Posted on 09/01/2004 9:30:22 AM PDT by fight_truth_decay
The heated argument consumed nearly eight minutes, so space permits only some limited excerpts as provided by the MRC's Jessica Anderson who caught the August 31 exchange:
Joy Behar: "Did you really say that, 'Thank God he was our President'? That's the first thing you said? You didn't say 'Oh, expletive,' or something?"
Rudy Giuliani: "No, no, that wasn't the first thing I said. That's one of the things that I said on September 11th to my police commissioner. It really came out because that was just a few months after that disputed election, and so I had called the White House to ask for support, and I felt very, very comfortable that he was in the White House because I know him, and because I knew he would be tough about it."
Behar: "I know, but so would Al Gore. Don't you think he would have been as tough on it? Of course he would. Any President would respond."
Elisabeth Hasselbeck: "I don't think so." [Audience applause]
Giuliani: "No."
Behar: "You don't?"
Giuliani: "No, I don't think there's any chance at all that Al Gore would have been as determined. I think Al Gore would have backed off now about four times with the kind of criticism that George Bush– [trails off]" [Audience applause and boos] . Giuliani: "Taking out Saddam Hussein was critical to defeating global terrorism."
Vieira: "But one is terrorism and one is the particular war in Iraq, and that's what I think people are upset about, because we went to war believing there were weapons of mass destruction. I was at the demonstration there on Sunday, that's what people were talking about. There were mothers of soldiers there. People weren't arguing against terrorism, it was the war in Iraq in particular."
Giuliani: "There's a tremendous amount of emotion always against war, always. In 1863, New York had tremendous riots against the Civil War and against Abraham Lincoln because they didn't want to be in the Civil War anymore. A President has to be able to withstand that. He has to be able to stand up to that." . Hasselbeck: "It's a long process."
Giuliani: "The idea that taking out Saddam Hussein wasn't part of the War On Terrorism really misunderstands the War On Terrorism."
Behar: "No, but people say it was a distraction from going after bin Laden."
Giuliani: "No it wasn't! Saddam Hussein was one of the principal supporters of international terrorism. He was sitting on top of $4 billion or $5 billion, he had used weapons of mass destruction, and Abu Nidal, who killed Leon Klinghoffer and maybe about 25 other Americans and a hundred other people, was operating out of Iraq."
Behar: "So were the Saudis!" .
Giuliani: "But the reality of that, that followed a quote of John Kerry's about an $87 billion supplemental budget that was to support our troops. And John Kerry voted against it, and then he explained it by saying, 'Before I voted against it, I actually voted for it.'"
Hasselbeck: "Right."
Giuliani: "And it seems to me you can't have it both ways and that's what he's been trying to do."
Behar, not joking: "He change his mind based on nuance."
Giuliani: "Everybody changes their mind. He makes it a rule to change his mind."
Vieira: "But being consistent isn't necessarily right if you're wrong in the consistency. You can be consistent, but if you're-" [Audience applause]
Behar: "You could change your mind. You change your mind."
Giuliani: "Sure I do, occasionally, but I don't change my core principles." [Audience applause]
Jones: "Come on, Mr. Mayor. You stand at that podium and support that President when you disagree with almost everything the Party socially says. You don't change your core issues? That's not fair, Mr. Mayor." [Audience applause]
Giuliani: "No, those aren't, my core issues are the national defense of this country, national security, and the economy. To me those are the two things on which I assess candidates that have the biggest impact on us."
Jones: "What about patriotism, Mr. Mayor? Because you know, you quoted something the President said that scared me. You said, you quoted him as saying 'either you're with us or you're with the terrorists,' and the President did make that statement. Don't question people's patriotism because they don't believe in the war."
Giuliani: "I do not."
Jones: "We love America! So why would the President make that statement? That scared me."
Giuliani: "It shouldn't because the president made that statement on September 20th."
Jones: "I don't care if he made it yesterday."
Giuliani: "He made it on September 20th of 2001, just a few days after the horrible attack on this city and Washington, DC."
Jones: "But you quoted it last night, Mr. Mayor!"
Giuliani: "I quoted it and gave you the date, because this country was united then."
Jones: "Do you believe that?"
Giuliani: "This country was united in the effort to go after terrorists and prevent what happened from happening again."
Jones: "Do you believe that today? 'Either you're with the terrorists or you're with us' -- that's not American!"
Giuliani: "Of course it's American."
Jones: "No, it's not! With 'us' -- who is 'us'?"
Giuliani: "You're either with the Nazis or you're with us. You're either with the Communists or you're with us." [Audience members boo]
Jones: "No, that's still not fair, Mr. Mayor. I'm surprised at you."
Giuliani: "Well, I'm surprised at you."
Jones: "I'm surprised you would say that."
Giuliani: "The terrorists killed almost 3,000 of our people. So what side are you on? Are you on their side or are you on our side?"
Jones: "I am on the side of men and women fighting in Iraq right now, and I want us to support those people."
Giuliani: "You can't be on their side and be on the side of the terrorists."
Jones: "No, being against the war is not on the side of the terrorists, okay?"
Giuliani: "Nobody is saying you can't be against the war. Nobody is saying that."
Vieira: "The implication is that if you disagree, I think, with the administration that somehow you are on the side of the terrorists."
Giuliani: "That isn't who George Bush said that to, that isn't what it means. That's a way of misunderstanding what he's saying, which is what people do to him all the time."
Jones: "Well, please clarify it for us."
Giuliani: "No, I'm not going to clarify. You're either with the terrorists or you're with us."
Jones: "Why not?"
Giuliani: "Because there is no distinction."
Audience member yells out: "Who's 'us'?"
Giuliani: "'Us' is the United States of America. The terrorists are the people who kill innocent people, the people who killed people in Madrid."
Behar: "We agree with that."
Jones: "We agree with that."
Giuliani: "Good, now we agree. Then why try to misunderstand it?"
Vieira: "Can you be on the side of 'us' and also believe that the war in Iraq is flawed and wrong?"
Giuliani: "Yes."
Vieira: "Fine, fine, fine. So you're running for President in 2008, correct?"
+ Check the posted version of this item later this morning for a RealPlayer clip of the contentious session.
Giuliani: "The idea that taking out Saddam Hussein wasn't part of the War On Terrorism really misunderstands the War On Terrorism."Behar: "No, but people say it was a distraction from going after bin Laden."
Giuliani: "No it wasn't! Saddam Hussein was one of the principal supporters of international terrorism. He was sitting on top of $4 billion or $5 billion, he had used weapons of mass destruction, and Abu Nidal, who killed Leon Klinghoffer and maybe about 25 other Americans and a hundred other people, was operating out of Iraq."
Behar: "So were the Saudis!" .
The proper response to this DNC/Michael Moore talking point is always "So then you support going to war against Saudi Arabia?"
no, I'm not, Ive been here since november of 2000 when rush mentioned free republic during the election dispute.
For the good of the board don't get territorial about 'your' threads. If there's an existing one, help the site by contributing to that one and not clogging up board with minor variations on the same article.
Every morning I go through all the threads since I last read the board and usually see many articles that are posted 2 or 3 times because people don't bother to check for duplicates before posting. Then we have 2, 3, or 4 threads each with it's own comments that is just wasting bandwidth and making it more expensive to operate the site. And the clutter wastes the time of people reading the site. It's inefficient.
I'm anxiously anticipating the roll call of celebrities who'll be calling for the carpet bombing of Riyadh.
It seems like they want to intentially misunderstand this statement. I think of it this way. Imagine two football teams in a game, the Cowboys and the Steelers. One of the players for the Cowboys criticizes the coach for bad play-calling. This does not mean he's 'with the Steelers'. However, if he begins rooting for the Steelers to win, then he IS. In fact, this is what some on the Left seem to do. They actually want the terrorists to win.
"Does anyone believe for one moment that Joy-less Behar was thinking.....oh I wish Al Gore was the president on that awful day?"
***
I sure do. Which is what gives me such worry about our future.
Here in L.A. we had some sort of local election with a couple of ballot measures shortly after 9/11 and I recall some old woman saying right there in the polling place how horrified she was that Clinton was no longer president and what are we going to do now?
Behar: "I know, but so would Al Gore. Don't you think he would have been as tough on it? Of course he would. Any President would respond."Sure Gore would have attacked Afghanistan and removed the Taliban from power and scooped up Al Qaeda members-- just like Bill did when Al Qaeda attacked us all those times. Oh, wait.Elisabeth Hasselbeck: "I don't think so." [Audience applause]
Giuliani: "No."
Behar: "You don't?"
Giuliani: "No, I don't think there's any chance at all that Al Gore would have been as determined. I think Al Gore would have backed off now about four times with the kind of criticism that George Bush– [trails off]" [Audience applause and boos] . Giuliani: "Taking out Saddam Hussein was critical to defeating global terrorism."
Again, we all will be alerted to our wasting the time of readers as well as the bandwidth thru our faux pas in posting.
Thanks again and...
You have a good day,
fight_truth_decay ;)
Brooklyn native.
Though overall it sure looks like Rudy put his foot in a few butts pretty hard, straight and true -- There is one thing I wish he would have said to further clarify the point about with-us-or-against-us:
Yes, you can have misgivings about the invasion of Iraq without being unpatriotic. It's the REASONS GIVEN for said misgivings/objections/dissent that determines whether you are patriotic or not.
For example: if you're a military wife with 5 mouths to feed and no family or support system to help you if your husband is KIA, I can understand being against invading Iraq.
But if you take the Michael Moore/Noam Chomsky/Jim McDermott/Hollywood line that the invasion of Iraq is more evidence that America is an inherently evil, corrupt, genocidal institution, then I don't know how much more UN-patriotic can get than that. Sheesh -- with "patriots" like that, who needs traitors?
The View, or as Hubby calls it "The Screaming Witches"
He pronounces "Witches" with a "B" though.
George W. Bush will be reelected by a margin of at least ten per cent
LOL! Repeat, as needed.
Winner!
Watching The View.
Edvard Munch's "The Scream":
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Some uninformed viewers think the host's "views" are the actual facts on a subject. They use Barbara Walters's background and those of some of the hosts', as well, to present an image of a news team...with "giggles".
Some uninformed viewers think the host's "views" are the actual facts on a subject. They use Barbara Walters's background and those of some of the hosts', as well, to present an image of a news team...with 'giggles'."
***
True, and I used to be one of them 20 years ago. Any time a 60 Minutes or 20/20 "expose" came on the tube, their credibility with me was very high and I sat there wide-eyed because, hey -- these are 'serious news people' so this must really be a serious situation!
But after years of soaking up rather gratuitous (to say the least) hip Anti-American cynicism from people I knew and having it largely supported by these serious news people, I was at the tipping point. It had been grating against my North Carolina conservative value system (not to mention common sense) on a subconscious level and this frustration was finally bubbling to the surface.
Then I caught Rush one day on the radio -- and like most converts, I didn't like him at first.
But his slogan he used to say a lot in those days was to listen for 6 weeks and you would start to "get" the show definite applied. The braggadocio and bombastic-ness, I figured out at long last, was just a way to tweak lib noses, and when I understood it that way, it was hilarious.
I made it official in '92 when I registered Republican. I was never exactly a Joy Behar but I was a bit soccer-mommish (embarrassing for a guy).
They can revise their stories but they can't revise the truth.
I was there!
Hmmm. Perhaps he can have that lisp checked. ;)
Here, honey, let me help you bash those dishes. Say, can you bake me up at 6:00 tomorrow morning? I bonder what's on TV now?
Shalom.
"From my recollections, the dems were whispering among themselves that they were thankful it wasn't Gore.
They can revise their stories but they can't revise the truth.
I was there!"
***
I believe you. Gore was never nearly as solidly backed and loved by the Democrats as Clinton, but they had no choice since he was the sitting Veep and not nominating him would be admitting they made a mistake. But he was Clintonian vacillation and indecision without Clinton's charm and charisma (as is Kerry).
I'm not saying that none of the Democrats secretly prefer Bush against Al Qaeda & Co., only that I believe someone like Behar could be that way and that she is far from alone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.