Giuliani attacks Clinton on Petraeus: The Swamp
 
The Swamp
-
Posted September 12, 2007 2:35 PM
The Swamp

Petraeus%20Clinton.JPG
(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

by Tom Brune

GOP presidential contender Rudy Giuliani did not take kindly to New York Sen. Hillary Clinton’s tough, disbelieving questioning of Army Gen. David Petraeus when he appeared on the Hill Tuesday to discuss his Iraq progress report.

Giuliani%20at%20sept%2011%20memorial.JPG

In a broad attack on Democrats for failing to condemn the liberal group MoveOn.org’s attack ad on Petraeus — equating his name to betrayal for “cooking the books” on Iraq — Giuliani singled out Clinton, the Democratic presidential frontrunner, as he declared himself an admirer of the general.

Giuliani said Democrats “sort of play into” the ad — which he called “disgusting” — by a liberal group that spends millions on their behalf.

But Giuliani took his shot in classic Giuliani fashion on The Randy and Spiff Show, a conservative talk show in Atlanta.

“Hillary Clinton said yesterday, I think, said to General Petraeus, ‘I think the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief.’” Giuliani said. “I don’t know what she’s trying to say when she’s accusing a general of the ‘willing suspension of disbelief.''

(Giuliani at 9/11 commemoration. AP Photo/Mike Segar, Pool)

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo

Comments

Well, Rudy, she is trying to say she doesn't think the General's completely independent and is telling the whole truth.

FYI - Generals are not completely independent. They follow the chain of command, just like all soldiers.

Oopps - sorry, I forgot how much I loath hillary. Go ahead and attack her Rudy, not that it will do you any good.


"Giuliani attacks Clinton on Petraeus"

I love it when "women" have catfights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_90nRRoXK8


Hilary Clinton is pandering to her democratic constituency.

The fact remains that the US has a vested interest in the mideast. It is in our long term interests to assist emerging democracies there and elsewhere. It is in our long term interests to work at Iraq and the greater middle east as long as it takes. (I remind the readers that there are still US troops in Germany, Japan and Korea after 50 years) Abandoning the efforts, will cost the US far more in the long run, whether yo u measure the cost in terrorist possibilities, oil, civil wars, genocide, prestige, what ever...

Whatever our mistakes may or may not have been, we are still the only country in the world that solely and actively supports, liberty, democracy, free markets and civil rights. It's not easy, it's not simple, it's messy. Better a messy struggle for our beliefs, than genocides or the allure of stability with dictatorships.

Let's not forget that.


If Gereral Petraeus is not "cooking the Books" why in Gods name are we not really making progress. Next September we will have 130,000 troops in Iraq. That is the same as last September. Between the two Septembers we will have lost another nine hundred to one thousand soldiers and have six or seven thousand more wounded. General Petraeus calls this success. How many more successful years can we stand?


Randy and Spiff????? Are you kidding me?????? NO ONE in Atlanta listens to those two. And it is not a conservative talk show - they are actually music deejays here.

These two guys are from Rockford, and actually were awarded a Steve and Garry Stupid DJ stunt award a few years ago.

The day I pay attention to what a politician says on the Randy and Spiff show is the day I vote Republican!!!!

Like I said Rudy - the day that Republicans apologize for Swift Boat, the ads in Tennessee against Harold Ford, the attacks on the patriotism against Max Cleland here in 2002 and every other GOP ad like that is the day the Democrats apologize for MoveOn.org's ad.


Rudy needs to be a man. Hillary leaves nothing to the imagination. She has the best knowledge of Iraq and how to get out because of it.


Guiliani plays the same tired old record of the Cheneybush Regime:

9/11! 9/11! 9/11! Be afraid. Give up all your civil liberties! Bankrupt America!

9/11! 9/11! 9/11!

Move On has it right. Let's put these chessy fear mongers behind us.


Ahh, the biggest numbnuts in the world are spewing their spittle here. Speaking of women, John E., is it John E.'s turn right now to post in the Swamp, while the other side of you, Janet, posts tomorrow? Inquiring minds want to know?


Rudolph Giuliani is THE natural heir to the Bush/Rove/Cheny legacy and I certainly don't mean that in any good way. He is the only candidate who could actually turn out to be a worse President than our current Commander-in-Chief.

It is rather clear that all Giuliani has to fear is the lack of fear itself, 'cause that's all he's got going for him. Elect Giuliani and expect a further expanding partisan divide and more and more war and profiteering, coupled with endless "terror alerts."

Giuliani is the worst of the worst in terms of character, and is also the least QUALIFIED candidate. 2 term mayor? Puhleaze!

He left NY with a bigger deficit than he inherited even at the end of the Go-Go Nineties. And though he does deserve some credit for turning NYC around, he also was mayor during a time of essentially endless peace and prosperity, where the whole country experienced strong drops in crime, increased feelings of well-being, and unprecedented economic growth.

Oh, and the only reason he got the glorious optics of being on the ground at 9/11 was because he put his command center in the WTC against the advice of security professionals. That decision very likely hampered the response and may have been responsible for more death than had Giuliani chosen the less sexy location in Brooklyn that experts favored.


Since the wingnuts feel any criticism of Petraeus by us "ordinary citizens" is traitorous and a victory for terrorists (what ever the heck THAT means) I'll leave it to Petraeus' BOSS to tell the world what HE thinks of the General....

During the Iraq war, the Central Command (CENTCOM) head — who leads U.S. operations in the entire Middle East region — and the Multinational Force Commander (MNF) have regularly testified together about the course of the war in Iraq.

Former-MNF Commander Gen. George Casey and his CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid constantly briefed Congress about the situation in Iraq and its regional effects. In at least four public hearings after Casey took office in 2004, the pair testified together:

Senate Armed Services [6/23/05]

House Armed Services [6/23/05]

House Armed Services [9/29/05]

Senate Armed Services [9/29/05]

In January, President Bush replaced Abizaid and Casey, who were “surge” skeptics, with Adm. William Fallon and Gen. David Petraeus. This week, Petraeus — in the first public hearings since taking on his new role — delivered his Iraq assessment to great media fanfare. But where was his boss, Admiral Fallon? Inter-Press Service suggests animosity between the two might be one reason for Fallon’s absence:

Fallon told Petraeus [in March] that he considered him to be “an ass-kissing little chickensh*t” and added, “I hate people like that”, the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior.


Better a messy struggle for our beliefs, than genocides or the allure of stability with dictatorships.

So how do you explain the Regan and Bush1 administrations giving arms to Hussein and Iran?


Snitramc, you really are another ignorant buffoon, aren't you? I'll try and keep this simple for you: In 1979, Iran kidnapped scores of American hostages and invaded U.S. territory, being the U.S. embassy. In 1980, Iraq and Iran went to war. The U.S. was overjoyed. Unfortunately I am old enough to remember. I also remember we wanted Iraq to kick Iran's butt cause the American people knew this country was impotent under the worst president in this nation's history, Peanutbrain Carter. Iran was exporting terrorism in the Middle East by the early 1980s. Iraq was not at that time. In the early 1980s, Iran was the problem, not Iraq. Not much different than the U.S. allying itself with Russia in WWII. Iraw at that time was seen as a counter to Iran. Sometimes you have to pick allies you may not want to or even like.


Hillary Clinton believes Norm Hsu, but distrusts General Petraeus.

She is such a moron.


Posted by: John D | September 12, 2007 9:29 PM

Johnny, what exactly are you responding to here? Or have you just been waiting to spit that stupid rant out all day regardless of context?


Distrust and Verify, please read Snitramic's idiocy at 7:53.

One final thing, looking at the picture of the Queen B., does this nation really want such a disgusting scoundrel hag representing this country as president? The Wicked Witch of the West has a more pleasing face.


John D, bet you had to stay up all night to come up with this rant. Are you and Brucie twin brothers, sisters or something?

Not sure who or what you are but someone should throw your arses into Iraq and see if you have the same set of ball's you try to put across on an internet forum.


Giuliani is a fraud, a hypocrite, and a coward. He talks tough about war and terror but has zero credibility or experience. He believes he's rightly entitled to be next President because he was mayor of NYC on Sept. 11th and ventured down to ground zero. He even has the audacity to say he spent more time at ground zero than most rescue workers. This man is a liar. Tell us about your adultery/ extra maritial affairs you unpatriotic bum.


Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "p" in the field below: