Primary Place Online

Nothing demonstrates better how insecure we have become as a nation than the amount of "security" we now have.  And nothing makes me feel more insecure than the security personnel surrounding a candidate.   The more "security" I see, the more insecure I feel.  This is the United States, for crying out loud.  Not Pakistan.  Forget the veracity of this payment dicrepency, or whether 4 buses of supporters actually were sent from NY to a Hampton, NH rally.  Rudy is a man whose police commisssioner, Bernard Keric, (recently nominated to be Homeland Security Chief!) is being indicted by a ferderal grand jury on tax evasion and corruption charges.  I mean, COME ON.  I don't pretend to influence any votes here but, even if Bernie is found innocent, this is not the posse many will look for to bring us the change we crave.

 Show me goodness and truth.

 My guess is this is what Iowa is saying by pushing Mike Huckaby to the lead in the polls.

I must say that in order for my support of Giuliani to change these allegations of him spreading the cost of security services throughout city agenicies would have to be proven true or verified directly from him. During election time anything suspicious in a candidates background is brought forward reagardless of his truthfulness.

According to the New York Times, there is evidence that debris was taken from a landfill to be used in road repairs; some of that debris might have come from the 9-11 attack and could have contained the incinerated remains of some victims. The use of landfill material is routine and the use in this case occured, at least in part, after Mr. Giuliani left office.

You can read the article here.

After I found out that Rudy used the remains of 9/11 victims to fill potholes in NYC I knew he was a worm. Last Sunday, he had an event in Hampton where he had four busloads of supporters come up from NY to make it look like he had a following here in the Granite State. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjZrcHeXM48 

One must be very skeptical of these types of accusations during campaign time.  While I do not doubt the information that was unearthed, I am not certain it disclosed any irregularities.  If actual charges of malfeasance from those in authority actually arise from this disclosure, then I would have to reconsider whether I should support him or not.  Right now I am leaning towards him as my candidate.

Although I have been leaning away from Giuliani, if this story proves true, this type of activity would seal the coffin (so to speak) in my book. Are ethics and politics an oxymoron? 

The mayor of New York has, to my understanding, a permanent police detail. It is also my understanding that he is allowed a personal life. How then can he conduct personal business without the city incurring protection costs? Until I learn otherwise, this is the kind of "gotcha" politics that I find stupid to the point that it turns me off our political process.

If you believe this country is in critical need of good, honest, stable, leadership with transparency and integrity, whatever this story's outcome, Rudy is not the guy.  From a religious perspective or a 'conservative' perspective it doesn't really matter if Rudy had taxpayers pay for his affair or that he has been married 2,3,4 times.  It makes a difference from a decision-making perspective.  In love, either he 1.) made the wrong choices, 2.) wasn't able to work out the differences, or 3.) waffled on his original choice of bride(s).  To me, this is where personal life comes into play.  If his record with his family is so wishy-washy, what does that bode for his record on major policy issues in the future?

In the law they call it a chain of evidence.  You build a case by linking the facts and thowing out the theories that don't fit.  Or you track a piece of physical evidence, say a gun, from the crime back to who handled it, then forward to the trial.  This story is not a 'smoking gun' but for me it is consistent with the character of the man we already know -- a man who, to my mind, has never said anything but what he thought today's audience wanted him to say.

Listen to him closely next time.  His answers are sort of a jumble of words that come out sounding like a stand on the topic.  In reality, he rarely takes a position.

I can't wait to hear Rudy's spin on this.  From initial reports it appears that he, or a member of his staff, moved the costs around so they appeared to be legitimate expenses in different accounts.  That sounds suspicious.  And when it was paid back, no matter what route the monies traveled, didn't it ultimately come from the taxpayers?  I think it is trouble for Rudy and I hear some Republican-leaning primary voters are having second thoughts.  We'll have to wait to see how it plays out.