CSotD: Rudy Giuliani do ya love me? Rudy Giuliani do ya care?
Skip to comments
Mike Luckovich sums up the big news of the past 24, and I appreciate his accuracy: Rudy Giuliani has not been disbarred, only suspended, which then just about guarantees he’ll be back, unless he doesn’t contest the suspension.
However, the language of the decision also suggests he may be invited back for other reasons and let’s hope he has switched to a more permanent hair coloring, because he’s surely gonna sweat.
The other thing hanging overhead, which Luckovich doesn’t mention, is that Rudy may not be alone in all of his future court appearances.
We shall see.
Ann Telnaes isn’t so analytical, simply pointing out that Rudy has been exposed, but that raises an interesting question: What did we know and when did we know it?
I was living in New York State when Rudy went off the rails in 2000, a wild ride which, in the expanse of about a month, saw him go from the Mafia-busting prosecutor who, as Mayor of NYC, had cleaned up Times Square, to a Senate candidate who elicited pity by announcing his prostate cancer, then abruptly to a flaming nitwit who elicited guffaws by announcing his divorce at a press conference without having first told his wife.
NYC’s tabloid press had a lovely time exploding his personal issues onto the public marketplace.
This is only one double-truck example from the Daily News, but it’s a goodie, from the blaring headline about how calm it’s gonna be, to Dr. Joyce Brothers explaining that cancer sucks, to an explanation of what happens when twice-married Catholics divorce, to Gail Sheehy pointing out that Rudy was having a crisis of some sort.
Illustrated by 10 random New Yorkers declaring it a personal matter.
What was particularly striking about this bizarre credibility avalanche was that, up until that month, the Senate race between Giuliani and Hillary Clinton seemed close, but maybe not for the right reasons: He had tough-guy credibility with some people but was seen as an anti-rights thug by others, while she came to New York with a carpetbag full of residual slime from Whitewater, Vince Foster, Troopergate and whatever else Richard Mellon Scaife and his minions had hung on her.
Sheehy had a profile of the race in Vanity Fair that was written before, but ran after, Rudy self-imploded and was still on newstands when he withdrew from the campaign, but which nonetheless summed things up: This was a contest to see who was hated more.
The Republicans swapped in a conservative sockpuppet, and Clinton wiped the floor with him in a 55/43 victory, but, even so, you’ll forgive New Yorkers who shuddered when the National Democratic Party insisted she be their only presidential candidate a few years later.
In any case, I wasn’t the only one waiting for Rudy’s pop-up timer to explode from his chest, but I hope I’m not the only one who thinks the current farcical pageantry is better for the tabloids than it is for the country.
Which is a nice segue to Lisa Benson (WPWG)‘s cartoon, with which I agree, but probably not for the reasons she had in mind.
It’s understandable for someone to comment off-the-cuff about a rapidly emerging controversy, but there’s been plenty of time, even for people who distrust media beyond their own fringe, to have looked into CRT and realized that, first of all, it’s not that big a breakthrough in historical analysis and, second, it’s not being taught in schools.
But I will agree that continuing to flog this rightwing fraud divides us.
It’s shameful, dishonest and, certainly, unpatriotic.
Nor are the modern-day Scaifes content to promote falsehoods about CRT. Now they’re exploiting a rise in crime, which is real, but, as noted in the fact check posted here yesterday, hardly a result of the change in the White House.
Paul Fell points out the inconsistency of both an outcry over violent crime and an insistence on resisting gun restrictions, but, beyond that, fear of crime appears to have created a mayoral race in NYC between a police chief and a vigilante.
You can’t fault their pragmatism, only their honesty.
And if you read all the mayoral race coverage, then go back to the Clinton/Giuliani campaign, you may understand why so many people in the rest of New York would just as soon saw it off at Yonkers and let it float out to sea.
Jeff Koterba points out our general fear without taking any political position on it.
It seems there’s an ammunition shortage, and while the joke is to suggest that people conserve the stuff by not shooting each other, I’m sure the bulk of the supply is sitting, unused, in the drawers of paranoid victims of politically-motivated fearmongers.
Which is comforting in terms of your safety in walking down the street today, but not so much in terms of walking into the voting booths in a year or three, because we all know the type of candidate who benefits when terrorized voters cast their ballots.
Michael de Adder ridicules the loonies, in a cartoon that parallels a Dana Milbank column in the same paper about competitive insanity.
It’s a funny cartoon and Milbank is always good reading, but here’s the bottom line: These delusional, extremist screwballs are winning elections. And successfully blocking legislation so they can keep winning more elections.
Are you still laughing?
Juxtaposition of the Day
This is less a Juxtaposition of differing viewpoints as one of differing interpretations, which may sound like a distinction without a difference, but here’s where the microtome cuts:
Conservatives attacked Harris for not having visited the border; now Kelley attacks her for going. But is she only going because Dear Leader went? Davis suggests that, whoever goes, it’s all a meaningless photo op, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.
Raising the question that, if it’s pure theater for Harris to go, what’s the purpose of Trump’s visit?
Though I guess if they both come away with the same recommendations, we might see some action: After all, she’s in a position to propose legislation, and we know McConnell will obey Dear Leader.
Comments 3
Comments are closed.