The main point is that it's just really tacky to take the line "awww, he could've done the treatment and campaigned too." I'm trying to understand what goes on in a person's head, why political obsessions twist someone's thinking so much, that they get to a place where their first instinct is to second-guess someone dealing with a cancer diagnosis and treatment regimen. Here is what Giuliani seems to have said at the time regarding his decision:
I've decided that what I should do is to put my health first and that I should devote the focus and attention that I should to be able to figure out the best treatment," he said.
Sounds 100%, eminently, and utterly plausible, reasonable, and intelligent to me. What earthly reason would one have to doubt Giuliani on this? And why does it matter in the first place?
Bizarre.
These people are Democratic plants. The idea that cancer is not a life-changing event is silly. For starters, you don’t know what the treatment will be, whether you will get it with the first kind of treatment, the effects of the treatment, and many other things. Don’t waste your time arguing with them about this!!
Read what I first wrote again (”the doctors said they thought campaigning was perfectly within his physical capabilities and, if he started treatment right way, he would have recovered and been “full speed” by the time the campaign normally kicked in.”)
In other words, he had no physical limitations that would not allow him to campaign (or do anything else, for that matter). And, remember—I only entered this conversation to correct someone that erroneously posted that “Rudy didnt run against Hillary because he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and had started chemotherapy treatments.”
I guess you would have preferred that myth be perpetuated—sorry to ruin your day.