Congressman Ron Paul the Apologizer...
But Rudy was there: "I would ask the Congressman to withdraw that comment and say that he really didn't mean that."
One drawback? Like some other Republican candidates (Giuliani & McCain), Thompson is on his second marriage. So far Romney is the only prominent candidate in the field who has only been married to one woman.Fred Dalton Thompson was bored in the U.S. Senate and has had more fun playing District Attorney Arthur Branch on NBC’s “Law and Order.” Now, he’s a step closer to the ultimate audition: running for president of the United States.
Thompson sees a potential opening in the unsettled field of Republican hopefuls as a no-nonsense, charismatic conservative who would offer reassurance at a time when voters are craving security, according to the friends.
About the only factor that makes his candidacy plausible at this late date would be his celebrity and the deep dismay that conservatives feel about the current field. Thompson also would have to answer questions about a notable embarrassment from his Senate career – a failed four-month series of hearings on the Democratic campaign finance scandals that he conducted in 1997 as chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.
Daily Kos carried a headline (carried from Bloomberg News) today that was hard to avoid:
If the report is accurate, Giuliani should distance himself from Venezuela now if he can. Granted, Venezuela is no Iran or North Korea, but one can hardly run for the Republican nomination when the leader of a state-owned company you advise called your party leader "the devil."Rudolph Giuliani's law firm lobbies for Citgo Petroleum Corp., a unit of the state-owned oil company controlled by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, the U.S.'s chief antagonist in the Western Hemisphere.
Bracewell & Giuliani LLP registered to lobby for Citgo in Texas on April 26, 2005, less than a month after the former New York mayor joined the firm and became a name partner, state records show. Citgo renewed the contract in 2006 and 2007 and pays the firm $5,000 a month to track legislation. Giuliani doesn't lobby, the firm says.
Rudy Giuliani or New Gingrich?
andMarch 9, 2007 — Setting the stage for his entry into the presidential race, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., gave a radio interview to be broadcast today with Focus on the Family's James Dobson, in which Gingrich for the first time publicly acknowledged cheating on his first and second wives.
Gingrich argued that the Clinton case was different from his personal transgressions.
And the Obama factor...Considering the formidable advantages Hillary Clinton has assembled for 2008, why should anyone feel sorry for her? Because the Senator is in a trap, and many of her assets have swiftly turned into liabilities. This predicament is largely of her own making but also of changed circumstances she did not foresee. Front-runners have often fared poorly in Democratic nominating contests during the last thirty years, especially when establishment insiders promoted an aura of inevitability for them. Hillary is a candidate for the same fate.
Obama, recently got a boost from the Selma anniversary according to Townhall. Critics slammed Hillary.Clinton's great vulnerability was captured brilliantly by Barack Obama in a single sentence, without a mention of her name. "It's time to turn the page..." People are looking forward, not back, he declares. People long for a promising new generation in politics. Let's not turn back to old fights, the acrimony of decades past.
Will March 4, 2007, the 42nd anniversary of the Selma, Ala., march for voting rights, propel Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) presidential candidacy with the same force that Sept. 11, 2004 energized George W. Bush’s pursuit of a second term? The day clearly belonged to Obama, despite the efforts of both Hillary and Bill to turn it into Clinton Day. Obama’s speech was inspirational, challenging African-Americans to assume responsibility and participate in the political process.
By contrast, Hillary’s speech, replete with a phony Southern drawl — the same one she used to effect in Arkansas — smacked of pandering. But Hillary’s attempt to paint the events in Selma as seminal in her ability to run for president seemed forced, artificial, and contrived. She appeared to have confused the efforts of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with those of Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and to have mixed up the 15th and 19th amendments to the Constitution. But Obama’s speech seared right through to the root of the American conscience. The spectacle of an African-American running for president and speaking on the site of a 42-year-old battlefield where the very right of blacks to vote was at issue could not but inspire everyone who watched it. The effect on the polls may be significant.
When she cites the family accomplishments--his and hers--or reminds audiences that "Bill and I" stood up to the vicious right-wing assaults, it sounds almost as though she is offering a co-presidency. If anyone misses the connection, the former President seems to be everywhere, touting his own thoughts on how to govern the country (presumably cleared with her, but who knows?).
And as Hillary's star seems to be faltering a bit, Giuliani gains support, Reuters reports.The Senator has one more problem, and his name is Bill. She and the Clintonistas probably regard the former President as their greatest asset, but he has the personal potential to become a fatal liability. I do not refer to the scandalous behavior that over the years has occasionally humiliated his wife (though that risk provides constant grist for insider gossip). I mean the threat that Bill Clinton simply won't get off the stage. He loves to talk and collect popular adulation, and people love to hear him. Last fall, he held a glamorous sixtieth birthday party in New York that lasted three days. He has the capacity--unconsciously or otherwise--to steal his wife's show just by being himself.
One thing we know from the past is that Bill can't help himself. Self-control has never been his strong point. But, as we also know from experience, Hillary Clinton and her campaign staff can't control him either. His egotism poses a real and present danger to her ambitions.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Voters are lining up behind Rudolph Giuliani, who became "America's mayor" on Sept 11, 2001. But many New Yorkers remember the mayor before that day with less affection.
New Yorkers may have enjoyed Giuliani's success at taming the untamed city but are quick to recall the combative mayor who insulted constituents, bullied opponents and made crossing the street in the middle of the block a punishable offense.
That's not to mention his multiple marriages, a divorce so acrimonious a judge ordered Giuliani's mistress out of the mayor's mansion and a son so estranged he plans to play golf instead of campaign for his father.
Nevertheless, as he builds on the reputation earned guiding New York after the World Trade Center attack, polls show the moderate Republican leading in the race for the party's nomination for the U.S. presidential election in 2008.
I've written somewhat positively of Barack Obama since he announced his candidacy for President. Although his position on Iraq would rush our troops out, one gets the feeling that he has at least contemplated the issue, and is not simply pandering to his base.
Obama is clearly a powerful orator, with fairly powerful credentials and resume. Serving as a State, and now Congressional Senator does not imbue the most worldly experience, yet when one considers the highest office Rudy Giuliani held was mayor of New York City, and is leading the Republican ticket, critics are silenced.
Indeed, Obama and Giuliani have a lot in common: Both are socially liberal, both are lawyers, both have somewhat limited government experience (as far as presidential nominees go), both are seen as relative outsiders, and both are [at least near] front runners in their respective parties. As a matter of fact, both can be seen as challenging the Washington establishment; Obama with Hillary, and Giuliani with McCain.
Granted, the comparisons only go so far, but they are similarities nonetheless. One last striking similarity that I would offer are personal mistakes each man has made in the past. Giuliani is twice divorced, lived with two homosexuals for a time [Which Republicans certainly frown upon], and broke up with his ex-wife at a press conference.
Obama, too, has skeletons in his closet. He admitted to prior drug use, hard drug use ("Maybe a little blow"), he recently paid off a number of very old unpaid parking tickets, and this past week other news has called his judgement into question... The New York Times calls him out, claiming that In ’05 Investing, Obama Took Same Path as Donors:
However,Less than two months after ascending to the United States Senate, Barack
Obama bought more than $50,000 worth of stock in two speculative companies whose major investors included some of his biggest political donors.
Considering he lost $13,000, I would give the guy a break. This would suggest the story is a non-issue, questioning the story's prominece on the top of the nytimes.com home page. Breitbart further confirms that Obama was Unaware of Investment Conflicts.A spokesman for Mr. Obama, who is seeking his party’s presidential nomination in 2008, said yesterday that the senator did not know that he had invested in either company until fall 2005, when he learned of it and decided to sell the stocks. He sold them at a net loss of $13,000. The spokesman, Bill Burton, said Mr. Obama’s broker bought the stocks without consulting the senator, under the terms of a blind trust that was being set up for the senator at that time but was not finalized until several months after the investments were made.
andWASHINGTON (AP) -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Wednesday that he was not aware that he had invested in two companies backed by some of his top donors and did nothing to aid their business before the government.
The Illinois senator faced questions about more than $50,000 in investments he made right after taking office in 2005 in two speculative companies, AVI Biopharma and Skyterra Communications. Obama said his broker bought the stocks as part of a quasi-blind trust.
I find these accusations miniscule in the extreme. Yet, other recent accusations seem to carry more weight. Michelle Malkin noted all the Pandering in Selma in a post this past Monday. In it, she wrote:The reports found no evidence that any of his actions ended up benefiting either company during the roughly eight months he owned the stocks. Obama lost about $15,000 on Skyterra and earned a profit of about $2,000 on AVI.
Drudge is headlining Hillary's new Southern twang adopted during a speech in Selma, Alabama to commemorate Bloody Sunday. But even more noteworthy: Obama's truth-stretching speech the same day. Allah caught two truthy assertions by The Messiah:Obama's woes continued as a self-professed pedophile posts photos of your young daughters on his Web site, where he describes them as an "angelic duo."
1) His claim that a Kennedy-sponsored airlift in Africa was responsible for bringing the Obama family to the U.S.
2) His claim that events in Selma led to his parents getting together--and Obama being born. Allah questions the timing.
1) JFK didn't take office until two years after Obama's arrived in the U.S.
2) Obama, Jr., was born four years before Bloody Sunday in Selma.
Obama's decision to threaten a lawsuit has nothing to do with his knowledge of the law. In all likelihood, he intends to scare the pervert into taking the photos down. Secondly, how would the public react if Obama took no action? He would likely be assailed by many as weak and unwilling to confront the man. Personally, I don't care who you are, but if you posted pictures of my daughter in a salacious manner, I will do everything in my power to get those pictures taken down.It happened to Senator Barack Obama whose presidential campaign threatened legal action against Lindsay Ashford, a self-professed pedophile who handicapped the 2008 campaign by judging the "cuteness" of several presidential candidates' underage daughters and granddaughters. Attorneys who specialize in free speech say the campaign's handling of the issues raises some questions about the candidate's stance on civil rights.
"Individuals can make comments about the candidates and the candidates' children without running afoul of the law until someone crosses the line into actual or criminal activity," said Lawrence G. Walters, a lawyer who has handled many cases involving pornography and the Internet. "For better or worse, pedophiles retain their free speech rights. If he's a professed pedophile and if he says, 'Let's try to find these kids,' then it could be in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, then he may be liable."
No matter how distasteful the content of the website, Walters and Jonathan Katz, another First Amendment lawyer, were surprised that the Obama campaign had threatened legal action in this case.
"If Obama knows that his lawyer is doing this, then that's one reason not to vote for him," Katz said. "These are clear free speech issues."
Reuters:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani, virtually tied with John McCain in a January poll, held a 25-point lead over the Arizona senator in a Newsweek magazine survey released on Saturday.
Among registered Republicans, 59 percent said they backed the former New York City mayor and 34 percent said they favored McCain, who announced on Wednesday he would seek the presidency in 2008, Newsweek said.
McCain has done it again. Two years away from the actual election, and the Arizona Senator has stepped in it big: McCain apologises for 'wasted lives' Iraq slip.
Worse, still, he repeated the same mistake Obama did just weeks ago. How can this be? I've written here and here about McCain's flip-flop tendencies, his serial pandering to whichever audience he happens to be in front of. However, these latest comments about American lives "wasted" in Iraq take the cake.
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann wrote yesterday that McCain's Campaign Collapses, and with good reason.
Fundamentally, he failed to heed the Shakespeare's admonition "to thine own self be true." The John McCain of the 2000 campaign is nowhere in evidence in 2007.
Now he has been identified with two issues, neither popular in the Republican Party: The Iraqi troop surge and amnesty for illegal aliens.
Republican strategist and Reagan campaign manager Ed Rollins makes an interesting point about McCain: He has switched roles. He has gone from being the McCain of the 2000 race, challenging the party orthodoxy, offering new ideas, and demanding reforms and changes to the Bush of the 2000, toeing the party line and only timidly venturing different ideas if he advances them at all. And this is no way to win the presidency or even the Republican nomination. But where it has counted, on the two core issues that move Republican voters these days — tax cuts and immigration — McCain is badly out of step with the GOP base.
Rudy also surges at a time when the other candidates are disappearing from the Republican nominating process. In addition to McCain's swoon, the other possible top contender, Mitt Romney has stalled and is falling backwards. His flip-flop-flip from pro-life to pro-choice and back to pro-life again is not winning him any converts.Hugh Hewitt also writes:
So, you should be asking, if it is all about the war, why isn't John McCain surging in his GOP support given his very vocal commitment to the war for all these years?
The GOP base has a trust issue with McCain, one that flows from the 2000 campaign, McCain-Feingold, the Gang of 14, the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, the September 2006 derailing of the Republican end-game strategy. McCain is fading, and not because of his age or energy level, but because the GOP electorate has to absolutely believe that the next president will be as committed to victory as Bush has been. Senator McCain's avoidance of new media has been reinforcing the impression that he is unwilling to provide the assurances he needs to in order to regain the trust he has repeatedly broken with the GOP electorate over the years. There is time to turn that around, but Senator McCain is not making the effort, an effort that would begin by a relentless courting of the base rather than the Hardball/Meet The Press audience. Every week that Senator McCain delays launching that effort is a week in which the mayor and the governor gather more pledges and momentum. The big three could be the big two by Memorial Day.
He said that the United States went to war with far too few forces and was wrong to dismantle Saddam Hussein’s military and government, and he conceded that if more information had been available about Iraq’s weapons, Congress never would have approved the war.
On the issue that looms largest over the campaign, Iraq, Mr. Giuliani used the interview to offer a harsh assessment of the Bush administration’s decision-making. His comments more closely aligned him with his chief rival in Republican primary polls, Senator John McCain of Arizona, who has supported the war, as Mr. Giuliani does, but has criticized its conduct.
From The Smoking Gun:
FEBRUARY 12--As he campaigns for the Republican presidential nomination, Rudolph Giuliani will have to contend with political and personal baggage unknown to prospective supporters whose knowledge of the former New York mayor is limited to his post-September 11 exploits. So, in a bid to educate the electorate, we're offering excerpts from a remarkable "vulnerability study" that was commissioned by Giuliani's campaign prior to his successful 1993 City Hall run. The confidential 450-page report, authored by Giuliani's research director and another aide, was the campaign's attempt to identify possible lines of attack against Giuliani and prepare the candidate and his staff to counter "the kinds of no-holes-barred assault" expected in a general election rematch with Democratic incumbent David Dinkins.
Among vulnerabilities the interal report raised are:
- The Candidate's independence from traditional national Republican
policies
- The Giuliani report noted that the candidate needed to make it clear to voters that he was "pretty good on most issues of concern to gay and lesbian New Yorkers"
- Pro-choice and supported public funding for abortion
- Giuliani's 14-year marriage to his second cousin, a union that he got annulled by claiming to have never received proper dispensation from the Catholic Church for the unorthodox nuptials
- Prospective charges that Giuliani dodged the Vietnam draft
- Was a "man without convictions" because of his
transformation from George McGovern voter to a Reagan-era Justice Department appointee
The campaign study was obtained by The Village Voice's Wayne Barrett in the course of preparing "Rudy!," an investigative biography of Giuliani. Perhaps that is why Giuliani, as Barrett reported, ordered copies of the vulnerability study destroyed shortly after it was circulated to top campaign aides.
These questions may not have a great affect on Giuliani with moderate voters, but they will certainly cause social conservatives to question their support for Rudy Giuliani. Then again, another leading contender for the nomination, Mitt Romney, is also the subject of criticism for his inconsistent view on gay marriage and abortion.
The American public has come to expect a controversy or two during a Presidential cycle - during any election cycle.
Yet, without making a judgement call, I am struck at the difference in the controversies within the Presidential campaigns of Republicans and Democrats so far. Two years prior to the election, anything can happen. But there can be no doubt that many Democratic hopefuls are off to a bad start.
John Edwards' Bloggergate has hurt him, especially among Catholic Democrats.
And Barack Obama has had negative press twice:
- First, Obama and Australian Prime Minister John Howard get into a flap
(Granted, Howard started it).
- Second, Obama says troop deaths in Iraq were "wasted," then fails to apologize for it (He has
only said he "would" apologize if military families were offended). More from Jules Crittenden
here.
In contrast, Republican Presidential hopefuls have managed thus far to avoid much negative press, save for John McCain, who is drawing fire for these bizarre steps:
- First by choosing to be the Kenynote speaker at a Creationist advocacy group, and
- Second, by predicting a Tet Offensive by insurgents in Iraq.
Yet, Romney, Giuliani, Huckabee and others have managed to stay away from bad press - for now. Only two more years to go...
