misterd on 07 June 2007
| Erik Aston said: Guiliani is a fearmonger even more than W. He's basically claiming that the country will not be safe with a Democrat as president. (That's the nice way to put it. A more correct/politically incorrect way might be saying that he's a terrorist who's message is "elect me or die.") Despite his claims, 9/11 happened on his watch, with the full warning of the first WTC attack. And his major policy in the wake of 9/11 was to postpone the NYC elections for his own benefit; undermining our democracy due to fear, just as Islamic extremists want. |
Last I checked, the planning and excution of the 9/11 attack largely happened outside of NYC, so there's not much he could have done to stop it short of putting missile launcher in the towers (which he wouldn't have been allowed to do).
As for fear mongering, I have no problem, in principle, with Guiliani saying America will be less safe with a Democrat in the White House. One of the primary arguments of any of these candidates, from either side, is why the US will be safer with them in the office as opposed to their opponents (of either party). If Rudy's opposition feels his policies will make the US less safe, then I think they too should make that case.
