Video: Rudy ad pulverizes Hillary over Petraeus

posted at 4:58 pm on September 14, 2007 by Allahpundit

I don’t mind this one as much as the print ad because it’s not being presented as a defense of Petraeus. It’s overtly an indictment of Hillary’s opportunism on the war, with her knock on the general just one piece of evidence. He’s pandering shamelessly and opportunistically himself, of course, by exploiting the “Betray Us” furor to his own end, but in the service of exposing her own craven, shameless pandering to the left — which didn’t start with Petraeus and won’t end with him — I can forgive him his sin.

Please do note, however, that he does Petraeus no favors by co-opting him this way. The left wants to discredit him as a waterboy for Republican optimism on the war. The more he turns up in Republican ads, the easier that is to do.

Exit question: Check out the description in the sidebar at YouTube. If they’re sincere about wanting to defend Petraeus, shouldn’t they know how to spell his name?

Update: They fixed the spelling.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Rudy is winning me over with this “stay on the offense” approach. It’s time for the Republicans to quit showing their bellies to the attack dogs of the left.

Stormy70 on September 14, 2007 at 5:01 PM

It’s a good ad. By asking her to apologize, she either does and looks weak to the nutroots or, more likely, she doesn’t and it raises doubts about her truthfulness and support of the military.

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:01 PM

Exit question: Check out the description in the sidebar at YouTube. If they’re sincere about wanting to defend Petraeus, shouldn’t they know how to spell his name?

Yes. But it’s a minor point. A typo.

Frankly I think the ad offended him more, but maybe they’re really about equal.

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:04 PM

Rudy can’t run against Fred or Mitt, so he is running against Hellery, using Petraeus as cover. Great move, Rudy!

AZCON on September 14, 2007 at 5:05 PM

Rudy can’t run against Fred or Mitt, so he is running against Hellery, using Petraeus as cover. Great move, Rudy!

Very very good mood. Whereas Hillary largely runs against Bush.

Fred runs against Mitt. And Mitt pretends to be running the super smiley nice campaign.

Advantage — Guiliani.

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:06 PM

*move

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:07 PM

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:01 PM

The nutroots speak. Over 1000 comments to this diary.

I will not vote for Hillary in the General Election
by VelvetElvis

Connie on September 14, 2007 at 5:07 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

He’s pandering shamelessly and opportunistically himself, of course, by exploiting the “Betray Us” furor to his own end, but in the service of exposing her own craven, shameless pandering to the left — which didn’t start with Petraeus and won’t end with him — I can forgive him his sin.

I don’t really think it’s shameless, I think it’s completely appropriate. I’m not a Rudy supporter, but someone finally has the balls to expose her. You realize of course that most people out there are too stupid to be aware that Hillary supported this war, and that her and the other Dems spent 13 years making the WMD case, and only called Bush a liar when the 2004 election cycle got underway.

They used that as an issue to divide a united country, because they stood no chance of winning otherwise.. they still didn’t win (that election), but that’s why it was done, and because of the current state of our media most people are still unaware today. I’m not going to get in to my belief that the WMDs were there, but I’ll just note that the war and Bush’s approval would be a hell of a lot better, if the Dems had simply stuck by their own WMD arguments and the war, which based on that WMD intel from around the world, was necessary in a post-9/11 world. The Dems didn’t turn against the war out of conviction, they did it because they had to divide the country or they’d have been out of power indefinitely. And this sick SOBs are still doing it today, emboldening the enemy to fight another day with each defeatist comment they make, promising to surrender if they’re elected.

If you ask me (which you didn’t, I know), Rudy’s not only not being “shameful”, he’s not going far enough. Outside of shamnesty ’07, that’s been my biggest beef with Bush. Bending over for these disgusting and evil Democrats (and yes I said evil, for anyone who hasn’t heard it explained “why” before… I can if necessary), and he never responded. Thinking he was staying out of the mud put him where he is today.

RightWinged on September 14, 2007 at 5:09 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

And who will beat him? Fred, Mitt, Mccain?

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:09 PM

And who will beat him? Fred, Mitt, Mccain?

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:09 PM

Newt

News2Use on September 14, 2007 at 5:14 PM

Rudy is running against Hellery because they share the same supporters-socially liberal hawks.

AZCON on September 14, 2007 at 5:15 PM

Newt?

Christoph on September 14, 2007 at 5:15 PM

He’s pandering shamelessly and opportunistically himself

A politician?! Pandering? Thank goodness this is an isolated case.

Newt

News2Use on September 14, 2007 at 5:14 PM

And I’ll go to the voting booth in a tutu.

amerpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:16 PM

I heard Mr. Newt interviewed on Bill Bennett’s radio show earlier this week and was reminded that Mr. News is The Man.

I’d forgotten.

It’s like when Vader/Fred starts going all soft, and the Emperor/Newt pwns him without getting up out of his comfy chair.

What do I want? An actual conservative. When do I want it? Now.

saint kansas on September 14, 2007 at 5:19 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

His social issues? What is Fred going to attack Rudy on abortion?

amerpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:19 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/09/14/video-rudy-ad-pulverizes-hillary-over-petraeus/

Now you’ve got skin in the game.

CK MacLeod on September 14, 2007 at 5:19 PM

Best political ad I’ve seen yet this campaign season.

RushBaby on September 14, 2007 at 5:19 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

If Mitt & Fred upend Rudy, they’ve just handed America to the Glacier, because neither Mitt nor Fred will beat Hillary in the general election.

clark smith on September 14, 2007 at 5:20 PM

Thompson/Hunter

AZCON on September 14, 2007 at 5:20 PM

This ad is the very reason I support Rudy. He has balls; something that so many, including Newt and Romney, in Washington are lacking.

bopbottle on September 14, 2007 at 5:20 PM

AZCON on September 14, 2007 at 5:20 PM

I don’t like that combination, but I’d like to see Hunter serving in some capacity in an administration.

amerpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Thompson/Hunter; and Newt can replace the DHS, Education, Labor, Health, State departments all by himself.

AZCON on September 14, 2007 at 5:23 PM

News2Use on September 14, 2007 at 5:14 PM

Based on what I’ve seen so far from all the other candidates, I would seriously consider Newt.

Guardian on September 14, 2007 at 5:26 PM

Rudy for president or for Chertoff-replacement! Though the money wouldn’t come close to what he makes now, or the potential, even if he isn’t the candidate for the fall of ’08.

Entelechy on September 14, 2007 at 5:28 PM

Sometimes I think you are stupid Allahpundit. Really. Or maybe you need a nap, a vacation, or an iPhone.

The notion that simply avoiding referring to Petraeus would make him a lesser target is ridiculous. These people are crazy hateful hysterical zealots.

Also, if our side won’t stand up for him (the proper example) who will? – “Let’s not support him, the other side might notice and attack” – sounds “dimm”-witted to me.

I do not “support” the troops. I LOVE them. I imagine all of the best characteristics of any superhero embodied in them. They are my heroes.

We say we “support” the troops because LOVE might show some kind of vulnerability – inviting attack. We also say they do not “support” the tropps so we don’t have to say the truth – THEY HATE THEM.

Agrippa2k on September 14, 2007 at 5:32 PM

His social issues? What is Fred going to attack Rudy on abortion?

amerpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:19 PM

Nah. Probably the 2nd amendment. Biggest reason Rudy would have to be the nominee before I’d ever think of voting for him.

Kowboy on September 14, 2007 at 5:43 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

I agree, however I hope we don’t feast on each other too much before we get to Hillary in the big one.

Good ad, but to me it still seems like Rudy’s “using” this one a bit much. But hey, this IS politics…..

omnipotent on September 14, 2007 at 5:44 PM

I thought it was a great ad. I like my republican candidates fighting democrats.

BelchSpeak on September 14, 2007 at 6:01 PM

I’ve got a better ticket.

Hunter/Me

Let’s face it. I rule.

Nethicus on September 14, 2007 at 6:03 PM

Very nice ad. A touch opportunistic but I’m glad to see someone call Hillary on this.

12thman on September 14, 2007 at 6:06 PM

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

I’m not sure. I’m a social con and I think I’m voting for Rudy. He’s the only guy, I think, who can win in the general election. I’m willing to suck it up to keep an R in the whitehouse in 2008. With a democrat house and senate; there really is no other choice.

(Damn you newt for being unelectable)

lorien1973 on September 14, 2007 at 6:08 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

So have said all the pundits. I think they fail to account for his charisma.

Spirit of 1776 on September 14, 2007 at 6:19 PM

How is Rudi pandering shamelessly? Are you not upset about Hillary’s position. This ad is a good strong attack against Hillary. If it wasn’t for the credist at the end, which are probably there for campaign finance purposes, you wouldn’t know who produced the ad.

davod on September 14, 2007 at 6:20 PM

That ad is a total beat down. Maybe the best one I’ve seen yet. It’ll be interesting to see how Clinton tries to wiggle out of this one over the next few days.

BadgerHawk on September 14, 2007 at 6:27 PM

I don’t see this as Rudy pandering. It’s simply Calling Clinton to the carpet. Good Ad. I appreciate it.
She will ignore it, or talk about how Bush is wrong..and on and on…

bridgetown on September 14, 2007 at 6:38 PM

Way to go, Rudy!

Face it, the other guys might be stronger on “this” or more credible on “that” but Rudy simply has stones 3x larger than any of them.

Including Hillary.

MikeZero on September 14, 2007 at 6:42 PM

I like my republican candidates fighting democrats.

BelchSpeak on September 14, 2007 at 6:01 PM

+1

Harpazo on September 14, 2007 at 6:47 PM

Nah. Probably the 2nd amendment. Biggest reason Rudy would have to be the nominee before I’d ever think of voting for him.

Kowboy on September 14, 2007 at 5:43 PM

Me too. Rudy pretty much cooked himself for me when he touted the Brady bill as the end-all be-all of crime reduction in an interview with Hannity following the last debate.

mojojojo on September 14, 2007 at 7:08 PM

Great ad. Rudy’s in this to win it.

Dudley Smith on September 14, 2007 at 7:12 PM

Stupid tactics. Save these attacks for the actual presidential election instead of wasting them in the primaries.

Darth Executor on September 14, 2007 at 7:27 PM

Rudy.

If the NYT and the Village Voice think he’s the spawn of satan, what other endorsements do you need? And he took on Arafat a long, long time ago, while Hellery was kissing “Mrs.” Arafat only a few years ago.

No one else comes close.

libertarianuberalles on September 14, 2007 at 7:41 PM

I’m not a huge fan of Rudy’s politics on certan social issues but that’s an awesome ad.

Yakko77 on September 14, 2007 at 7:44 PM

Good ad! Need more of those.

But it would be nice if they would put side by side clips of contradictory and hypocritical statements/actions. Right after they showed her supporting the war, then show her saying it’s “Bush’s war” and all her other statements against us being there.

nottakingsides on September 14, 2007 at 8:06 PM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

Uh…Go Obama?

JWS on September 14, 2007 at 9:01 PM

I like this add from Rudy, altho it is shooting fish in a barrel, this batch of flounders need to be shot.

The Democrats are abominable, shamelessly attacking honesty with their vapid hatred.

Rode Werk on September 14, 2007 at 9:01 PM

It’s a crapshot who’s going to represent Repubs in ’08. Rudy is smart to get an early start against Hillary, since she’s the likely nominee for the Dems. He’s looking down the road. Standing up to Hillary will endear him to many, many Repubs in the long run.

windbag on September 14, 2007 at 9:07 PM

Open Border Rudy?

MB4 on September 14, 2007 at 9:23 PM

Allahpundit:

How on earth do you get from here to “Giuliani’s finished.”? I get that you’re offended by his “silkification” of Petraeus, but what communication from anyone, anywhere in politics doesn’t include a solicitation? I get that you think he was trying to politicize Petraeus to personal advantage, but frankly, a full page ad devoted to a patriotic, statemanlike defense of the general would hardly have looked any less self-serving.

In terms of presidential politics, Giuliani clearly realized that the really, really BIG mistake here was not the Moveon ad, but Hillary’s “willing suspension of disbelief.” Not only has Giuliani permanently tied that comment, and thus Hillary herself, to Moveon’s atrocious blunder, he has memorialized an unforced Clinton error which might otherwise have been all too easily buried by the time the primaries even roll around. As Petraeus’ potential Commander in Chief, I believe that emblematic Clinton statement should, and will, thanks to Rudy, come back to haunt her in the general election.

As a bonus, Giuliani has also paved the way for cheap advocacy ads at the New York Times’ expense — not to mention future placement for groups that the Times once felt free to shun.

Tasteless, perhaps, but all in all, not a bad day’s work.

Given the steep uphill climb ahead, Giuliani is the only Republican candidate with a realistic prayer of actual election in ’08, and I, for one, think that ultimate success in Iraq depends a lot more on putting another Republican in the White House than on what happens in the interim. There is certainly no small measure of Bush fatigue on the right, but I think folks monumentally underestimate the extent to which that fatigue, rightly or wrongly, extends by conflation to conservatives — and especially social conservatives — in the body politic.

Like it or not, the kind of credentials that seem to excite the Fred/Huckabee/Hunter/Newt fans will put any Republican candidate at a serious disadvantage which he will end up spending most of his time and energy struggling to overcome when we get to the national election. Democrats can’t put Rudy in that box; he can come out fighting Hillary from the get go — as he’s already doing — instead of having to fight his way out of the conservative corner she’ll have put him in first. Giuliani is pre-emptively defining her right now, and that’s something that every Republican in the running ought to be thanking him for doing.

JM Hanes on September 14, 2007 at 9:43 PM

Rudy just set the bar pretty high. Let’s hope that the rest of the pack can do just as well.

right2bright on September 14, 2007 at 9:51 PM

I don’t really think it’s shameless, I think it’s completely appropriate. I’m not a Rudy supporter, but someone finally has the balls to expose her. You realize of course that most people out there are too stupid to be aware that Hillary supported this war, and that her and the other Dems spent 13 years making the WMD case, and only called Bush a liar when the 2004 election cycle got underway.

They used that as an issue to divide a united country, because they stood no chance of winning otherwise.. they still didn’t win (that election), but that’s why it was done, and because of the current state of our media most people are still unaware today. I’m not going to get in to my belief that the WMDs were there, but I’ll just note that the war and Bush’s approval would be a hell of a lot better, if the Dems had simply stuck by their own WMD arguments and the war, which based on that WMD intel from around the world, was necessary in a post-9/11 world. The Dems didn’t turn against the war out of conviction, they did it because they had to divide the country or they’d have been out of power indefinitely. And this sick SOBs are still doing it today, emboldening the enemy to fight another day with each defeatist comment they make, promising to surrender if they’re elected.

If you ask me (which you didn’t, I know), Rudy’s not only not being “shameful”, he’s not going far enough. Outside of shamnesty ‘07, that’s been my biggest beef with Bush. Bending over for these disgusting and evil Democrats (and yes I said evil, for anyone who hasn’t heard it explained “why” before… I can if necessary), and he never responded. Thinking he was staying out of the mud put him where he is today.

RightWinged on September 14, 2007 at 5:09 PM

I agree with RightWinged – every word.

I don’t agree with Rudy on all the key issues but I do think he may be the only Republican who can beat whatever defeatist, redistributionist, international consensus following leader emerges from the Democratic primary.

Times dictate we have a leader in 2008: not a political strategist; not a policy wonk, not someone who plays a leader on TV; a real tried and tested leader. We also need an a leader who can articulate what we are doing and why and who can and will defend those ideas when challenged. Rudy fits that bill. – Bush has the backbone but is not strong in front of the cameras – I keep hearing people protest his repeated references to New York but I don’t see why. Can anybody name another job that would be a better proving ground for all the skills required than being an Republican Mayor of New York?

Tough issues? Check
Hostile legislature? Check
Media spotlight? Check
Big Business Lobbyist? Check
Big Budget? Check
Under attack by terrorist? Check
Divers Population? Check
Organized Crime? Check
Big Unions? Check

… And Rudy did the job well.

– I think I have just convinced myself Rudy has the top the the hill unless somebody else in the primary knocks him off .

Unquiet on September 14, 2007 at 9:59 PM

Well said, Unquiet. You nailed it.

MikeZero on September 14, 2007 at 10:09 PM

The question as to who will win in ’08 comes down to how many conservative votes are for/against the war. Because right now, all the main GOP candidates have that albatross around their necks, and that is the noose with which Billary hopes to become president. They already have the liberal vote locked up, now they need the centrist/right vote, the Reagan democrats.

If you have two candidates, and one wants to bring your kids backs from Iraq, that is a powerful incentive for many conservative voters. That is the only way a radioactive robot like Billary could ever have a chance of winning the Whitehouse. People will hold their noses and vote Democrat for that reason. That is my fear.

If the troops were home already, she would not have that natural advantage, and the Whitehouse would stay GOP. Unfortunately, that won’t happen, and the GOP nominee will have to defend the Iraq war as well as his own conservative domestic policies. It puts him at a natural disadvantage. The ideological struggle in this election is close enough without that handicap.

jihadwatcher on September 14, 2007 at 10:10 PM

You realize of course that most people out there are too stupid to be aware that Hillary supported this war”

RightWinged on September 14, 2007 at 5:09 PM

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked,
Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
– Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

MB4 on September 14, 2007 at 10:38 PM

He’s not my candidate of choice (would definitely vote for him over a democrat!) – but it’s a very good ad.

Shay on September 14, 2007 at 10:38 PM

When is Hillary going to be held accountable for this: Hillary Clinton’s views on going to war, Saddam, & WMD

Michael in MI on September 14, 2007 at 11:06 PM

It’s funny – when barking Moonbats engage in self-promotion and Bush bashing, it only provokes “Huzzahs” from the other barking moonbats and compliments all around.

Why in the name of GOD do idiots on the right have to PICK APART motives and “the way you’re doing it” when someone with GUTS and BRAINS FINALLY has the PRINCIPLES, CHARACTER and MORAL FIBER to call the seditious Mouthpieces for The Terrorists WHAT THEY ARE?

If YOU or anyone else thinks that there is some sort of “sin” in the way Rudy CORRECTLY RIPPED HILLARY and her Terrorist-Loving buddies MOVEON.ORG a new one, please listen carefully:

YOU ARE AN IDIOT!!!!

I don’t CARE if Rudy turned his Ad into a COMPLETE campaign-promoting, horn-tooting, self-aggrandizing oil bath (which he didn’t) – HE DID THE RIGHT THING, THANK GOD

FINALLY!

MY only question is: WHY HAVEN’T MORE PEOPLE WITH PRINCIPLES DONE IT, TOO?

We NEED people like Rudy to STAND UP to these BULLIES EVERY DAY – Day after Day after Day after DAY!!

PLEASE – Let’s mount a REAL Attack on these enemies of Freedom!

God Bless RUDY!! RUDY CAN’T FAIL!!!!

grtflmark on September 14, 2007 at 11:18 PM

Unquiet on September 14, 2007 at 9:59 PM

Good points all, Unquiet, but I have to distance myself from you a bit… I’m not supporting Rudy. I certainly will take him over any Democrat if that’s what it comes to… but I’m currently not a supporter.

My comments were simply about the ad. I think the ad was great, and am not clear on why Allah finds it “shameless”?

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 12:53 AM

Thompson/Hunter

AZCON on September 14, 2007 at 5:20 PM

That’ll lock in the dyslexic stoner vote.
(yeah…i went there.)

soundingboard on September 15, 2007 at 1:07 AM

Giuliani’s finished. Once Mitt and Fred really turn up the speakers on his social policies, he’ll sink like a stone.

Allahpundit on September 14, 2007 at 5:08 PM

Hmm…then Fred! turns up the speakers on the contrasts between Tennessee Republicanism against Massachusetts Republicanism?

soundingboard on September 15, 2007 at 1:21 AM

Nah. Probably the 2nd amendment. Biggest reason Rudy would have to be the nominee before I’d ever think of voting for him.

Kowboy on September 14, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Me too. Rudy pretty much cooked himself for me when he touted the Brady bill as the end-all be-all of crime reduction in an interview with Hannity following the last debate.

mojojojo on September 14, 2007 at 7:08 PM

Guilani has always been on the wrong side of the Second Amendment.

That will cost him votes in the general.

Don’t take my word for it.

Consult the Goracle.

soundingboard on September 15, 2007 at 1:25 AM

Wow, grtflmark, unbridled passion and a Clash reference. You’re allright with me!

MikeZero on September 15, 2007 at 1:37 AM

RUDY CAN’T FAIL!!!!

grtflmark on September 14, 2007 at 11:18 PM

You said Rudy can’t fail. hehe

- The Cat

MirCat on September 15, 2007 at 1:45 AM

Wow, grtflmark, unbridled passion and a Clash reference. You’re allright with me!

MikeZero on September 15, 2007 at 1:37 AM

Dang it, beat me.

MirCat on September 15, 2007 at 1:46 AM

Allahpundit is another in a long line of “right wing” pussies who have opted to store their testicles in Hillary’s lock box.

Giuliani is doing what he does best, attacking, relentlessly hammering at the weakness created by his opponent.

However, as per usual, AP pulls a John McCain/Olympia Snowe move and needs to show ability to be fair as opposed to relentless.

Can’t have a Republican taking initiative, that wouldn’t be prudent.

mylegsareswollen on September 15, 2007 at 4:22 AM

Smart ad. Keep up the pressure on M.O.L.D. (Move On Lap Dogs)

oakpack on September 15, 2007 at 7:25 AM

It’s about time someone took on this worthless piece of ____t! Excellent ad! At least ONE Republican out there still has a pair! Our President lost his years ago!

sabbott on September 15, 2007 at 8:17 AM

Great Ad (rebuttal)but Hitlery’s ego won’t let her apologize and she has always counted on the fact that those of her ilk think everyone is afflicted with their short attention spans.

Because of my ability to read and digest both sides it is easier to determine what is the right thing to do. Therefore, Move On needs to be Moved Out, because it dose not respect the country that let’s it exist.

Also, Hitlery’s continued association with such groups will not serve her well and even her health care program can not cure her.

MSGTAS on September 15, 2007 at 10:42 AM

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 12:53 AM

I quoted you at length because I really do agree with every word - in that statement.

I had no intent to imply you agreed with what I said afterword and I don’t think I did so but understand why you would want to clarify in this medium.

I went a little further than what I I started out trying to say. But, when I got to the end, it just seemed logical; if I placed such a high weight on proven leadership and a strong backbone and I had all those ? Checks for Rudy; I was putting him at the top of the list and checking to see if others could knock him off. So I said it.

As I said, Rudy has a few positions which trouble me but we don’t get to assemble candidates like robots from our favorite parts, we have to choose a real live package. Currently the Rudy Package is, for me, the front runner.

Of course, there are many out there who will try to take a candidate with no actual endoskeleton and mold them into the perfect exterior representation of the electable candidate. But that is another subject.

On Topic: I liked the ad.

Unquiet on September 15, 2007 at 11:24 AM

mylegsareswollen on September 15, 2007 at 4:22 AM

A-freakin-men!

JWS on September 15, 2007 at 12:53 PM