iraq was a complete and utter SUCCESS
    You said it was” A complete and utter failure”
    Restudy the word complete, please.

    Yours is only an opinion that it was a complete and utter failure.

    My point is that it is not and I proved it.

    You lose.

  71. Jersey McJones says:

    Oooookaaaayyy… Whatever floats yer boat, man.

    When I weigh the positives with the negatives, I get a negative sum. I call that failure. Total, complete, utter failure.


  72. micky2 says:

    You had to of failed math if you call that total
    “When I weigh the positives with the negatives, I get a negative sum. I call that failure. ”

    If you had put a little more thought into what comes out of your mouth and just said this in the begginjng, it would of changed everything.
    This is why I chose not to debate you on specific issues because you are to encompasing with unproven statements that are full of finality
    Although I believe the accomplishments outweigh the failures, you are entitled to your belief also.
    But you are not allowed to state it as a unrefutable fact without proof and be taken seriously at the same time, and this leaves you open to attack.
    So stop bitching when people question you.


  73. Jersey McJones says:


    You said, “If you had put a little more thought into what comes out of your mouth and just said this in the begginjng, it would of changed everything.” Wow. You’re right – and no sarcasm intended. I should be very clear and straight forward. I Learned something tonight – be clear, be direct, don’t go out of my way to convince someone of something through preface – and do it right straight from the beginning. Just like writing music. (I’d bet my spleen you’d have enjpyed my music!)

    I like that conservatives try their best to get right to a central point. I do that too. I have to think well enough of my fellow conservatives to assume they would want the same. You want the straight, plain, right-in-your-face opine, with back-up. Can do. Actually, as liberal as I seem to be is as liberal as American “Conservatives” really are. ;)


  74. micky2 says:

    Its just basic dude, not one or the other

  75. Jersey McJones says:

    What does that mean?


  76. micky2 says:

    No matter what side of the isle, the same rules should apply for a productive debate.
    It doesnt really matter whos right, although that s what usually happens.
    Goody two shoes here actually thinks its about finding answers.
    Once both parties can get all the B.S. out the way we could actually find some middle ground or answers. This is growing increasingly difficult due to those who state opinion as fact. Or fighting there own stupid war at home when neither of us is really the enemy

  77. Jersey McJones says:

    I’m not following you.


  78. micky2 says:

    You said;
    You want the straight, plain, right-in-your-face opine, with back-up. Can do. Actually, as liberal as I seem to be is as liberal as American “Conservatives” really are.


    I appreciate this but my point is that poltical affiliation should not decide your communication techniques.

  79. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, I have no political affiliation.


  80. micky2 says:

    Are you not concerned with politics ?
    This concern affiliates you and gives you a connection no matter what title you choose.
    I know its very nice to seek individuality and think you have it in certain areas and maintain that you are of some avant garde speciallity.
    We are all very special , but not that different
    And since you yourself said that you seem to be liberal , well if it sounds like a duck and looks and walks like one.
    Just keep it simple man, its not the end of the world if you have a label or preference.

    I use to claim the independent label and found myself into more heat and confusion than it was worth. Its also a chicken doo doo way of dodging issues and being a fair weather friend fence sitter and involves no commitment to a specific idea.

  81. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, I can think of no group with which I am affiliated – other than the ACLU, and a bunch of humanitarian and animal charities. I understand and consider the balance of partisan governance, but have no favorite horse in the race, just complex preferences. I’ve split tickets my entire voting life. I understand that governance is about balance. It’s about probabilty and chance, competing interests and competence. I wish there were a great progressive GW or LN, TR or FDR that could rise to the occasion of today, but I see none. Look, I thought Alan Simpson was a great republican, and at the same time Pat Buchanon. I disagreed with them a lot, but I respect the sincerity of their rhetoric. It’s that vast void of the middle of the GOP that bothers me. They remind me of the Dixiecrats. Dinosaurs.


  82. micky2 says:

    The ACLU is not the third leg of the left?
    OH MY GOD ! If thats not affiliation then we must be in alterd states or something in the middle of a space time continuem.
    There you go again, jeeeez you must really think we are all a bunch of roaring lunatics ! Its amazing the kind of crap you try to pass off on me , god bless man give me an ounce of credit, really !
    And you obviously have one horse in the race that you love to beat to death.
    And these so called “complex” preferences of yours just enable you to skip and around and critisize without actually taking a positive position ” EVER”
    I’ll talk to you when you pull it out.

  83. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, anyone who thinks the protection of civil rights is “leftist” must then believe that all our founding fathers were leftists too. I find baiting the ACLU about the lowest endeavor I’ve ever seen.


  84. micky2 says:

    That was then holmes, turn the page and get up to date.

    Roger Baldwin, founder and guiding light of the ACLU for over 30 years, is now a member of the National Committee of the ACLU. Mr Roger Baldwin has a record of over 100 communist-front affiliations and citations (documented in detail, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD May 26, 1952). In an article written for Soviet Russia Today (September 1934), Roger Baldwin said: “When the power of the working class is once achieved, as it has been only in the Soviet Union, I am for maintaining it by any means whatsoever.” “The class struggle is the central conflict of the world, all others are coincidental.”. (He said he did not care who died for his cause)

    Our founding fathers had no idea of this intellectual bigotry in their time,.
    Give me another break from the BS would ja ?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.