Posted on 03/23/2007 6:41:15 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Okay then. To all Rudy supporters, I will grant this: The Nation is a liberal equivalent of the Weekly Standard. However, some of the information within has been supported by other websites.
I want to know if any of the information in this article is DEMONSTRABLY false. If so, we need to know before the primaries.
Okay.
This is a pretty in-depth article, but I want to know if any of the information within is false. After all, it's from the Nation.
Fact-finding time!
Oh, FYI, Rudy ping.
Or, depending on how things turn out, "Stop Rudy" ping.
I stopped right there.
In eight years, Giuliani's most famous comment about public education was that the school system should be "blown up."
Okay, I'll admit that Rudy isn't all bad.
If its in the Nation, it can generally be ignored. The Nation is so far to the left (stalinist), that they think Rudy is a Rush Limbaugh conservative.
Wrong. The New Republic is the a liberal equivalent of the Weekly Standard.
The Nation is far, far more to the left, than the Weekly Standard is to the right. In fact there is no right-wing equivalent that I can think of.
If you want to get in bed with the The Nation, that's fine. But material from The Nation belongs at DU IMO.
Why do you need to know? You aren't voting for Rudy in the primary. You think this is going to make his supporters here in Free Republic abandon him? If so, what are you smoking and where can I get some. :)
BTW, the Nation would not be the lefts Weekly Standard. More like the lefts New American, the bircher rag.
I haven't actually heard of the Nation before. I just looked at its front-page and saw liberal ads and thought "Hmm."
Eh, I suppose I'll be branded a liberal/CINO/whatever now.
Darn it.
In May 2000 Giuliani looked like a control freak who had lost control of himself.
Most control freaks are lacking in self control. They try to control others because they blame others for their own lack of character.
I was searching for information to try and confirm Spiff's words that Rudy had a deficit at the end of his mayoral term, and I came across this article.
I'm not quite that familiar with the Nation, only that it was left-leaning.
Didn't know it was the intellectual equivalent of "The Militant".
If its in the Nation, it can generally be ignored. The Nation is so far to the left (stalinist), that they think Rudy is a Rush Limbaugh conservative.
FR must have some Nation writers posting.
And yet a huge contingency of FReepers will spend the weekend telling us why they're right "on this article."
I have no real problems with people not supporting Rudy, or even not wanting him to win. But I find it amusing that the far left and the far right are singing from the same hymnal.
We ain't singing from the same hymnal. I just said that if its in the Nation, dismiss it. The Nation dislikes Rudy for the good qualities he has, as far as I'm concerned.
Because, really, there is not that much difference between the far far right and the far far left.
I don't think Corin mentioned you by name. So, you have no reason to take offense at his post.
But many here are. If that strikes a nerve, so be it.
Why do you think I was offended by his post? I jusrt wanted to make sure he knew that one of the biggest Rudy foes here (me) wouldn't trust the Nation to know what year it is.
I don't get offended. that's lib speak.
Some are stretching it, to be sure. But I think you will find that most here that criticize Rudy are doing it for his lib leaning positions, not that he grabbed NY by the balls and cleaned it up.
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.