Posted on 04/25/2007 3:41:28 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
This is the start of a series of threads that will be used to expose the truth about Rudy Giuliani in his own words and deeds.
Please post all of the quotes, speeches, interview transcripts, video clips, photos, newspaper/magazine articles, reports, records, statistics, NYC budgets, NYC spending, political appointments, gun grabs, connections to the gun control lobby, lawsuits against gun manufacturers, the truth about crime reduction in NYC, private property grabs, asset forfeitures, abuses of office, individual rights trampling, constitution trampling, violations of public trust, violations of the rule of law, national security risks, failures in security preparedness prior to and after 911, corruption, graft, bribes, favors, union dealings, mob dealings, business dealings leveraged through government contracts and contacts, rainmaking for his business partners, connections to US, Middle East or South American oil and energy companies and law firms that have profited and or will profit from Giuliani's government offices especially if he becomes president, war profiteering, his personal and business finances, his train wreck of a private life and lack of character, lack of qualifications for high office, illegal alien sanctuaries, welfare for illegals, pandering to illegals/illegal alien lobby, support for the abortion and gay rights lobbies, NARAL connections and participation, past and current support for McCain-Feingold, connections and dealings with liberal officeholders or the liberal/socialist caucuses/lobbies, etc, etc, etc, that you can find.
We're primarily interested in the words from his own mouth or primary source records and reports of his deeds/misdeeds. All submissions must contain true facts with documentation and links to source documentation and a link to FR thread on the individual item if available.
We do not need to embellish the record. The ugly truth from his own liberal mouth will impeach his credibility and the reader will be able to disqualify the man from consideration for high office based solely on his own words and deeds.
Here's an example entry:
FOX News | Feb 6, 2007 | Hanity and Colmes
http://www.freerepublic.com/^http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250497,00.html
HANNITY: Let me move on. And the issue of guns has come up a lot. When people talk about Mayor Giuliani, New York City had some of the toughest gun laws in the entire country. Do you support the right of people to carry handguns?
GIULIANI: I understand the Second Amendment. I support it. People have the right to bear arms. When I was mayor of New York, I took over at a very, very difficult time. We were averaging about 2,000 murders a year, 10,000...
HANNITY: You inherited those laws, the gun laws in New York?
GIULIANI: Yes, and I used them. I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide, I think, by 65-70 percent. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City.
So if you're talking about a city like New York, a densely populated area like New York, I think it's appropriate. You might have different laws other places, and maybe a lot of this gets resolved based on different states, different communities making decisions. After all, we do have a federal system of government in which you have the ability to accomplish that.
HANNITY: So you would support the state's rights to choose on specific gun laws?
GIULIANI: Yes, I mean, a place like New York that is densely populated, or maybe a place that is experiencing a serious crime problem, like a few cities are now, kind of coming back, thank goodness not New York, but some other cities, maybe you have one solution there and in another place, more rural, more suburban, other issues, you have a different set of rules.
HANNITY: But generally speaking, do you think it's acceptable if citizens have the right to carry a handgun?
GIULIANI: It's not only -- I mean, it's part of the Constitution. People have the right to bear arms. Then the restrictions of it have to be reasonable and sensible. You can't just remove that right. You've got to regulate, consistent with the Second Amendment.
HANNITY: How do you feel about the Brady bill and assault ban?
GIULIANI: I was in favor of that as part of the crime bill. I was in favor of it because I thought that it was necessary both to get the crime bill passed and also necessary with the 2,000 murders or so that we were looking at, 1,800, 1,900, to 2,000 murders, that I could use that in a tactical way to reduce crime. And I did.
Free Republic thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1780940/posts
I appreciate your effort to flatter Jim while encouraging him not to think. Good for you.
But you know very little about statistics, or city crime.
Breaking windows is not a prank, it is, actually, a misdemeanor and sometimes a crime. What Giuliani did was not go after the ‘pranksters’ but made building owners keep their windows patched. You ever heard of the Broken Windows approach to crime? Do some reading. It’ll be good for your brain.
Furthermore, it’s just plain asinine to say that by boosting statistics for minor crimes, he could make murder look lower in comparison. He didn’t need to make murder rates look lower comparatively. Murder went down in real terms, in real numbers. Big numbers.
Now, if you want to argue about who is responsible for that, go ahead. But it wasn’t Dinkins, and it wasn’t some crime fighter in Nebraska. If you want to deny Giuliani any credit for cleaning up NYC, be my guest. No serious thinking person would agree with you.
I agree.
Btw, I'm a U of C alum, too, Jake. :)
Let's think about this question...abortion? Conservative. I don't think Jesus would want to be around the current Democrats, other than try to offer salvation.
The nearly 50% who would vote for a 3rd party candidate is very interesting. Do you believe this will ultimately be the case?
“Read and understand and abide by the second amendment. End of discussion.”
(chuckle)
Indeed.
Here are some excerpts that address some of the crime fighting tactics:
In 1994 Giuliani and then-police commissioner William Bratton ordered their “elite” Street Crimes Unit to confiscate illegal weapons from pedestrians through a program of stop and search. Charges flew of civil-rights violations and increased police shootings. More than 33,000 people were stopped on New York City’s streets in 1997 and 1998, according to police data. The actual number stopped will never be known because many citizens were stopped and frisked and found not to be carrying unlicensed weapons. Most were sent on their way, and no paperwork or record of the intrusion was filed.
[Philadelphia Inquirer/Knight Ridder, Mar 22, 2007]
Giuliani’s cops, and primarily [the Street Crimes] unit, have adopted aggressive crime-fighting methods. They’ve made stop-and-frisk procedures the centerpiece of their tactics. In the last two years, this unit has stopped and frisked 40,000 New Yorkers. They’ve found grounds to arrest fewer than one in four of them. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires cops to stop and frisk only when they have a “reasonable suspicion” - - one they can clearly articulate — that a crime has taken place or is about to take place. That legal nicety seems largely ignored in New York City. Last year, roughly half the felony gun cases brought to court in Manhattan were deemed unconstitutional.
[Times Union, Apr 2, 1999]
The last time we checked, the Fourth Amendment protection `against unreasonable searches and seizures` was still the law of the land. But just get caught driving while intoxicated in New York City, neighboring Nassau County, or what seems likely to become a growing number of jurisdictions across America, and see where the rule of law gets you. In the brave new world of Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s Big Apple, it will cost you your vehicle on the spot; no trial and conviction required. Along with the Fourth Amendment, you can forget about the Fifth (`No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law`), Sixth (`the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial`) and the Eighth amendments (`excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment`).
[The Sunday Patriot, Mar 7, 1999]
Peering from skyscrapers with lenses that can count the buttons on a blouse three miles away, [cameras] watch every move you make. Even Rudy likes to watch. After testing reaction to the monitoring of parks, public pools, and subway platforms, the city is quietly expanding a pilot program on buses. Cameras indistinguishable from lampposts have advanced from the perimeter of Washington Square into the heart of the park. They’re already hidden at some bus stops and intersections to snag speeders and parking perps. More are on the way. The Housing Authority is rushing to put bulletproof cameras in corridors throughout city projects. ... With little public awareness and no debate, the scaffolding of mass surveillance is taking shape. “It’s all about balancing a sense of security against an invasion of privacy,” Rudolph Giuliani insists.
[Village Voice Oct 6, 1998]
Thanks to you both.
And what would Jesus actually do about abortion?
How comfortable would you be with a law that stated every pregnant mother was to be cared for until her child was born, at tax payers’ expense?
Wouldn’t fly with conservatives at all.
You see, conservatives rightly condemn abortion, and rightly want to outlaw it. But I see very few that open their homes to unwed mothers and care for them and their children. Oh, there are plenty who would condemn them. But few who would put their money where their mouth is.
You call into a trap when you try to pick an issue and take a simplistic, non-real-world stand on it. Jesus came for this world, to redeem it. His ways are neither conservative nor liberal. He will not fall into that trap.
Further, the very idea that the solution to our problems can be fixed with more or less government, or one party over another, is pure heresy. Jesus and his Gospel are the only things that can save this world. Nothing else can, and placing our trust and hopes in the “right” kind of government (as many conservatives and liberals do) is idolatrous.
Not piling on here - but you have to realize that one of the reasons criminals feel free to attack people is that they don’t expect the average person to be carrying. If you remove the restrictions from law abiding citizens, at the very least, it would cause a mugger to stop and think about it. They could be taking their lives in their hands by attacking someone if that someone is armed. I’m with Jim on this one. If you’re a law abiding citizen, you should have a right to carry. Period.
So are you saying you favor abortion?
Incidentally, there are many organizations that care for pregnant unwed mothers without taxpayer assistance. Those are usually girls who have been counseled first, and they know they don’t want to kill the innocent child. They see the ultrasound and hear the heartbeat, and they choose life.
I will dare to say Jesus would oppose killing the babies.
You sound very bitter toward pro-life people and conservative churches.
Go back and read our entire conversation carefully, especially my questions and criticisms.
“Third party,” “Write-in,” “Stay home” and “Leave blank” will definitely give us eight more years of the Clintons and a Democrat Congress.
And, one or two more Ruth Bader-Ginsbergs on the Supreme Court.
Electing a lib like Rudy would give the same results. That is why defeating Rudy in the primaries is essential.
Proves once again this RINO wants to rule-——not govern.
Even though I don't quite understand what you are talking about here, I will say this. God also gave us laws to live by, you know morals, something that the liberals in charge of big cities totally disregard. You cannot equate the need to prohibit the 2nd amendment with population density. The problem is the value system that permiates big cities, which are often run by liberals, not he 2nd amemdment.
What a dumb question. Of course I don’t favor abortion. But again, your question demonstrates the simple-mindedness of polarized political thinking. Either you agree with us with 100% political purity and think in lock step with us, or you must favor abortion.
It is an established historical fact that the early church preached against not only abortion, but also infanticide, both of which were common practice in Roman times. I’m with them.
I’ll tell you who is bitter: God is bitter against those that preach and preach but don’t sacrifice themselves for the poor. He’s bitter against any religiosity that disdains the poor. (Remember, Jesus abolished all religion, conservative and liberal.)
Open your own home to an unwed mother. Your lifestyle will change drastically (by necessity), but your joy will increase.
As a matter of fact, I have supported unwed mothers. Go find someone else to argue your nonsense with. I wonder if you actually practice what you preach?
Yep. I just read a 1995 Newsday article about NY crime statistics. According to info they send to the FBI, “the rate of serious crime in Tallahassee is nearly 80 percent higher” than in New York City. You made a good point in your post about manipulating statistics. It’s an art, not a science. LOL.
I collected those last week and posted them to ellery. Ellery has put together a pretty good collection of constitutional abuses, by the numbers.
Yup---Rino Rooty's nutty strategy. Rooty's a bigtime troublemaker----like waving a red cape in front of a rampaging bull. This RINO is the lapdog of the Endless War Hopefuls. He echos whatever will appease his handlers and campaign donors.
Perhaps you can explain how there can be half an abortion as a means to compromise here.
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.