I would think this is kind of a big deal...

Pat endorses all kinds of small-minded, hateful things, including Rudy.

Does this mean the fundie legal limit on divorces gets upped to three?

"divorces" should read "marriages"

Don't want to offend the accuracy police.

**** Robertson To Endorse Giuliani ****

........the kiss of death.........

........the kiss of death.........

Posted by skizziks


Just like it was for W

Good new for Rudy. I can't say that I am shocked by this at all; there was no way Robertson was going to back Romney.

I can't say that I am shocked by this at all; there was no way Robertson was going to back Romney.

Posted by taxman


I was expecting he would endorse Thompson... or McCain or anyone other then the guy who is Pro-Choice and open to gay marriage.

I think this could go along way to securing the nomination for Rudy.

Well now you have once again all the neocons and all the rapture-ready crew latching on to one common parasite-- Rudy Guiliani. Rudy should be so proud.

I'm sure Robertson's and Norm Podhoretz' poison will keep Rudy going like an energizer bunny through Iran and the rest of the middle east right up to the pearly gates...

Zionists must be going bonkers! This is their dream match-up!

Well now you have once again all the neocons and all the rapture-ready crew latching on to one common parasite-- Rudy Guiliani. Rudy should be so proud.

I'm sure Robertson's and Norm Podhoretz' poison will keep Rudy going like an energizer bunny through Iran and the rest of the middle east right up to the pearly gates...

Zionists must be going bonkers! This is their dream match-up!

Posted by k_g_beekeeper


With all these buzzwords and catchphrases, I have to assume you're some type of mid level micro managing asshole...

How many times have you used the words facilitate and synergy today?

Pat and Dobson may have to go mano a mano on this. Fortunately for Pat, he can leg press a Mack truck, so he should prevail.
Nice two guys who have trouble telling the truth about anything are getting along. Their fishing stories must be incredible.

I can't say that I am shocked by this at all; there was no way Robertson was going to back Romney.

Posted by taxman

I was expecting he would endorse Thompson.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

I'm shocked, and I would thought the same thing Rob.

"facilitate and synergy"

Don't forget network, partner, and paradigm shift.

I'm shocked, and I would thought the same thing Rob.

Posted by wisgod

Robertson endorsing a pro-choice candidate, is really quite astonishing to me. Like the article says I think this has a lot of repurcussions, like stalling Romney's momentum with the right, it might prevent the far right from going third party or staying home, and if it gives Rudy more votes securing him the nomination it almost certainly keeps Bloomberg from throwing his hat in, which keeps it a two party race. It certainly silences the "Out before Iowa" chanting liberals...

Don't forget network, partner, and paradigm shift.

Posted by Zatoichi

I just cringed reading these... Paradigm is the worst word ever spoken...

With all these buzzwords and catchphrases, I have to assume you're some type of mid level micro managing asshole

LOL. Is that assumption because you are a low level pee-on who has to answer to a mid-level micro managing asshole? He-he.

I'm flying to Madison, Wisconsin later today. I'll let you be me co-pilot. You can cull from that vast wellspring of knowledge of human behavior you have to keep me entertained while I fly over boring ol' Michigan. You can even bail out along the way. I might even throw in a parachute if yer a good boy. It's a long way down, but I bet you knew that already, didn'tcha smart-guy???

I'm flying to Madison, Wisconsin later today.
Posted by k_g_beekeeper

If your meeting with the Govenor, bring cash. That asshole doesn't accept Credit Cards from lobbyists. (unless you are a member of the Potowatomi Tribe)

Paradigm is the worst word ever spoken

And "leverage", when not teaching high school physics, is next.

I'll let you be me co-pilot.

So I can listen to you go on and on for hours about how we have to think outside the box, and grow the brand? No thank you...

Madison, Wisconsin huh? Sounds like a real important afternoon for you...

Beekeeper - I wouldn't let Rob NEAR my plane.

Madison, Wisconsin huh? Sounds like a real important afternoon for you...

Yeah I know, pee-on. I know you'd rather post a few hundred times on Drudge instead-- much more exciting!

So I can listen to you go on and on for hours about how we have to think outside the box, and grow the brand? No thank you...

Well you could always drown me out by continuing to listen to yourself talk...

Beekeeper - I wouldn't let Rob NEAR my plane.

I like to take a short snooze when I fly, fold origami, play the harmonica, etc. I'm sure he can keep an eye and make sure that the darker blue is down and the lighter blue is up when I'm busy.

I'll do the take-off and landing. He can blow Otto.

Beekeeper - I wouldn't let Rob NEAR my plane.

Posted by sitdown

Your loss...

Paradigm is the worst word ever spoken...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-11-07 11:04 AM | Reply

yeah, but the worst phrase.....wait for it.....is "Presidentess Hillary."

That's probably what keeps Uncle Pat up at night, and he'd be willing to do just about ANYTHING to defeat that hose beast.

I like to take a short snooze when I fly, fold origami, play the harmonica, etc.

Everything about you screams excitement!

Getting back to the point-- Giuliani, Podhoretz, and Robertson suck ass, so why not suck ass together?

makes sense.

I don't think Pat Robertson is as relevant as he was. When Falwell died, there was a shift in the paradigm. Now, if Joel Osteen endorses Giuliani, the young evangelicals will be on board. I think all of Robertson's outlandish predictions have relegated him to crazy uncle status.

shift in the paradigm

Ooops...um...changing of the guard.

When Falwell died, there was a shift in the paradigm

FUCK!

I think this will be a great wake-up call for all of your anti-christian types out there who think all of us Christians who are conservative are mind-numbed automatons who think and act alike. We are quite different.

While I took notice of what Pat said, it will not be AT ALL instructive of how *I* vote next November.

This topic has alot more mileage it in, perhaps unfortunately...

and I don't mind the terms, "synergy", "paradigm shift" and the like....I simply picture Steve Carrell saying it in character in "The Office" and it's funny again!

Kirk-

God'll get you for that.

"I just cringed"

Careful, I worked in the Fortune 50 for 16 years.
I know them all.
I was an advocate for partnering a paradigm shift in throughput; An alpha geek in the adminisphere.
Now I'm a woofy with a telephone number salary.
Value-Subtracted resellers are like seagull managers, they're power losers.

"I like to take a short snooze when I fly, fold origami, play the harmonica, etc...."

Hmmm...'splains a lot, prolly oxygen deprivation. That'll make ANYONE seem to be in a stupor.

Yeah, Lee, but what will God do to those who vote for Jezebel?

I had to think for a minute before I could place Joel Osteen, then..........................
.....

No PLEASE - It's not real!

Man, evangelicals must really hate Mormons.

I bet Rudy begged Robertson not endorse him.

Robertson endorsing a pro-choice candidate, is really quite astonishing to me.

Dobson who?

LOL

All this means is that the religious conservatives are not the "Kingmakers" any more in the GOP. And for moderate Republicans like myself that is a very good thing.

So Pat Robertson endorsed a cousin inbreeding, divorce loving, corruption loving, illegal immigrant encouraging fear monger for President.

I wonder if it came to him while he was leg pressing a volkswagon?

I bet Rudy begged Robertson not endorse him.

Posted by briwo at 2007-11-07 03:56 PM | Reply

TRhis is a reverse psychology performance by Pat Robertson. He knows He isn't liked as well these days so He endorses Rudy thereby giving Him the Proverbial kiss of death. Know what I mean??

Larry Mohr

Endorsement by Pat Robertson just certifies that a candidate is insane. I thought Rudy qualified, now I know he does.

Seems to me to be a compromising of Robertson's stated values to support a candidate who is pro-choice, cross dressing, a serial divorcer and all the rest.

Imagine that, Robertson compromising his publicly stated principles...

And I'm sure he's making a statement on how God led him to this, all with that demented little chuckle he has.

I think Pat is looking at the electability factor here, and someone who will be more in spirit with Conservative values.

For sure, Hillary will not be President in 2008, but a female President will arise in future.

That is all a bunch of crap. good old pat the fraud has always endorsed george the spender who calls himself conservative and he aint. this is all about what is in it that greases pats palm. if you believe that crap you are a loonie, pat is a white jessie

Rudy gets the endorsement of the man who agreed with Jerry Falwell that homosexuals and promiscuity had made God mad and caused 9/11.

So now Rudy has yet another 9/11 connection.

Bravo.

I think this could go along way to securing the nomination for Rudy.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-11-07 10:31 AM | Reply

I don't think it's significant. Pat Robertson is a loud person who draws attention to himself, but so is Pat Ireland and Jesse Jackson. But none of them wield influence over a significant number of people.

The Charlaton has spoken. Send cash immediately.

I guess he dosn't mind abortion.

Endorsement by Pat Robertson just certifies that a candidate is insane. I thought Rudy qualified, now I know he does.

Posted by danni at 2007-11-07 04:16 PM | Reply

Takes one to know one?

Initially I didn't think this had much significance. But, it seems to have gotten under Corky's skin....he must be scared that it is some kind of detriment to his beloved Hillary otherwise he may not have commented at all.

Further proof that the religious right (and, more generally, the South) gets an erection every time you mention 9/11. You could be killing fetuses right there in front of them, but if you talk about 9/11 at the same time, they'll love you.

Ride On has a hard on for the Giu. Was it Rudy in drag that had you from hello? It couldn't be the millions he made from his 9/11 fearfest. You're too smart for that.

I don't think it's significant. Pat Robertson is a loud person who draws attention to himself, but so is Pat Ireland and Jesse Jackson. But none of them wield influence over a significant number of people.

Posted by vernon


Rudy's biggest issue with the GOP voters is that he has some very liberal views on issues like abortion and gay marriage and such... if a die hard evangelical can support him, I would think that would ease some of the fears of your average bible belt voter...

I don't think this can hurt him, but it should help him... at least for the fact that Romney didn't get the endorsement

Endorsement by Pat Robertson just certifies that a candidate is insane.
Posted by danni


Please elaborate.

very liberal views

Don't you mean progressive?

:-)

Please elaborate.

Posted by MrFair at 2007-11-07 06:26 PM


That means Pat Robertson is insane. If you think Robertson is sane---you aren't worth the discussion. He thinks God told him to run for the Presidency. He thinks God talks to him. Need anything else? Does God talk to you too?

Don't you mean progressive?

:-)

Posted by Bowa at 2007-11-07 06:29 PM | Reply

Liberal. Liberal values built this country. Not conservative values. Doesn't that just piss you off?

Freedom---liberal concept

Freedom of the press---liberal concept

Freedom of religion---liberal concept

Right to gather peacefully---liberal concept.

Right to bear arms---liberal concept.

I'm proud to be a liberal and defend the concepts liberalism stands for. It stands for America. Conservatives hate the concept.

For sure, Hillary will not be President in 2008, but a female President will arise in future.

Posted by takitez

Laughing at you righties is going to make my 8th decade.

Freedom---liberal concept
except from thought or the governments fingers
lets just call it what it is
freedom to smoke whatever you feel like

Freedom of the press---liberal concept
But we have to keep the right wing off the radio

Freedom of religion---liberal concept
but we must end it on the whole

Right to gather peacefully---liberal concept.
lets get together and do....nothing YEAAAA
Pass the doobie there please

Right to bear arms---liberal concept.
but arms don't mean guns, only a militia can be armed, its only wacko's who want to own firearms,


Right?

c'mon
trying to compare modern libs to the founding fathers is asinine.

"Right?"

No.

Hans

sorry hans
Left

That better?

Pat robertson supports guiliani? That fucking guy is truly crazy and a downright hack. Huckabee should of been his boy.

I'm calling it now, Pat is going down....

Knight;

call him and tell him how disappointed you are im sure for a small donation he would listen well maybe a large donation, ehh a blank check will probably do.
1-800-all-mine

Rudy will be the candidate fer the GOPhers come next year.

He is the annointed one on the right just as Hillary is fer the left.

That's the narrative as the MSM reads it and unless enuff people wake up that's gonna the choices fer '08.

Frying Pan (Hillary) vs. Fire (Rudy)

Be Well.

Figures Pat the Bunny endorses Rudy the Giu. He prays the warmonger hastens the rapture.

I'm sorry but ... "keep the right wing off the radio"??? I don't know any progressive who favors that. Indeed, my beloved ACLU fights for the righties' rights to REMAIN on radio. I do think there's something to be said for the good guys' rights to set the yahoos straight or not patronize firms who sponsor yahoo talk shows. herm

Liberal. Liberal values built this country. Not conservative values. Doesn't that just piss you off?

No...

Because Liberalism from just a few decades back is nothing like today's liberalism.

Hell today's liberals would have called for the Impeachment and imprisonment of two of this country's greatest presidents (Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt), who were responsible for some very "liberal" ideas...

very liberal views

Don't you mean progressive?

liberal = progressive = socialist = communist = insane

liberal = progressive = socialist = communist = insane


Posted by vernon at 2007-11-07 11:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Good for Rudy--

Guess the conservatives are making a sound critical thinking choice for the Repub nominee.

Rudy and Huckabee in 2008.

And Hillary is dropping in the polls--we'll have to see how she does at the next debate--which will likely be higher in ratings--just so folks tune in to see her Not answer a question about illegals getting driver licenses amoung others.

Murphy

That means Pat Robertson is insane. If you think Robertson is sane---you aren't worth the discussion. He thinks God told him to run for the Presidency. He thinks God talks to him. Need anything else? Does God talk to you too?

Posted by Buffalo_Bob


Bob - keep your shirt on. Look at my post. I didn't assert that Robertson was sane, did I? I simply asked Danni (not even you anyway) to elaborate on why being endorsed by an insane person would automatically make the candidate insane. Watch the knee joints - they get strained from all that knee-jerking.

Enough with the leg press jokes. The guy didn't even do them right, he was using damn near all of his muscles to do it. Ever see the video? His gonna throw his back out doing that shit.
Now, it is impressive that he could lift that weight at all given his age, but let's not call them "leg presses". More like "wrongly done weight lifting".

On the same day that Pat "MC 900 Ft Jesus" Robertson endorses the Rudeboy Ghoul we also see Brownback Mountin' (who's left the Presidential race) endorse John McCain.

Wot does this tell us?

Two things fer sure, as Spud is see it.

One, the religious right are hedging their bets.

Why is that? cos of number...

Two, they haff tasted greater power then they haff ever known before under BushCo and they are now hopelessly addicted to the stuff.

Just a coupla spuddish thoughts.

Be Well.

Hell today's liberals would have called for the Impeachment and imprisonment of two of this country's greatest presidents (Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt), who were responsible for some very "liberal" ideas...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-11-07 09:58 PM


You have no idea what a liberal is. I am a liberal and your post is bullshit. If you can find a liberal that agrees with your post, you will have a point. Until then you must admit you are talking out your ass since the only liberal capable of evaluating your assinine statement has said what an ignorant concept it was you put forth.

Freedom---liberal concept
"except from thought or the governments fingers
lets just call it what it is
freedom to smoke whatever you feel like"

You confuse liberals with the Bushites who want to listen in on your phone calls. Smoking what you like is part of liberalism---as is drugs, rock and roll, fast food, guns and hunting.

Freedom of the press---liberal concept

"But we have to keep the right wing off the radio"

Not at all. No liberal has ever said to take Limbaugh off the air. To say such a thing invalidates their status as a liberal. Liberal means--Free.But we reserve the right to respond to idiocy and laugh at stupidity. Freedom for all remember.

Freedom of religion---liberal concept

"but we must end it on the whole"

As a liberal and an American I would fight for your right to worship any way you choose. I still reserve the right to laugh at you and tell you what a moron you are for worshipping such evil, but expressing my opinion is not an attempt to end stupidity.



Right to gather peacefully---liberal concept.

"lets get together and do....nothing YEAAAA
Pass the doobie there please"

Or walk down the street together with a couple of friends without being thrown up against a wall and searched for nothing in particular and being asked where your going and why your're going there. Glad to see you understand the value of these freedoms.



Right to bear arms---liberal concept.

"but arms don't mean guns, only a militia can be armed, its only wacko's who want to own firearms,"

Now you are confusing liberals with democrats and people who can read the Constitution. Liberals are all for freedom and the right to bear arms--all arms--tanks, jets, bombs, biological weapons, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons. It is called freedom--a liberal concept. It seems it is the republicans and democrats who want to restrict arms. Well them and the Constitution.


"Right?"

Have you ever been? Your record is still secure.

Posted by salamandagator at 2007-11-07 06:49 PM |

""Hell today's liberals would have called for the Impeachment and imprisonment of two of this country's greatest presidents (Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt), who were responsible for some very "liberal" ideas...""

Yeah cuz it was the libruls who were pro-slavery.
What a dolt. Fast forward about 200 years and you have Nixon developing the Southern Strategy to take advantage of conservative resentment over civil rights in the South and what do you know....conservatives were still voting their racial hatred in droves.

Yeah cuz it was the libruls who were pro-slavery.

No, it was the democrats who are pro-slavery. I don't think the term "liberal" was in common usage during the civil war.

Of course, not much has changed. It is the democrats who still support government driven segregation by race- they just dress it up and call it "affirmative action".

Dear Mr. Giuliani:

With which of the following of Pat Robertson's expressions of his worldview do you agree? With which do you disagree?

1. "There is no such thing as separation of church and state in the Constitution. It is a lie of the Left and we are not going to take it anymore."

2. "We have imagined ourselves invulnerable and have been consumed by the pursuit of ... health, wealth, material pleasures and sexuality... It [terrorism] is happening because God Almighty is lifting his protection from us."

3. "This [9/11]is God's power and he sent this thing to warn us ... we needed a shock."

4. "Individual Christians are the only ones really -- and Jewish people, those who trust God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob -- are the only ones that are qualified to have the reign, because hopefully, they will be governed by God and submit to Him."

5. "I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that's the way it is, period."

6. "Many of those people involved with Adolph Hitler were Satanists, many of them were homosexuals -- the two things seem to go together."

7. " Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It's no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history."

Yrs,
A Very Concerned Citizen

With which of the following of Pat Robertson's expressions of his worldview do you agree? With which do you disagree?

Can I take #5?

just kidding.

Can I take #5?

If I was you, I'd check it out with my wife first.

No, it was the democrats who are pro-slavery. I don't think the term "liberal" was in common usage during the civil war.



Posted by Bowa at 2007-11-08 11:25 AM | Reply


There are only liberal and conservative concepts. Not republican and democrat. Republicans and democrats change positions so much that it is hard to ascribe a position to either party. But liberals and conservative concepts are always consistent. Liberals are for freedom, and conservatives are for conservatives. That is always how it has been, and how it will always be. Lincoln was a conservative in many way, but freeing the slaves is a liberal concept, not a conservative concept as seen in the racial voting patterns and actions of the bigoted south. Attacking Viet Nam while using a lie to do so(sound familiar) as Johnson did was a conservative action based on conservative thought.

The point is this. Don't associate liberals with democrats because even though their causes sometimes intersect, a democrat is not always a liberal, and a republican is not always a conservative.

Of course, not much has changed. It is the democrats who still support government driven segregation by race- they just dress it up and call it "affirmative action".

Posted by Bowa at 2007-11-08 11:25 AM | Reply


It seems you think giving people an equal chance at a job is discrimination. It also seems you don't know anything about affirmative action. Affirmative action isn't just about race as you seem to believe and FOCUS on, affirmative action protects many segments of our society against discrimination and helps level the playing field against bigots like yourself that see race as a major factor in their lives.

Affirmative action protects WOMEN from discrimination as well as people in minority groups. Affirmative action protects against discrimination against RELIGION so people of different religions are afforded an equal chance at a job. Affirmative action protects the rights of VIET NAM VETS so they can have an equal shot at jobs that they were hampered from enjoying while off fighting for their country.

Affirmative action isn't just about race. Affirmative action levels the playing fiels so that just more than white males have access to the best jobs. Of course a bigot like yourself only sees the RACE part and is upset that others get a fair play. I can understand that. You are a conservative.

"that is always how it has been, and how it will always be."

Because i say so and i am the almighty bob. Never mind reason or logic or fact i need none of these thing to come to my conclusions.





but anyway
your confusing the word liberal with the actions of the people that define them selfs as liberal. liberals as a group are comprised of their constituents and those people do not stand for freedom anymore. Instead are for socialist programs (the opposite or liberty) government restrictions on business( huh thats sound like freedom) enviro-nazism (oops my bias is showing) and since you brought it up firearms restrictions (you think it was the right wing wacko's idea to ban automatic weapons in many states?)
The word liberal has nothing to do with the party that affiliates itself with it. That is not to say there are not true liberals out there, some call themselves libertarian some anarchists amongst others. If you high ground comes from an extinct definition of a party that has been hijacked than it must suck to be you.

Because Liberalism from just a few decades back is nothing like today's liberalism.

Hell today's liberals would have called for the Impeachment and imprisonment of two of this country's greatest presidents (Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt), who were responsible for some very "liberal" ideas...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-11-07 09:58 PM | Reply |

Perhaps this is just another in a long line of slanted liberal remarks you make, but do you have any sort of expansion on this idea? Like why today's liberals might have tried if such a timewarp were to occur?

ROBERTSON IS A COCK-SUCKER..

This endorsement demonstrates yet again that Giuliani has poor judgment.

Bernie Kerik will be indicted (again) tomorrow.

It seems you think giving people an equal chance at a job is discrimination.

I support equal opportunity not equal outcome.

How is it that Pat Robertson, who has always endorsed candidates based on social conservative ideologies, is now endorsing a guy who is ideologically a liberal (no matter how conservative he wants you to think he is). That doesn't make any sense.

Guilliani is like a socially liberal Bush. It will be more of the same bullshit but with a president who is pro choice, pro gay, and who likes to dress up like a woman.

In fact, as much as I hate the Bush administration, I believe a Guilliani administration would somehow be even worse.

Wasn't Kerik supposed to be indicted today?

What happened?

is now endorsing a guy who is ideologically a liberal

I think you mean "progressive" not "liberal"

In fact, as much as I hate the Bush administration, I believe a Guilliani administration would somehow be even worse

In a compentent evil vs. incompetent evil kinda way?

Yup, Spud gets that creeping feeling too.

Spud's still digging the essential hypocrisy of this story.

Pat Robertson, the guy who blamed 9/11 on gays and abortion, has endorsed the only pro-Choice/ Pro Gay Rights candidate other than Romney.

Actually, Spud has always felt that both Rudy and Romney had to ignore their own personal positions on these subjects in order to placate the liberal masses in Mass. and NYC and get/stay elected.

MLK and Nelson Mandela they aint.

Be Well.

Wasn't Kerik supposed to be indicted today?

What happened?

Posted by Bowa at 2007-11-08 05:01 PM |


5:01, lmao!

Sweaty day, Bowow?



Kerik Indictment on Tax and Corruption Charges Imminent

By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 8, 2007; Page A04

Federal prosecutors are planning to unveil an indictment against former New York City police commissioner Bernard B. Kerik as early as week's end, spotlighting alleged corruption that occurred a decade ago when he worked was a trusted adviser to former New York mayor -- and now presidential candidate -- Rudolph W. Giuliani, according to people familiar with the case.

Kerik, 51, rejected a plea bargain earlier this year and was informed by prosecutors that he was likely to be indicted on charges that could include tax evasion or tax fraud, public corruption and filing false information regarding his failed 2004 nomination to be President Bush's homeland security chief.

"as early as week's end," Bowser.

Don't get too comfortable yet.

E) Rudy made 100s of thousands of decisions just as important as recommending someone for Head of Homeland Security.

According to Rudy.




(next)

(F) Rudy has tremendous foreign policy experience

(Thanks for the nudge, Corky.)

"Dear Pat,

I cheated on my first wife. I cheated on my second wife. I am currently cheating on my third wife. Elect me President, and I will cheat on you, too!" - Rudy G.

funny Doc,

I keep asking Bowal Movement if he has 5 seconds to discuss Rudy's foreign policy experience, noting that we would still have time for a sandwich and dessert, but no response so far.

Rudy doesn't have a problem with wives, just that they don't fit in the closet with him...get it...cause he's gay.

Sorry gay's

BowWow went over all that the other day. Were you on that thread? My god, it was beyond tedious. Basically, meeting and greeting visiting dignataries qualifies as "foreign policy experience," which would probably make the mayors of Corpus Christi and Niagara Falls dandy candidates, and the tugboat captains in San Francsico practicallyh shoe-ins.

I missed that, Doc. Fortunately.

I suppose now I will have to support the baggage Cap't at Kennedy Airport if he runs.



Have a good one.

I suppose now I will have to support the baggage Cap't at Kennedy Airport if he runs.

He's The Man.

The fat chick from Georgia who scans retinas at Passport Control is The Woman.

And the geek who adjusts the borders between warring Balkan political entities on maps published by Rand McNally is The Wiz.

LA Times had an article today about Rudi and his tough guy image.


Rudi is a tough guy in much the same way Bush is a cowboy.

Watch out, Wobbie may be trying to hijack this thread. He is a master-debater you know.
Too Funny.

If it weren't for 9/11 everybody would think that Rudy was an asshole. He has received way too much credit just because he happened to be the mayor when 9/11 happened. Even his kids think he's an asshole.

This is a kiss of death for Giuliani.

I thought the kiss of death was supposed to be when Dobson said he would never support him?

So which "kiss of death" is it? Robertson's support? or Dobson's lack of support?