Think Rudy Giuliani is the front runner?
With his leading poll numbers, the public smooching him by Michael Medved, George Will, Sean Hannity, Billo Reilly; and who the MSM is calling the GOP conservative wing- why wouldn't he be?
These pragmatic conservatives see the former New York mayor, a thrice married Roman Catholic, as the only person in the running who can stop Hillary. John McCain is stumbling, and distrusted; Romney, despite Ann Coulter's support is seen as a flip-flopping cultist or, as those loving Christian fundamentalists always say, "The word 'Mormon' was conceived in the mind of Joseph Smith, and given to him from the devil, and is synonymous with evil."
Medved et al are willing to overlook Rudy's soap operatic past, and his liberal stands on issues such as gun control, gay rights, abortion on demand, and that he's on video-tape dressed as a woman.
Unfortunately for Rudy, who's riding a little wavelet this week, is that those right-wing elites don't get to nominate presidential candidates for their troubled party. They're nominated by such as Doug Parris, the fierce Reagan Winger who is socially conservative nemesis of the state Republican Party moderate elites.
Read Parris' latest post, Ladies and Gentlemen... the President of the United States ... Julie Rudiani replete with pics of Milton Berle with wig, and Giuliani with cigar; and in a violet dress with Trump kissing him on the neck and the breast...
During part of Michael Medved’s somewhat astonishing advocacy (given his claim to being a “cultural crusader”) for the desirability of the former New York Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, as a GOP Presidential Nominee in 2008, he mentioned that hizonner had “one drawback” (another astonishing assessment in its own right): once, a long, long time ago (went the story) Mr. Giuliani dressed up as a woman, entirely as a joke, in a violet dress, and there is a video of his (obviously staged) sexually suggestive encounter, in public, with an overtly amorous Donald Trump.
“It was obviously a joke,” Medved assures us, once again, even while admitting that, of course, if you’re running for President you don’t want a video out there of your frolicsome cavorting in women’s clothing (Unless, perhaps, you’re Hillary, who has never been accused of frolicsome cavorting except with other people’s money).
Frolicsome and gay cavorting is obviously not such an impediment if you’re just running for Mayor of New Babylon.
The upshot, as far as Michael Medved's opinion was concerned, was that Giuliani’s foray into the Transgendered Experience (TE) was no different than for, say, Milton Berle, a similarly non-feminine man who frequently donned gay apparel in pursuit of laughs in the early days of Television: just an act. Insignificant, we are to think.
But Mr. Medved couldn’t be more wrong.
Wrong on the facts and wrong on the conclusion.
Factually, because the former mayor’s journey into cross-dressing can hardly be described as “once” or “a long time ago.” He has had, in fact, a recurring habit of dressing as a woman… in public. And it is anything BUT insignificant.
It's a stretch to imagine Hizzoner being nominated so bitterly opposed by such as the Reagan Wing and their cohorts across the country. But it's even a longer one to think those social conservatives- so important to the GOP in this narrowly split country- would turn out to vote if he were.
Wow!! You and Ann Coulter teaming up...using different words...but teaming up none the same!!
Posted by: Thom | March 03, 2007 at 04:52 PM
Possibly current front-runner, but of a very dismal group that IMHO doesn't stand a chance in '08.
Unless something dramatic happens to change it, Mrs Clinton will be our next President. She has tirelessly worked to increase the Democrat coffers and it will be her's for the losing. The 'machine' will support her 100% (unless AG decides to enter)- that's the way I see it.
Again, I continue to be perplexed at why the Rev Jesse Jackson apparently garners more support than Senator Obama? He could be a surprising influence on this race and a definite help to Mrs Clinton.
Posted by: Duffman | March 03, 2007 at 05:02 PM
Yes, I agree and you should count us out. We surrender. Don't worry your pretty lil ole heads. We are just going to stand back and watch. No worries for you to concern yourselves with. We do not have any candidates that can compete with your great Democrat leaders. So we wont even try. Yep, we are just going to concede congress and the POTUS to Nancy and Hillary and Harry and....
Oh crap, think I'm gonna blow chunks. Gotta go.
Posted by: chucks | March 03, 2007 at 05:04 PM
Well, with the many $millions in the Republican coffers - they will undoubtedly put up one heck of a fight; but IMHO the American public will not fall for it this time around. Iraq will be the main (but not the only) deciding factor. America is ready for a change (an over-used phrase, but so appropriate this time. Again, I pray Iraq is somehow settled before Pres Bush leaves office so that we don't have to start out 'in a hole'. I think Mrs Clinton has some definite plans. (Just hope she learns how to avoid the F* bomb as much as she reportedly uses it) - would not be good protocol...ha.
Posted by: Duffman | March 03, 2007 at 05:14 PM
"Unfortunately for Rudy, who's riding a little wavelet this week, is that those right-wing elites don't get to nominate presidential candidates for their troubled party. They're nominated by such as Doug Parris, the fierce Reagan Winger who is socially conservative nemesis of the state Republican Party moderate elites."
That's an issue both parties have. Activists get out the vote/do the heavy lifting and want a real say. Candidates have to garner their support to win the Primary. Before primaries, Party Bosses could get together at the Convention to make the choice as to who would be the Party Candidate.
Nowadays, its pretty much decided by that time.
But the Dems have a clear advantage in 08.
Posted by: Pugetsound | March 03, 2007 at 05:27 PM
5:08 p.m. E.S.T friday March 2, 2007,Washington,D.C. ,skinny blonde Bitch enters from stage right, at the 140th annual Crapfest, otherwise known as Crapfest of Politically Asinine Conservatives , otherwise known as C-PAC. The Bitch Skank, otherwise known as Ann Coulter, begins to speak after tumultuous applause, during which time scores of fatass disgusting Republican men, lift their asses off their chairs and fart to their hearts' content, under cover of the thundering noise. The Bitch Skank begins to smirk and speak- " I was going to open my remarks with a discussion of John Ewards campaign for President, but I've been advised that you're required to go to rehab if you use the word 'faggot'". Ann pauses, smirking, and the room erupts with raucous whoops and horselaughs by the attending conservative men and women, covering a second wave of farting, by disgusting fatass Republican men. The Bitch Skank stands at the podium,smirking, and glowing with evil. 5:20 p.m P.S.T., Tommy008 is walking down a hill in a Seattle neighborhood, toward the marina, and listens in disbelief on his little radio as ABC radio news plays a tape of The Bitch Skank's comment, with the word "faggot" bleeped out. In a few minutes he repeats the speech line to the clerk at the marina grocery, who thinks Tommy008 is pulling his leg.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 03, 2007 at 06:13 PM
correction- that's John Edwards , not John Ewards
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 03, 2007 at 06:28 PM
T-8
I recall after 9-11 Coulter's comments that were so beyond the pale that the National Review Online kicked her off staff. It led to an interesting/testy on-air debate between Coulter and Jonah Goldberg.
Coulter is in the biz of ticking people off then using the 'controversy' to garner nice speaking fees.
Posted by: Pugetsound | March 03, 2007 at 06:33 PM
T8
"...Coulter's comments that were so beyond the pale that the National Review Online kicked her off staff"
I may have been incorrect. She was terminated or kicked off but it was over editing issues on some controversial articles dealing with muslims right after 9-11. But if you ever locate the mp3 of the on air discussion tween the two it is interesting. Very testy. The conservative host who brought them together trying to play kumbaya and it wasn't working.
Posted by: Pugetsound | March 03, 2007 at 06:45 PM
Regarding my previous post-If a bunch of Republican and conservative degenerates want to have a convention, and cheer on garbage like Ann Coulter, as she spews out hate speech, I'm going to give it as good as she's dishing out. Sorry, I'm not a creamy-voiced "common sense" super-sophisticate milktoast like Dave Ross.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 03, 2007 at 08:43 PM
T-8
I always wonder why people invite someone who is in the biz of being 'controversial' -like the folks did at this convention- and then get something that is clearly counterproductive for them. It's good for Coulter's biz but I doubt the Repub party wanted this kerfufel.
Posted by: Pugetsound | March 03, 2007 at 09:06 PM
If anybody can give her as good as she gives, it's you Tommie! Great post and keep 'em up.
I think her endorsement of Romney can't hurt him, unfortunately. People who watch faux news, believe the hate speech and seem to like it.
Who was it said you'll never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people? (something like that)
Funny.
Posted by: joanie | March 04, 2007 at 12:08 AM
thanks Joanie this Ann Coulter speech to the cheering C-Pac degenerates is the stuff of Brownshirt rallies in Nazi Germany.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 04, 2007 at 03:49 AM
Picture this !
Ann Coulter"s, body with Stocky yard Vinnie's Head !!! HA HA ! The head picture of Vinnie on the KIRO WEB SITE!
Posted by: Dale | March 04, 2007 at 07:39 AM
it's been variously attributed to P.T. Barnum and H.L. Mencken.
Posted by: lukobe | March 04, 2007 at 11:21 PM
The T-8 Bill O'Reilly "Coulter Watch" is now officially running. I'll be monitoring O'Reilly's radio and TV shows next week to see if he does the right thing and condemn's hatemonger Ann Coulter's despicable, hateful and gratuitous remarks about John Edwards at this weekend's annual C-PAC convention. O'Reilly has been complaining for years about the leftwing "haters" such as Al Franken, Whoopi Goldberg, Michael Moore, etc. They're terrible people he tells us. When he's been challenged about Coulter, he's always used euphemism's about her such as "rightwing ideologue", "bombthrower" and other such nonsense to describe this hate-filled bitch. I've heard him say that he doesn't really think her comments qualify her as a truly mean person , like his favorite enemies on the left. No, Bill has said, Ann's not really mean or evil, she just says extreme things to shock and be a real show business kind of gal. What a crock of crap. If Bill condemns Ann, and calls her out for her hatespeech, I'll give him credit. If not I'll expose him as a hypocrite, fraud and poltroon.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 02:56 AM
Par excellence, T-8.
Except for this bit:
The Bitch Skank, otherwise known as Ann Coulter
Not that I don't appreciate the effort, but I'm just not sure if that's the best description of AC. I usually appreciate "Transexual plagiarist"/b>
Posted by: mercifurious | March 05, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Interesting Repug media silence (read: cover up)on Mr. Coulter's remarks:
>> Drudge=NOTHING
(well, 'cept something about Hillary's drawl)
Interesting, because Drudgy does have a link to "Romney gets the nod from CPAC... " but nothing about Mr. Coulter giving the nod
>> Wirby Killber this morning, he played Mr. Coulter's remark, but then PROMPTLY stopped the audio so no one could here the heel-clicking Neuremburg-rally standing-O. He then went on to say that the audience response has "mostly suprised with some applause". Lying sack (big sack).
>> Orbusmax get's the closest, but decides to play the "they's doing it too" kiddy-game:
"WHO IS WORSE - COULTER OR THE NUTROOTS?"
Posted by: mercifurious | March 05, 2007 at 11:42 AM
"It's a MAN, baby!"
Posted by: sparky | March 05, 2007 at 11:44 AM
oops. ending bold now
there, that's better
Posted by: mercifurious | March 05, 2007 at 11:55 AM
I find it rather surprising that according to a latest Gallup poll only a small % give A.G. any chance of winning in '08, were he to enter? Thought that riding his current popularity it w/be different.
Posted by: Duffman | March 05, 2007 at 12:06 PM
IMHO Ann Coulter is silly and continuously tries to make a bold impact - in order to try and sell books. To be ignored.
Posted by: Duffman | March 05, 2007 at 12:10 PM
Duffy with his seventh "IMHO" today:
"IMHO Ann Coulter is silly and continuously tries to make a bold impact - in order to try and sell books. To be ignored."
A.) Tell that to CPAC, Romney & Faux news "comedy" show. I think they'll always love Mr. Coulter
B.) Duffy's O's might be H, but they're also WWM (Wholly Without Merit).
Try using evidence over HO's next time
Posted by: mercifurious | March 05, 2007 at 12:28 PM
"mostly surprised with some applause"- absolute lie by Wilbur, and it shows what a punk he is, that he can't be honest. There was a slight pause, followed by a deafening combination of raucous bellylaughs, cheers, whoops and applause. Hannity is also absolutely punking out as I type, refusing to condemn or even criticize Coulter, and saying, "they do it too" neener neener neener.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 01:27 PM
Kirby Wilbur by his own admission keeps a handgun holstered underneath his Fatboy Brand sports coat, as he walks the mean strets of downtown Seatle and Duvall Washington. Talk about delusions of grandeur. Alan Berg had reason to carry a gun- he could out-argue callers to the point there they were speechless and apoplectic with rage. Wilbur's mumbling, soggy debating skills are laughable, and really couldn't enrage anyone.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 01:41 PM
So distracted by vengence that you can't seem to stay on point...guess it still hurts huh?
Posted by: Duffman | March 05, 2007 at 02:03 PM
So distracted by HO, that you can't seem to produce any E's. My intellectual and scholastic integrity is intact. How's your's?
(Guess it still hurts, huh?)
Still wondering how Duffy made it through college with IMHOs
Posted by: mercifurious | March 05, 2007 at 02:16 PM
Feel free to ignore...you DO have that option. Wont bother me, I promise....ha
Posted by: Duffman | March 05, 2007 at 02:22 PM
Tommie, weren't you listening? I heard about ten minutes of 710DORI today and he played three (I think) or four sound bites from DL podcasts wherein Goldy facetiously referred to Hutcherson and Eyman as possibly gay . . .
So, Dori said of Goldstein and I quote: "The most blatant example of hypocrisy that I've heard in my 45 years on this earth."
Isn't that funny? If you heard Goldstein's show yesterday, he did make much of Coulter's comments . . .
I suppose Eyman and Hutcherson may not be in the same league as Edwards, but it certainly fired up Dori's audience and Dori.
Posted by: joanie | March 05, 2007 at 05:20 PM
O'Reilly Punks Out and Makes it a Perfect Sweep (T-8 News Service)Bill O'Reilly completed a perfect sweep of local and National Repug and conservative talkhosts who refused to condemn Ann Coulter's recent hatespeech regarding John Edwards. To cover himself, O'Reilly engaged in an intellectually dishonest and morally cowardly stunt, by pairing the recent comments of Bill Mahr and Ann Coulter together instead of addressing Coulter's comments by themself. Mahr's recent comments weren't even in the same league as Coulter's. O'Reilly declined to condemn or even really criticize Coulter, and chose to engage in rationalization, stating that Coulter "says these things for shock value, to get attention" and that her comments were "a marketing tool". He even went on to criticize Edward's comments in response to the incident. According to O'Reilly, when Al Franken says something hateful and evil it's "hate speech" but when Coulter does it, it's an "attention getter" and a "marketing tool". Today's O'Reilly radio show first hour proves once and for all that Bill O'Reiily is a disgusting, transparent hypocrite, moral coward and poltroon, and a fraud.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 06:37 PM
"Today's O'Reilly radio show first hour proves once and for all that Bill O'Reiily is a disgusting, transparent hypocrite, moral coward and poltroon, and a fraud."
...and laughs all the way to the bank because so many pay attention to him...you know if we all ignored him may be he'd go away...either by choice or demand?
Posted by: Duffman | March 05, 2007 at 06:48 PM
Due to my utter disgust over O'Reilly's craven, cowardly and hypocritical performance tonight, I see no reson to ever tune into either his radio or TV show, as I've done from time time up until now.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 06:52 PM
Excellent! I wrote him off some time ago when he had the incident with one of his 'producers'; that totally disgusted me and made me lose any interest I had in either him or his show.
Posted by: Duffman | March 05, 2007 at 06:56 PM
I should have dropped O'Reilly after the producer(Ms. Mackris) incident as well, but I gave him a second chance.Now the only thing I'll remember about O'Reilly as the years go by without any exposure to his shows, will be tonight's night of infamy, and O'Reilly boasting to Mackris about his "big cock".
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 07:49 PM
What a bunch of Hypocrites.
Posted by: Steve | March 05, 2007 at 10:09 PM
Like you'd even know hypocrisy if it bit you in the ass. . . gimme a break!
Posted by: joanie | March 05, 2007 at 10:24 PM
Now add Frank Shiers to the list of local and national conservatives and repugs who are candycoating what Coulter said, and refusing to codemn her or even mildly call her out for her hate speech. Unbelievable. Shiers, ever the jackass, is following O'Reilly's lead and using asinine euphemism's like "bomb-thrower" and "poor choice of words". Poor choice of words , my ass , Shiers you phony little bastard. if Blatherwatch had called you a faggot, you wouldn't be calling it a "poor choice of words".
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 10:49 PM
Like Wilbur and Carlson before him, Shiers is now lying about the response Coulter got in the room full of c-pac degenerates. He also refused to play the whole tape, just liek Wilbur, and cut if off before the full response from the audience could be heard. He's calling it "polite applause". Shiers, you're a lying sack of shit. There were hoots , cheers and loud laughter and applause by a good portion of the audience
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 10:57 PM
As far as Dori goes, I missed his show, but it's perfectly natural and fair for Goldstein to wonder or muse aloud whether those who "doth protest to much" about gays, such as Hutcherson, Eyman, and Medved, might be gay themselves, especially since many of these types have indeed turned out to be gay in past years. That's a far cry from an absolutely gratuitous, hateful comment such as Coulter's labelling Edwards a "faggot". I don't believe Goldstein used the word faggot. It's apples and oranges Dori, you moron.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 05, 2007 at 11:06 PM
Who cares who's gay or not?
And why are any of you listening to Bill O'Reilly?
Posted by: lukobe | March 05, 2007 at 11:40 PM
Now add Larry Elder to the Hall of Shame. I just heard his ridiculous, lame rationalization of Coulter's hate speech, and refusal to condemn her.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 06, 2007 at 03:47 AM
Talkhost Hall of Shame (rationalizers or defenders of Coulter's 2007 CPAC HATE SPEECH) Bill O'Reilly Sean Hannity Larry Elder Michael Savage John Carlson Kirby Wilbur Dori Monson Frank Shiers (partial list- only those who've I've heard disgrace themselves with my own ears)
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 06, 2007 at 04:41 AM
Jethro raly is hot on this topic. I wonder why?
Posted by: Steve | March 06, 2007 at 05:21 AM
Sorry should read,
Jethro is really hot about this topic. Wonder why? Hit to close to home?
Posted by: Steve | March 06, 2007 at 05:23 AM
And Joanie,
I see you can't tell either. And I thought you were the smart one here. Maybe i'm wrong on that part also?
Posted by: Steve | March 06, 2007 at 05:24 AM
Of course you all saw Michelle Malkin condemn Coulter on the O'Rielly Factor on FOX News channel last night. She did say that she was disgusted with it (as am I).
Some credit for the right may be due.
Posted by: chucks | March 06, 2007 at 10:17 AM
When Ann Coulter can disgust even Michelle Malkin, you know the Coultergeist is in trouble!
Posted by: sparky | March 06, 2007 at 10:34 AM