Democrats Jump on Rudy Giuliani for Something He Didn't Say

OhDear · 04-26-2007, 07:38 AM

This Article tells how misinformation spoken by the media gets responded to by some of the potential candidates for the next Presidential election.

OD

THE LINK

Quote:

New 9/11?
Washington woke up to morning headlines that Rudy Giuliani predicted a "new 9-11" if a Democrat wins the presidency in 2008. Barack Obama responded that Giuliani has "taken the politics of fear to a new low." John Edwards said Giuliani's comments were "divisive and plain wrong." And Hillary Clinton called it "political rhetoric" that would not lessen the threat of terrorism.
The problem is Giuliani never said what the headlines claimed. It all started with a story in The Politico newspaper, which contained not a single quote to support its lead and headline. But it got picked up elsewhere nonetheless.
What Giuliani actually did say is what he has been saying for weeks, that Democrats would play defense instead of offense in the War on Terror, the same approach tried back before 9/11.

CrazyFlamingos · 04-26-2007, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhDear

This Article tells how misinformation spoken by the media gets responded to by some of the potential candidates for the next Presidential election.

OD

THE LINK

No offense, Oh Dear, but I think your subject heading is a little prejudicial in its own right.

True, the Democrats were reacting to something he didn't say. But the blame lies not with them but with the media who misquoted Giuliani in the first place.

OhDear · 04-26-2007, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos

No offense, Oh Dear, but I think your subject heading is a little prejudicial in its own right.

True, the Democrats were reacting to something he didn't say. But the blame lies not with them but with the media who misquoted Giuliani in the first place.

Crazy Flamingo, I am sorry. I only did a copy and paste of the title given to the article at all. I did not make up my own title. You see, I was in the process of getting kids up for school. And so I read the article and thought, "Hmmm, I wonder what all my fine friends over at the DtT will think of this?"
So I did a quick post of the article, and did only copy and paste.

And I only thought it could bring some conversation about media portrayal of any candidate. And how well should one know the facts, before they offer their views to the public.

OD

teethandclaws · 04-26-2007, 09:02 AM

You know, he [Giuliani] talked about how if a Democrat took office, they would be cutting back on the powers of the Patriot Act and have laxer security.
I am of the mind that we need to restore American's freedoms, if the government wants to stalk visitors to this country that would be appropriate, and tighten our nation's border security that would be appropriate, and if they want to make foreign tourists sit around for two hours or however long is appropriate at the airports to do security checks on them, that would be appropriate, and if they want to tap the phones in hotel and motel rooms, (or payphones outside of them) that would be appropriate too.
It seems to me the average joe citizen is the one losing freedoms and the people who should be having trouble getting into this country, get a pass.
How does that make America safer?