He's not my first choice, but he is America's Mayor.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249482,00.html

Herb

It's too bad Harry Reid isn't running for president. If by chance he won the Democratic nomination and Rudy won the Republican nomination, it would be fun to see Herb vote against a pro-lifer (Reid) and for a pro-choicer (Rudy).

Andrew

He is just like Slick Willy though Herb! But a little worse in the AFFAIR dept......
Pro-AFFAIR and Pro-LIFE????
WOW!
Spin it to the max Herb.

Fiorello LaGuardia did qualify as America's mayor during a part of the last century, but I would not count this particular corrupt opportunist among men of that stature. If Giuliani runs, you will see more dancing skeletons than a Ray Harryhausen movie.

Little you are CORRECT!

This is a great opportunity to see how headlines can be used to "spin" a story. Fox is better at it than most. First, read the headline:

"FOX News Poll: Voters Most Comfortable With Rudy Giuliani as President"

Now, read the story:

"NEW YORK — More voters say they would be comfortable with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani as president than other top 2008 contenders, though majorities would also be comfortable with other leaders from both parties, according to the latest FOX News Poll. In addition, of all the 2008 hopefuls — announced or frequently mentioned as a possibility — voters want to hear more from one candidate specifically: Illinois Sen. Barack Obama."

It's clear the poll asked a question like, "Which of the following candidates would you feel comfortable having as president?" According to the news story, Giuliani got more votes than any other candidate. But because they also report that other candidates were voted for more than half the time, then those taking the poll must have been allowed to choose multiple candidates in response to the question.

Now look at the headline. Do these poll results indicate that voters are most comfortable with Giuliani? No! The poll did not ask about level of comfort, only whether the voter felt "comfortable" with the candidate.

It would be as if there were a list of foods, and people were asked to mark those foods they liked. Many foods were marked as being liked, but lets say that broccoli made it on more people's lists than any other food. To declare that "People Most Like Broccoli" would be an incorrect conclusion. Just because it is on most people's list doesn't mean it is their most-liked food.

If Fox has written "Most Voters Comfortable with Rudy Giuliani as President" that would have been a much more accurate summary of the poll results. But then again, any candidate who scored over 50% in the poll would have qualified for the same praise. Newspapers are learning most people don't have the time or inclination to read beyond the headline, and if they do they won't read carefully.

Fox is doing some deft spinning here Herb - but you already knew that, since you are so self-admittedly good at spotting spin.

(9:01 edit - revised my broccoli analogy to make more sense)

Hehe... can't resist a bumper sticker culture post!

Selectable, not electable!™

You read it here first!

"Spin it to the max Herb."

Again.

I said 'He's not my first choice...'

Spin yourself into a tizzy.

Herb

Read, Herb, read.

My point is that when you read the story carefully, it says nothing about him being *anyone's* first choice, despite the impression you might get from the misleading headline. According to the poll, he is most often *a* choice, one of many. And no, this doesn't mean that "If the election were held today blah blah blah..." he would win. It's a pretty inconsequential poll, inflated into meaning something it didn't, to make Giuliani look good.

If you had read well the story beyond the headline, and understood what it (didn't) say, I don't think you would have linked it and started this thread.

You were spun, Herb.

He's America's mayor and rallied our nation at the nadir of our war against terror.

Herb

Great. He should run for mayor then.

(what the hell does it mean to be "America's Mayor" anyway?)

Witnessing a tragedy in your city is not a good reason to be crowned king. No one has suggested that C. Ray Nagin should run for president or that he is America's mayor.

Bush also garnered the collective goodwill of the world after 9/11...and look how he's frittered it all away. There's no guarantee Giuliani wouldn't be any different. He was not perceived as that successful of a mayor prior to 9/11.

Giuliani still sits at the top of a lot of 2008 preference polls of GOP voters.

Could it be a clear marketing message? "The guy who knows how to deal with terrorism."

Not saying he IS that guy, but boy, that's his image.

In their hurry to get the dollars pumping again, Giuliani and his office hid the truth about hazardous materials from thousands of rescuers, salvage workers and folks with businesses nearby. As a result, hundreds have become sick and some have even died.

After conveniently emerging from the rubble into the spotlight, Rudy has made millions from the bloodshed on the lecture tour and with commercial endorsements. He is only a "man of stature" because the stack of corpses he is standing on is so tall.

"Witnessing a tragedy in your city is not a good reason to be crowned king."

Mr. Giuliani hardly only witnessed tragedy.

He rallied New York and the nation.

Plus, no one is talking about king here.

You sir, are guilty of a preposterous post.

Herbosterous

I say we call him if we need him.

Giuliani rallied New York. This is true. However, he did not push for an independent investigation to prevent this tragedy in the future. He did not hold members of this administration accountable for ignoring the warnings before this unspeakable horror. In fact, he did little more than pour out well-timed crocodile tears and grin like a kid in a candy store. He is not a hero. He is the sort of ambulance chasing opportunist that ought to be publicly shamed for exploiting the pain of so many others for his own benefit.

As for America, I think we all felt compassion for New Yorkers in a natural way. I may be a naive optimist, but I believe that people are built to feel sorrow without having it suggested to them by someone in power. We wanted to hear the stories from firemen, policemen and the volunteer force of rescuers, not from a self-appointed armchair quarterback and waver of pom-poms.

We still have no need for insight from a two-bit big city mayor who was equally cozy with the mob and real estate developers. Before that morning dawned, he was the sworn enemy of minorities, the poor and small businessmen. He ought to be remembered for rampant police corruption, insider deals and extramarital affairs. The tragedy was spun to save his own legacy.

Cozy with the Mob? COZY WITH THE MOB?

ARE YOU SERIOUS? Giuliani prosecuted the Mob BIG TIME IN NEW YORK. PLUS, he cleaned up Times Square..you know, the squeegee guy place where people were hijacked for $ in their cars.

Who do you like-the prior NY Mayor Mr. David Dinkins, who let crime spiral out of control on his watch?

I don't know what you're drinking, but it must be 5pm somewhere.

Speaking of prosecuting the mob, personally, I'd vote for former NYPD Chief Bernard Kerik for President in a New York minute.

Talk about kicking some behind and taking names. I think the mob is scared of him. He's cleaned up many prisons and NYC, too.

Bernie Kerik in 2008 for Republican Presidential nominee.

Herb

Yes cozy, snuggly as a kitty cat. Giuliani shot a few fish in a barrel and helped to consolidate the marketplace.

Since most every mayor has left that city in worse shape than when they arrived, my vote is still with LaGuardia, a Republican, but more important, a true New Yorker.

Kerik is a great candidate for the gray bar hotel.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/bernard_b_kerik/ind ex.html

Since you asked, coffee.

'Yes cozy, snuggly as a kitty cat. Giuliani shot a few fish in a barrel and helped to consolidate the marketplace.'

Let's see proof. I have NEVER heard that.

Plus, you cite the NY Slimes to attack Mr. Kerik. If it's in a straight paper, I'll take it as fact. Otherwise, it's likely like the LA Slimes. Hogwash.

Herb

"Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani was called as a witness before the Bronx grand jury investigating allegations that a mob-connected builder paid for tens of thousands of dollars in renovations to the Bronx apartment of former Police Commissioner Bernard B. Kerik, one person who has been briefed on his appearance said yesterday."

New York Times
June 10, 2006

You're citing a leftist rag.

Herb

Ooooh! Blatant Ad Hominen attack from HerrB Hamcock!

Nice One Merkin!!!! LOL You Ham-Basher! LMAO

Is Fox news your only source?

"NEW YORK — More than 18 months after his Homeland Security nomination sank over ethics questions, former police commissioner Bernard Kerik pleaded guilty Friday to accepting tens of thousands of dollars in gifts while he was a top city official.

Kerik pleaded guilty to a pair of misdemeanors in state Supreme Court in the Bronx in a deal that spared him any jail time. Kerik was instead ordered to pay a total of $221,000 in fines at the 10-minute hearing.

Kerik acknowledged accepting $165,000 worth of renovations on his Bronx apartment from a company attempting to do business with the city — a New Jersey construction firm with alleged links to the mob. And he admitted failing to report a loan as required by city law.

The plea bargain allows Kerik to continue his new career as a security consultant in the Middle East.

Prosecutors had considered bringing felony bribery charges against Kerik based on allegations that in exchange for the renovations he helped the company, Interstate Industrial Corporation, seek business with the city."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,201708,00.html?sPage=fnc.national/crime

"Blatant Ad Hominen attack."

As Mrs. Clinton would say:

"Not so fast."

Attacking a newspaper is NOT Ad Hominem, which means "Against the PERSON," remember?

Spin on.

Herb

Well, then let's correct that.

Herb, Merkin is accusing you of making an "ad newspaperum*" attack, or "attack against the newspaper" , meaning that you are belittling the newspaper rather than arguing against the statement itself.

Feel better?

Spin: off.

(*I just made up a word! In Latin!)

When newspapers lie, as the NY Times has been wont to do, you bet Ol' Herb is going to call it.

Herb

Damn right the New York Times has lied. Just look at how they spread Judy Miller's pro-Bush war lies in late 2002-early 2003!

Andrew

Hilary for President!!!!!!!!

Just because it pisses Herb off.

No. I wish that were all it does.

It terrifies me.

Herb

President
Hillary
Clinton


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Andrew

Now I don't have any fingernails left.

Herb

President
Hillary
CLINTON!!!!!

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Andrew

Hey Herb, you are getting your money's worth tonight huh?

What's so scary about Hilary?

"What's so scary about Hilary?"

She's farther left than her husband and way, way smarter. Other words that come to mind are cunning and ice-cold.

Thank goodness she isn't as slick and that she has high negatives, or it would be 8 SCARY years of liberalism in the White House.

Herb

Actually if you read what Andrew2 wrote the way it should be read, its;

President
Hillary
Clinton? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Andrew, you left the question mark out!

Run Hillary Run (On the front of my Land Cruiser!)

...and with a Democratic congress to launch with, could get ugly from your point of view.

I still don't like one party rule. All Dems might suit me better than all GOP, but still it's not ideal.

We need proportional representation. Would be much better for us overall.

A lot of time and energy is spent on things as they stand today.

As Republican candidates go, I think that at this point, only John McCain stands a prayer of surviving any scrutiny by a free press. McCain has a rather chequered past due to some criminally poor fundraising choices. I am sure great hay from all quarters will be made of this and other public gaffes.

Still, his military record, his ability to cross the aisle for the good of the people and his stand on torture as a former prisoner of war ought to balance it out. He is also a very effective communicator. As this utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt congress of late goes, he is probably the cleanest of the filthy.

He is also a candidate that may have won the election fair and square, had he been given the nomination in 2000.

He also may have read a memo on his desk the following summer and put our government and military on alert -- rather than going on vacation. I also believe that he may have left a classroom full of children to attend to a crisis like a terrorist attack.

It is entirely possible that the FEMA in a McCain administration may have been run by someone with little or no experience with equestrians, but plenty of years in emergency management. Perhaps Katrina would have destroyed the city, but his administration would have noticed, reacted and be rebuilding the city this very moment.

A McCain administration would not have attacked Iraq on cooked evidence. It would not have permitted no-bid contracts for any government work. It would not have turned it's back on our allies and shunned new friends. It would not have viewed the Geneva Convention as optional. It would not have trampled the Constitution. It would not have thrown our proud Veterans away like so many fish bones.

Still, folks wonder why fiscal conservatives without extremist ideals are becoming Libertarians in droves. It may already be too late to save the jolly elephant. Perhaps the "Grand Old Party" will be a distant memory as Cowboy George fills his pockets, tips his hat and rides the last pachyderm into the sunset.

"You're citing a leftist rag."

Uh, not so fast, HerrB. IMNSHO you're guilty of "ragging" on Littlesongs for not citing something YOU approve of, so yes, in my book you ARE insulting Littlesongs personally and insinuating there's something wrong with him/her personally for daring to cite something you hate. And you despise that. And the messenger it rode in on.

Thank you for pointing that out, Mrs. Merkin. It was a New York question and I cited a New York source. I even covered the hallowed, "Five W's" in my quotes. In fact, even the info-tainment specialists at Fox confirmed the story.

I am a Portlander through and through and would certainly hope that a New Yorker would go to the Oregonian for information about my fair city.

Do I believe every word of the Times? No. Should a New Yorker believe every word of the Big O? No. Are they valuable references when exploring our communities? Yes. Will they both still tell you the facts when a big local figure has been indicted on Federal charges? Yes.

I am not foolish enough to believe everything in ink. Like most folks, I read newspapers and I enjoy them with a grain of salt. Eventually, the truth always wins out, and in these articles, it did. "Rosebud" was plenty slippery, but it was not a sled.

Aequam memento rebus in arduis servare mentem

"A McCain administration would not have attacked Iraq on cooked evidence."

BUT, he not only was, and REMAINS, pro-Iraq war, but he is one of the ones pining for MORE troops.

I agree with you on every other front, I really like McCain, he's a moderate who isn't afraid to stick it to his fellow Republicans when it merits it ... but the whole Iraq view is a deal-breaker here.

You have pinpointed McCain's basic flaw.

He loves a winner, especially if he actually believes in them or the causes they support. However, he gets himself into pickles and then doesn't know when to cut his losses. He doesn't get the fact that a really good cowboy can switch horses during the ride.

Unfortunately, with all of the partisan malarkey swirling, he didn't keep George's feet to the fire after the election. He wanted to appear unified. He wasn't alone. With the results still in question in everyone's mind, both parties desperately positioned themselves all willy-nilly before 9/11.

I hate to say that such an awful day was convenient for anyone, but it has quite obviously turned out that way. Unfortunately, McCain has missed or ignored many opportunities to rise head and shoulders above his colleagues by pointing out more than a fraction of all this almost unbelievable cowflop to the Senate.

Perhaps we've overestimated the man. Perhaps he is a typical milquetoast politician with just enough savvy to seem like he has potential. I like him. I don't like this war.

If John thinks really hard late some night he will come to the conclusion that his stubborn attitude is rooted in his own war experience. I understand why he wants to win it this time and I am sure someday he will too. Vietnam scarred many people and few were affected more than this good Senator.

==============================================

I am among the many independent voters who are skeptical, critical and watchful of our republic. To this point in my lifetime, the only resident of Pennsylvania Avenue who has earned my respect is Jimmy Carter.

Hindsight being what it is, he was actually a success. He was a gentle farmer who dared lead a country with a staggering inflation rate, high gas prices and incredibly low military morale. He had to start from scratch in a cynical land that had just witnessed the most corrupt government in our history.

If this all sounds familiar, it is because it is exactly what the next fellow or lady will face when the moving truck drops them off. I wish them a hell of a lot of luck. Jimmy raised that bar pretty damned high.

"ad newspaperum" still has me laughing. It is nice to meet all of you.

"The President and First Man..."

First Man. First Man. Hmmm... First Man. We haven't heard that one since the Garden of Eden...

...or since we crawled from the mud...

...or since we were beamed down by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

I get taken to task all day long by the left here, for not using their 'approved' sources.

Can dish it out, but can't take your own treatment, eh?

Herb

Herb said>>>>
Can dish it out, but can't take your own treatment, eh?

LMFAO!
Pot meet Kettle

Herb writes:
I get taken to task all day long by the left here, for not using their 'approved' sources.

When you post outright lies such as your recent "Letter to Clinton" thread, no wonder people question your sources. Herb, why can't you argue with true facts instead of resorting to making stuff up (or posting made-up stuff)? Is it because you realize that you can't win an argument if you must stick to the truth?

Andrew

Herb CAN'T handle the truth......

EVER!

"When you post outright lies such as your recent "Letter to Clinton" thread..."

Aside from a few pot shots taken, I note that for the vast majority of that post, it was left wisely unchallenged.

Herb

Didn't need to waste my time challenging something so obviously false - but the part that isn't merely hyperbolic partisan rhetoric is easily refuted. Of course, you cheerily didn't bother to apologize for publishing the "Clinton got Israel to release Atta" lie/smear (yeah, I took a "pot shot" at it by posting a link to the Snopes page showing it is in fact, false). Someone with any sense of honor or decency would have apologized. But keep posting the lies, Herb - it simply demonstrates that that's all you have to argue with.

Andrew

You have nothing but spin, whether you know it or not.

Herbalicious

It's not "spin" to say that your lie about Israel "releasing" Atta was an outright fabrication. It has zero basis in fact beyond Sean Hannity's restless dreams about Bill Clinton. Spreading such crap gives you about as much credibility as some nutjob claiming that Bush orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as some sort of government conspiracy. But if you want to be lumped in with that select group of loonies, be my guest - keep posting the same sort of stuff.

Andrew

We'd have even more evidence if the Clinton administration hadn't destroyed much of it.

This is precisely the kind of information that Sandy Burglar stole, in his socks, no less.

Herb

Herb writes:
We'd have even more evidence if the Clinton administration hadn't destroyed much of it.

Maybe Bush and Cheney destroyed all the evidence of their orchestration of the 9/11 attacks, too? Great standard of evidence you've got going there - could pretty much be used to justify anything you want.

I hear Laura Bush has been living at the Mayflower hotel for two years and that Bush and Condi have had a secret affair going for years. My evidence is that Bush must have destroyed all the evidence of it, so it must be true.

Andrew

I think that the issue here is about how tall a pedestal politicians deserve. Perhaps that has been lost in the frivolity and bickering, but that is really the issue here. Is it blind love? Or is it reasoned trust?

I am disgusted and disappointed by American politics on a lot of levels. However, I am willing to cite real things. I am not hung up on black helicopters because I know who flies them.

Would it make you feel better if I touched on a few things about the Clinton administration that turned my stomach?

The high rates of civilian casualties that we inflicted as a major player in U.N. peacekeeping missions in Europe and Africa.

The attempt to change the policy of the military toward same sex relationships without first giving the troops the pay raise that previous administrations had promised and never delivered.

The waste of valuable time and resources on a national health care plan that could have been suggested to the states instead -- with Oregon as an example.

The erosion of environmental laws.

The massive deregulation of different industries -- like broadcasting -- for the benefit of a select few.

The happy skippy way he let his fellow baby boomers feel entitled to mortgage our future.

However, he will not be tarred and feathered for enjoying the company of a curvilicious adult member of his staff. Issues of fidelity are petty nonsense when the world is so complicated.

It makes one wonder what might have happened if the congress had focused on terrorism instead of fellatio. Facts about the former were available to them, while the latter was simply conjecture.

As far as politics are concerned, I am right there in the middle. I don't look in the field for the color of the cattle. I look to see how much b*llsh*t they have created. I am not one of the folks who believes with faith and passion in his leaders. I reserve those emotions for my country and the people in it.

I'm so sorry to digress from such a great post, LS, but "curvilicious"? May I borrow that?


(That's me, baby!)

Yes, of course.

Mr. M. is a lucky fellow to have your mind around, but I bet that wasn't the only deal maker.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled political discussion.

Fair enough, Littlesongs.

However, you are in error on Mr. Clinton, i.e.,"...while the latter was simply conjecture."

Make what you will of it, but Mr. Clinton perjured himself.

There is also no conjecture about his DNA on a blue dress.

Herb

There is also the hard truth that a majority of the nation does not care!

Fair enough, Herb.

In honor of Black History Month, let me point out that our current administration shamed the most decorated, highest ranking African-American in the history of our military.

It was a brilliant move when, General Colin Powell -- a hero to many and known the world over -- was appointed our Secretary of State. He was then told to shut up and tap dance. He suffered indignity after indignity, seeing the rejection of every proposal he made on Africa and being told repeatedly to butt out of military affairs.

After it was discovered that he was essentially ordered to lie to the United Nations, he finally threw in the towel and went off to spend time with his grandchildren.

A heartfelt salute to Colin.

A finger to the shrub.

It's ironic, and speaks volumes of the current administration, that arguably one of the brightest military minds in the history of the United States was told to "butt out" repeatedly of military affairs, because they didn't happen to coincide with the Dubya agenda of conquering. It's truly sad that his name was sullied solely because of guilt by association. He toed the company line and got bit in the arse anyways.

I'm glad that he gave the true proper salute to Bush and went on his way. SOMEONE who stepped out to save dignity rather than continue to be a drone, a "yes man".

"...he was essentially ordered to lie to the United Nations..."

Right.

Herb

Well Herb, that's what it WAS. Remember him doing that Power Point presentation at the UN "showing" those mobile missile launchers in Iraq that MUST have WMD on them? Remember that whole song and dance? All based off of this cooked intelligence that was shoved down our throats as factual.

Powell was skeptical of the invasion from the get-go and let it be known. He was told to shut up and stand in the corner because it was going to happen regardless. Instead of listening to the top military mind in his arsenal, one of the top military minds in the WORLD mind you, Bush dismissed his concerns and went anyways.

Don't YOU see a problem with this? I sure do.

If we didn't know what we do now about Iraq being a planned affair, there would be a solid case for incompetence.

We were headed into Iraq no matter what. That's the problem.

"All based off of this cooked intelligence.."

Right.

Intelligence from your pals the French, plus the Brits and our NATO allies. You wanna blame Mr. Bush for everything? Go right ahead. But then you gotta blame your enlightened European buddies.

Spin on.

Herb

I don't blame Bush for skewed intelligence.

I DO blame him for continuing on in this debacle however, and I DO blame him for shutting out any dissent whatsoever on a war he KNEW was unjust and flat out wrong. I DO blame him for making Colin Powell look like a buffoon because he REFUSED to listen to those who SHOULD be making the decisions on this faulty, unjust invasion and occupation that we partook in. I DO blame Bush for the deaths of 3,000+ Americans and thousands of other Iraqis for his faulty, unjust invasion.

Besides, no matter WHO conducted and shared the intelligence, it was still cooked. No matter how much you polish a turd, Herb, it's still a turd.

Listen to yourself, Herb.

IF the intelligence was bad, who should we blame? Our Allies for helping contriblute to it (not ALL was from Europe remember - we have a CIA y'know) or Bush for trusting in it so completely, despite expressed concerns from guys like Powell (and maybe you) to reconsider the source.

Or, if the intelligence was good then the French, NATO etc. are great allies to have by virtue of the great intelligence they help us get. (You don't sound very appreciative.)

Which is it, Herb?

WMD Intel Bad = Fault Bush for naively accepting bad intelligence from people like the "French".

WMD Intel Good = praise the French, NATO, etc. for their help as good friends of this nation, and give Saddam (may he rest in hell) a lot of credit for being smarter than our entire armed forces in his ability to hide those darned WMD's.

Spin: off.

The Bush Administration used intelligence selectively to backup their march to war, like a marketing campaign. Cheney himself went to the CIA numerous times to pressure them to get the intelligence they wanted to sell the war to the American public. And Cheney repeated long-discredited intelligence ("Mohammed Atta meeting with an Iraq intelligence agent in Prague") numerous times to justify the Iraq war.

When Dick Cheney proclaimed so loudly in the early fall of 2002 that, "there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." there was in fact plenty of doubt within the intelligence community and elsewhere, but no one wanted to buck a popular president a year after 9/11. Doubts were supressed. Military intelligence people planning for the Iraq invasion starting raising questions about where the supposed WMDs were and found no answers, found the intelligence weak at best. Of course, no one listened to them at the time and did a reality check. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz all assumed the war would be easy and a new US-friendly Iraqi government would just fall into place and we'd find all the weapons. They based going to war on what they wanted to believe, not what an unbiased look at the intelligence at that time would have told them.

Andrew

"I don't blame Bush for skewed intelligence."

Then lay off the poor guy...He's no Nixon when it comes to international matters and needs all the help he can get.

Herb

You must have missed the rest of the post, citing what I DID blame him for. Why should I lay off the poor guy? The ***hole did it to himself but he's making you, me, and every other John Q. American look like a grade-A ASS to the rest of the world.

Yes, let's "praise the French."

The earliest bicycle was a wooden scooter-like contraption called a "celerifere" and it was invented about 1790 by Comte Mede de Sivrac of France.

Jean Bernard Léon Foucault was a French physicist who invented the gyroscope in 1852.

Two brothers, like our own Wrights, Joseph and Jacques Etienne Montgolfier made the first successful hot-air balloon. It was launched in December, 1782, and ascended to an altitude of 985 feet.

Louis Pasteur was a French chemist and inventor who invented a heating process (now called pasteurization) which sterilizes food, killing micro-organisms that contaminate it.

In 1859, the French physicist Raymond Gaston Planté invented a battery made from two lead plates joined by a wire and immersed in a sulfuric acid electrolyte -- this was the first storage battery.

The first functional sewing machine was invented in 1830 by French tailor, Barthélemy Thimonnier.

The aqualung is a breathing apparatus that supplies oxygen to divers and allows them to stay underwater for several hours. It was invented in 1943 by Jacques-Yves Cousteau and the French industrial gas control systems engineer Emile Gagnan. This safe, easy-to-use, and reliable device was the first modern scuba system.

Lest we forget, a talented inventor, Benjamin Franklin, secured loans from the French to keep this nation in three corner hats and rifles when this democracy was an infant.

We also acquired vast amounts of land in a deal with Napoleon. You may be familiar with the crown jewel of this transaction: New Orleans.

To return to the original post, Giuliani is the son of immigrants. His father was in the mob and that provided for his family. It was just business in those days. I don't have any issue with his Italian heritage, his height or his personal beliefs. I take issue with his actions. No other measure of a person means a damn thing.

Seriously!

He took the oath and the failure is on his watch! Nail him --and Cheney, who probably is the mastermind behind a lot of this crap, too.

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

It does not mention the interests, investments or whims of the United States, only the Constitution.

Even with such clear language, the shrub could not comprehend his responsibility. He has broken that simple solemn oath and should be removed.

Herb said>>>
You have nothing but spin, whether you know it or not.

Pot meet Kettle

"I do sullenly swear the I will occasionally execute the office of Prez-dent, uh, United States, and will, to test my ability, reserve, reject and amend the Con-stew-shin, uh, United States."

- Inauguration, January 2001

Actually, if you're going to mock someone for their accent, that's more like Mr. Clinton.

In any event, belittling one for the way they speak is sophomoric. I suppose you have perfect elocution?

Herb

I was actually born in Texas and then we moved to New England.

Rather than being born in New England and then moving to Texas like say, the Bush clan.

He went to Yale and yet he talks like a drunk sixteen year-old trying to do a book report.

That's really not my fault.

Well, we can always poke fun at his less than stellar performance then!

Nice guy, Worst President Ever.

There, everybody is happy!

It came across more like Foghorn Leghorn to me. Remember how Foghorn kept having to deal with that little chickenhawk? That was funny! Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh....heh heh heh heh...heh heh..whoo boy! Flashbacks of watching Ramblin' Rod there.

Okay. Sorry. Back to the thread. What were we talking about?

We could abandon this argument and start a Ramblin' Rod thread.

http://home.comcast.net/~kptv/Shows/ramblin.htm

http://platypuscomix.cartoonsdammit.com/fpo/history/ramblinrod.html

"Now it's time to watch another cartoon, here we goooooooo..." (ear piercing whistles)