Archive for the ‘Rudolph Giuliani’ Category

The Carnival of Latin America and the Caribbean

Monday, May 16th, 2011

The Chinese Dragon Sweeps Through Latin America
Time to stand up and take notice — English and Spanish speakers alike

Jorge Macchi
South American magic on show in the north

Bossa nova and Elenco Records
A moody soundtrack for Brazil

No Samba for Chavez this time around

After 11 Months Colombia Asks, Who’ll Stop the Rain?

Take a seat

Organized Crime in Costa Rica and the Other Balloon Effect

Ecuador: Uncertainty and Division

Report Links Ecuador’s President With Colombian Guerrillas

Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa may have received as much as $400,000 from Colombian guerrillas and their drug trafficking allies for his 2006 presidential campaign, a U.K. think tank concluded in a report released Tuesday.

Ecuador emerging as new cocaine centre

Ecuador’s constitutional referendum
A close count
The balance of powers hangs in the balance

Oppenheimer Report; Ecuadorian media censorship

El Salvador Quits the Market Model
The country’s debt has been repeatedly downgraded as President Mauricio Funes has increased government spending.

The problem is not only reckless spending but also hostility toward business. The Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal Index of Economic Freedom, which once ranked El Salvador as the ninth freest economy in the world (2000), now places it at 39.

Battle With Mexican Gang at Texas-Border Lake Kills 13

Martelly inaugurated as Haitian president

Qaddafi’s Man in Managua
Sandinista boss Daniel Ortega is an old friend of the Libyan tyrant.

Fears grow that US unready for larger Panama canal, via The Latin Americanist.

Giuliani accompanies Keiko Fujimori on campaign

American Airlines Backs Puerto Rico Airport Plan

Hugo Chavez: FARC’s unreliable partner
Close logistical support is suggested in new report between Venezuelan officials and wanted murderers – so what do we do about it?

Hugo Chavez’ main link to the FARC, trusted adviser (and twice Interior Minister) Ramon Rodriguez Chacin

Committee to Free Venezuela Foundation’s Anonymous Effort

The week’s posts,
Chavez, nursing knee injury, tweets
Zelaya returning to Honduras
Raiding private pensions: it’s not just for Argentina anymore
Ecuador’s Correa and the FARC
A guitar grows in Argentina
Bin Laden’s cousin arrested in Ecuador for human trafficking
Makled now in Venezuela

At Real Clear World
Venezuela Wanted FARC to Act as Hit Men
Iranian Training Camps in Latin America


Rudi vs Arianna smackdown VIDEO

Wednesday, April 7th, 2010

Stacy has the video,

NewsBusters has the transcript,

RUDY GIULIANI: Arianna, I’m also, I’m also responsible largely for the turnaround of New York City. I took over, I took over a city that had 2,000 murders a year, I left a city with four or 500 hundred murders a year. I took over a city with 1.1 million people on welfare, I left a city with 500,000 people on welfare. I took over a city with a $2.3 million deficit, I left a city with a $3 million surplus. I hired a lot of good people to do that…It’s just a cheap shot.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: That’s a cheap shot!…I want to stop. I want to stop right now. I want to talk also about Bernie Kerik for a second. I know no one else will agree with me. This is just me talking and nobody else. Bernie Kerik did a hell of a job also keeping New York City safe. Two, it’s an unpopular thing to say, Bernie Kerik made mistakes, a lot of people make mistakes. I was glad Bernie Kerik was standing behind Rudy Giuliani September 11. And the bottom line is Arianna, if Rudy Giuliani did not run for President of the United States, Bernie Kerik would be walking the streets today, because the second Rudy Giuliani started running for President of the United States, the long knifes came out and they started searching everybody’s record and they found somebody who had made some bad mistakes. […]

MORT ZUCKERMAN: If there is one thing that the mayor deserves a lot of credit for is that he turned around the living conditions of New York by really reinforcing law and order, and particularly backing the police, and doing what he, a fundamental transformation of life in this city.

ARIANNA HUFFINGTON: That’s not either, or. You are not judging the mayor’s entire history. We’re talking about something very important, something very specific. And we’re talking also about this knee-jerk attempt to criticize the administration on everything, especially the position of the president on terrorism from a man who said you don’t know if waterboarding is torture. I don’t know if you still hold that position.

GIULIANI: Well, first of all, we have a perfect right to talk all about that, but you’re comment about Bernie Kerik was totally irrelevant to it and just a cheap shot. […]

SCARBOROUGH: Can I ask also how we got from Marco Rubio to waterboarding, Arianna? That is a wild (?), you have taken this conversation and hijacked it.

HUFFINGTON: It’s all about what the mayor stands for. What the man stands for means that we can look at who he supports from that perspective. This is a man…

SCARBOROUGH: Do you want to take waterboarding as the issue you embrace, because I know a guy sitting in the United States Senate now that said it polled pretty damn well in Massachusetts.

HUFFINGTON: What does this have to do with anything?

SCARBOROUGH: It has everything to do with everything. You’re saying that his position on waterboarding disqualifies him to endorse a guy in Florida, and I’m telling you if waterboarding is popular in Massachusetts, it’s probably pretty popular in my home state of Florida.

HUFFINGTON: So what? So it doesn’t disqualify him from supporting anybody he wants. It means that I don’t have to take his support particularly seriously. That’s all I’m saying.

SCARBOROUGH: I don’t think he gives a damn whether you support his candidate or not because you’re not going to support him anyway, right?

HUFFINGTON: I’m not saying whether I’m going to support his candidate. I’m saying we’re having a conversation about whether who he supports makes a difference.

SCARBOROUGH: It does in Florida.

HUFFINGTON: I mean, this is a man who also spent $50 million in the presidential race and got one delegate.

SCARBOROUGH: Hold on a second. Arianna, I’ve got to say this. Just stop. If we’re going to do this, Arianna, I, understand, we’re going to talk about your race in California.

HUFFINGTON: I never, I mean, my…

SCARBOROUGH: You ran for governor of California, and it was a complete flop. I still want to hear your ideas, and I don’t always go back to your failures here or your failures there. But for some reason, you’re doing it with Giuliani. And I, by the way, I would be defending somebody on the Left if someone on the Right was doing the same thing to them.

GIULIANI: The reality is you criticized the Tea Party movement and the right-wingers for getting terribly personal and terribly irrelevant and racist, and you’re the worst offender. I mean, I come on here just to talk about Marco Rubio, you’re attacking me on Bernie Kerik, you’re attacking me on how I ran my presidential race. I imagine you’re going to attack me on what I did in the Little League when I was a child. I mean, this is an over the top, emotional reaction as opposed to an intellectual discussion of whether Rubio or Crist would be the better senator.

That’s what we have Arianna for, isn’t it?

Rudi does Rio

Saturday, December 5th, 2009

Giuliani To Provide Security Consulting For Rio Olympics

Former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s consulting firm is being hired by the city of Rio de Janeiro to help make the city safe for the 2016 Summer Olympics.

Giuliani visited a slum in Rio on Friday and praised the city’s efforts to bring order to violence-plagued areas filled with drug traffickers.

He says Rio can be a safe city before the Games begin.

The governor of Rio says the firm is being contracted to give security advice. Details of the deal were not disclosed.

Take it away, Peter!

Same song, with Hugh Jackman as Peter Allen,

Paterson to Obama: Pffffttttt!!!!

Sunday, September 20th, 2009

Earlier today, Obama administration asks Gov. Paterson not to seek reelection in 2010.

Well, it didn’t take long for Paterson to give Obama the raspberry:
Paterson Says He Will Run, Rejecting Call From Obama

Gov. David A. Paterson defiantly vowed to run for election next year despite the White House‘s urging that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race.

“I have said time and time again that I am running for governor next year,” he said at the 40th annual African-American Day Parade.

Mr. Paterson would not characterize what he was told by the White House, saying that he would not “discuss confidential conversations.”

“I’m not talking about any specific conversations,” he said. “As I said, I am running for office.”

President Obama had sent a request to Mr. Paterson that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race, fearing that Mr. Paterson cannot recover from his dismal political standing, according to two senior administration officials and a New York Democratic operative with direct knowledge of the situation.

The decision to ask Mr. Paterson to step aside was proposed by political advisers to Mr. Obama, but approved by the president himself, one of the administration officials said.

As you may recall, Paterson was not elected; instead, he became governor following Eliot Spitzer’s resignation over a sex scandal involving prostituties.

Why did Obama ask?

The general election is more than a year away, but Mr. Obama and his political team are moving now in part because of signals from Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, that he may run for governor, according to Democrats who have spoken with White House officials. Many Democratic leaders believe that Mr. Giuliani’s presence at the top of the Republican ticket could spark enthusiasm among his party’s voters, who might otherwise have little desire to go to the polls.

Should a President be involved in state politics to this extent? James Joyner says,

A sitting president has long been considered the nominal “head” of his party. Obama seems to be taking that to its logical conclusion. There’s not really any reason he shouldn’t use his influence behind the scenes in this manner, although it’s yet another step down the rather depressing road of presidents thinking they actually “run the country” rather than just heading up one of three branches of the central government in a federal system.

What do you think?

And, would Giuliani present a formidable challenge to a Democrat?

It’s happened in Minnesota

"You’re likable enough, Hillary."

Friday, January 11th, 2008

Dr Krauthammer is Bringing Obama Back to Earth

It’s not just that NBC admitted that “it’s hard to stay objective covering this guy.” Or that Newsweek had a cover article so adoring that one wonders what is left for coverage of the Second Coming. Or that Obama’s media acolytes wax poetic that his soaring rhetoric and personal biography will abolish the ideological divide of the 1960s — as if the division between left and right, between free markets and the welfare state, between unilateralism and internationalism, between social libertarianism and moral traditionalism are residues of Sergeant Pepper and the March on Washington. The baby boomers in their endless solipsism now think they invented left and right — the post-Enlightenment contest of ideologies that dates back to the seating arrangements of the Estates-General in 1789.

The freest of all passes to Obama is the general neglect of the obvious central contradiction of his candidacy — the bipartisan uniter who would bring us together by transcending ideology is at every turn on every policy an unwavering, down-the-line, unreconstructed, uninteresting, liberal Democrat.

He doesn’t even offer a modest deviation from orthodoxy. When the Gang of 14, seven Republican and seven Democratic senators, agreed to restore order and a modicum of bipartisanship to the judicial selection process, Obama refused to join lest he anger the liberal base.

Special interests? Obama is a champion of the Davis-Bacon Act, an egregious gift to Big Labor that makes every federal public-works project more costly. He not only vows to defend it, but proposes extending it to artificially raise wages for any guest worker program.

On Iraq, of course he denigrates the surge. That’s required of Democratic candidates. But he further claims that the Sunnis turned against al-Qaeda and joined us — get this — because of the Democratic victory in the 2006 midterm elections.

Obama has yet to have it pointed out to him by a mainstream interviewer that the Anbar Salvation Council was founded by Sheik Abdul Sattar Abu Risha two months earlier. Obama has yet to be asked why any Sunni would choose to join up with the American invaders at precisely the time when Democrats would have them leaving — and be left like the pro-American Vietnamese or the pro-French Algerians to be hunted and killed when their patrons were gone. That’s suicide.

Even if you believe that a Clinton restoration would be a disaster, you should still be grateful for New Hampshire. National swoons, like national hysterias, obliterate thought. The New Hampshire surprise has at least temporarily broken the spell. Maybe now someone will lift the curtain and subject our newest man from hope to the scrutiny that every candidate deserves.

Years ago Hillary said, “You don’t have to fall in love, you just have to fall in line.” Unfortunately for her the media’s fallen in love… with Obama.


Last night I liveblogged with the Heading Right gang, and we thought that either Fred won, or that it was a McCain/Fred tie.

Here’s Fred mopping the floor with Huck:

Today JASmius of Hard Starboard posted A Mute Commentary pointing to Giuliani,

Nice to see that Fred did well. One could make the case that Fred has topped every debate he’s been in. Regrettably, debates do not win elections, and they’re not getting FDT out of single digits. How much less so this cycle, when substance looks more and more like it’s being abandoned in favor of emotion and symbolism (Huckles, Obama, and Hillary’s crocodile tears) and sheer mass amnesia (McCain).

I’m a little surprised that Romney is melting under the pressure. But he should be scared, his modest, early delegate lead not withstanding. There’s no way he’s going to “second place” himself to the nomination, no matter how wishfully the Romneylans think. His entire strategy was predicated on winning Iowa and New Hampshire. Now he has to win Michigan, or it’ll be perceived as strike three for his campaign. And the latest polling composite there has McCain pulling slightly ahead.

I agree with Patrick Basham (or, since I posted the idea before he did, it may be more accruate to say that he agrees with me) that the ultimate beneficiary of Huck’s and McCain’s double-team on Romney will be Giuliani, who is poised to swoop in, take Florida and clean up on February 5th. Not only is he better equipped organizationally, financially, and notoriatily to wage a national campaign than “Sailor” or the Rev’rund, but after the “near-death experience” through which conservatives are currently suffering at the spectre of the two least trustworthy, left-most Republicans in the field winning the first two “bellweather” nominating contests, even Rudy’s social liberalism will gain a whole new palatability if he can enable the GOP to avert both the complete evisceration of the Reagan coalition and total disaster in November. Giuliani-Thompson, anyone?

Yeah, I’m the guy who spent the past year saying that “America’s Mayor” was unnominatable. But I could never have imagined that the twenty-first century Elmer Gantry and Darth Queeg would emerge as frontrunners, either. We do live in “interesting” times. And that isn’t a good thing.

What is interesting in both articles is that the top spots are in contention. A year ago things were looking like the annointed would take it all.

Now, who knows.

Betsy also notices that “Republicans must be in the position of not only considering which candidate they like the most, but also vote defensively for the one best able to win the general election.”


Share on Facebook

Hillary, the media and today’s roster

Friday, November 9th, 2007

Betsy’s asking, Has the victim card been played out?
It’ll never be played out. There’s too much riding on the victimology industry.

It takes a village to tip a single mom


Jihad on panties

Siggy writes about Media Dances And Other Forms Of Distraction and this week’s Useful Media Idiot of the Week

Bernard Kerik has been indicted. I agree with Macsmind that “But this is good news in a way for Guilliani the story will be three days old by Monday.”

Jammie Wearing Fool has the whole roster of Hillary cronies.

Green Mountain Politics has a good Giuliani impersonation.


Via Larwyn, Roy Spencer on Global Warming

As N.Y. Economy Sours, Aliens Plan To Leave for Home, or at least for Newark.

The Van Gogh didn’t sell

Via Sex and the South,
cash advance

Last night’s debate, and Fred en espanol

Monday, October 22nd, 2007

For the first time, the candidates actually got to debate each others’ points. The WaPo says, Attacks Sharpen Among Party’s Principal Rivals. Fred Thompson’s running as a conservative, and he’s not keeping quiet about it:

Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney were quickly put on the defensive, fending off criticism leveled by former senator Fred D. Thompson (Tenn.), who questioned their conservative credentials.

While the debate played on TV I was keeping an eye on Carlos Curbelo’s liveblogging in Spanish at the Fred Thompson site.

As I mentioned last night, I was skeptical over the bilingual experiment. The Democrat instant-translation effort at Univision was ghastly not only because of the pandering but also because the translation was awful. Carlos did an excellent job translating but also bringing out Fred’s points at the same time as the other candidates.

While the average Spanish-speaking voter probably won’t need the liveblogging because they already know English, the liveblogging in Spanish apprears to be a useful tool to inform newly arrived residents to the US on the campaign’s positions. Currently, as Florida residents are well aware, there’s a significant influx of new (legal) residents coming in from Venezuela and other South American countries. The Thompson campaign has an innovative approach, and it’s starting to show.

John McCain got a Standing O:

Fox News did a woefully inadecuate job of allotting time to the candidates. Ed Morrissey noticed, too. I wish the media would pay more attention to Duncan Hunter, who is well informed on national security, immigration and the role of government.

But at least we finally got a debate.

Meanwhile, while the debate was on, our boys (and girls) in Iraq were busy smashing a big Iranian backed militia base in Sadr City

Memeorandum, however, only sees the debate through the Hillary prism.
Theo Spark has this:


Share on Facebook

Cheating husbands and all that

Monday, October 22nd, 2007

Language alert:
While I consistently strive to maintain a certain leve of discourse in this blog, the quotes in this post are unedited for cursing and coarse language

Rep. Charles Rangel Apparently Refers to Giuliani as a ‘Cheating Goddamn Husband’

Apparently? Did he, or didn’t he say it?

Well, let’s take a look: Rudy’s Doin[‘ It!
Battle Stations! Shocked Cacophony Among New York Democrats That Rudy They Know May Actually Become Republican Candidate; ‘Romney Is Entitled to Three Wives,’ Says Charlie Rangel

Referring to Andrew Giuliani’s reportedly distant relationship with his father since the ugly bust-up of Mr. Giuliani’s marriage with Donna Hanover, Mr. Rangel said it was because “sons respect and admire their fathers, but they love their mothers against cheating goddamn husbands.”

And touching on another of Mr. Giuliani’s public difficulties – Mr. Giuliani’s close association with Bernard Kerik, the disgraced former police commissioner – Mr. Rangel said he regretted that all the personal problems surfaced so soon in the electoral process. “I’m sorry this damned thing turned out so early because, really, just like Kerik, it would have bombed his ass out,” said Mr. Rangel.

But Mr. Rangel said he still looked forward to Mr. Giuliani’s Republican opponents making an issue of his infidelity – “Romney could say, ‘I’m entitled to three wives,'” Mr. Rangel said – and said that when it came to abortion, “The church will take care of his ass all alone.”

Such is Charlie Rangel’s concern for the public morals and the high level of political discourse that he can not restrain his opprobrium.

Thanks, Charlie; where were you in ’98?

Pejman‘s asking a similar question.

Share on Facebook

Fred announces on Leno

Thursday, September 6th, 2007

Fred Thompson Makes A Late-Night Late Entry

And he brought up the WOT while at it.

I was live-blogging (after a delayed start due to internet connection issues!) the Republican debate last night with the guys at Heading Right (Captain Ed has a wrap-up here), and felt that Fred was right to have not taken part in the debate – which by the way, was the first real debate from either party. To begin with, while Fox and the moderators did an excellent job, it was the first night of school in most of the country; not a good night. The first primary is still months away, and the election is over a year away, so only us bloggers and die-hard political news junkies were watching, and even then, those of us who weren’t at the local schools for orientation.

And then, Fred got a lot of mileage from the debate itself,

Thompson’s Republican rivals appeared unbowed by his entry and used their forum to take potshots at him for skipping the debate. “Maybe we’re up past his bedtime,” Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) quipped. Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani joked: “I think Fred is a really, really good man. I think he’s done a pretty good job of playing my part on ‘Law & Order.’ “

Fred then topped off the evening by announcing on Leno, overshadowing the debate itself. As Ed points out, by announcing there,

The format allowed Thompson to give a substantive and detailed answer that the debate simply wouldn’t allow.

Once a few more candidates on the Republican side drop off, things will start to get interesting.

PS, The NYT has the Transcript of the Fox News Republican Presidential Candidates Debate.


Share on Facebook

Puerto Rico and Hugo’s subs, in today’s round-up

Tuesday, June 26th, 2007

No, not these subs; the Russian subs: Mora writes,

Chavez is heading to Russia in the next few days, to discuss the purchase of five kilo-class submarines, and possibly four more advanced amur-class subs. There are questions as to how he would be able to finance them as well as how obtain the advanced training to bring them online, but there is no question from his statments that he wants them.

The financing might involve not only oil, but also drugs. As I have pointed out, Hugo needs money for financing his “Bolivarian Revolution”, i.e., his desire to control all of Latin America’s politics. For that he needs money. A huge amount of money. The drug trade is one source.

As for the advanced training, I’m sure Putin will provide the personnel as part of the deal. Don’t believe for a moment that Vlad’s going to hand Hugo valuable war weapons without keeping a firm hand in the works.

Mora also points out,

Although there are many islands in the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf Of Mexico, and many colonial powers, it’s significant that Chavez alluded to the U.S.’s and France’s prime presences there. In the past he’s threatened Netherlands and its overseas territories, and he’s always hated Britain, but now he seems to have singled out France. While Chavez’s antipathy to the U.S. is well-known, what’s less well-known is that France’s new president, Nicolas Sarkozy, has an interest in the region and a clear understanding about Chavez. He’s stepped up his ties to Venezuela’s battered neighbor, Colombia, and probably will become more active in the region as Chavez’s aggression steps up. Chavez knows this, and wants to throw out a few threat to France and the U.S. now.

This segues well with my theory on the drug trade: France has repeatedly caught tons of cocaine proceeding from Caracas in the past (including the seizing of a vessel carrying 18 tons of cocaine on March last year. I explored this connection between Chavez and the drug trade on my post of April 13, 2006 (scroll down).

Hugo may be fooling some, but he’s certainly not fooling Lech Waleska: Via Gateway Pundit

“I believe Chávez is a huge demagogue and populist who says one thing and does a quite different thing. He likes giving away what does not belong to him and tries to take advantage of people’s dissatisfaction,” he added.

One thing for sure, Hugo’s not fooling Newton


Immigration and Terrorists in the US: Connect the Dots
In a nutshell – terrorists flew under the radar in 1986, over-stayed visas, and rode the curtails of illegal Mexicans who had crossed the border all the way to citizenship. Do we want to do that again? Can we afford it?


In other, totally unrelated news, Hitchens asks, Let’s stop channelling angry Muslims
Look Forward to Anger
It’s impossible to satisfy “Rage Boy” and his ilk. It’s stupid to try.

The lives of Shiite Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Christians—to say nothing of atheists or secularists—are considered by Sunni militants to be of little or no account. And yet they accuse those who criticize them of bigotry! And many people are so anxious to pre-empt this accusation that they ventriloquize the reactions of Sunni mobs as if they were the vox populi, all the while muttering that we must take care not to offend such supersensitive people.

This mental and moral capitulation has a bearing on the argument about Iraq, as well. We are incessantly told that the removal of the Saddam Hussein despotism has inflamed the world’s Muslims against us and made Iraq hospitable to terrorism, for all the world as if Baathism had not been pumping out jihadist rhetoric for the past decade (as it still does from Damascus, allied to Tehran). But how are we to know what will incite such rage? A caricature published in Copenhagen appears to do it. A crass remark from Josef Ratzinger (leader of an anti-war church) seems to have the same effect. A rumor from Guantanamo will convulse Peshawar, the Muslim press preaches that the Jews brought down the Twin Towers, and a single citation in a British honors list will cause the Iranian state-run press to repeat its claim that the British government—along with the Israelis, of course—paid Salman Rushdie to write The Satanic Verses to begin with. Exactly how is such a mentality to be placated?

We may have to put up with the Rage Boys of the world, but we ought not to do their work for them, and we must not cry before we have been hurt. In front of me is a copy of this week’s Economist, which states that Rushdie’s 1989 death warrant was “punishment for the book’s unflattering depiction of the Prophet Muhammad.” There is no direct depiction of the prophet in this work of fiction, and the reverie about his many wives occurs in the dream of a madman. Nobody in Ayatollah Khomeini’s circle could possibly have read the book for him before he issued a fatwah, which made it dangerous to possess. Yet on that occasion, the bookstore chains of America pulled The Satanic Verses from their shelves, just as Borders shamefully pulled Free Inquiry (a magazine for which I write) after it reproduced the Danish cartoons. Rage Boy keenly looks forward to anger, while we worriedly anticipate trouble, and fret about etiquette, and prepare the next retreat. If taken to its logical conclusion, this would mean living at the pleasure of Rage Boy, and that I am not prepared to do.

Interesting to see that The Economist is referring to the Prophet Mohammed; I’ve been subscribing to The Economist for decades now and never once have I seen them refer to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Fred Thompson has more to say about Rushdie.


GreenMountain politics posts on Giuliani.

Go, Pundit, Go has a video on the Dems and the unions


Side note:
We’ve been on the road, and I’m happy to recommend the Subway franchise for a fast lunch. You can get a freshly-made salad with as many or as few toppings as you like, without having to put up with greasy burgers or overfried, overseasoned chicken.

Posted in Caribbean, Fred Thompson, Hugo Chavez, Latin America, Puerto Rico, Rudolph Giuliani, Russia, Saddam Hussein, Venezuela, Vladimir Putin | 1 Comment »