Giuliani draws up guest list for Dems’ inauguration

Two weeks ago, Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) made some intemperate comments about the president, which led to a major-league, far-right freakout (Stark later apologized). But as “edgy” as Stark’s comments were, they were no more unhinged than this.

On Iran, Giuliani criticized Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., also a candidate for president, for saying they would engage in diplomatic relations with Iran. Obama has said he would be willing to meet with Iran’s leader in the first year of his presidency without conditions; Clinton has said envoys below the presidential level should begin diplomatic work.

“This is the world we live in. It’s not this happy, romantic-like world where we’ll negotiate with this one, or we’ll negotiate with that one and there will be no preconditions, and we’ll invite (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad to the White House, we’ll invite Osama (bin Laden) to the White House,” Giuliani said.

“Hillary and Obama are kind of debating whether to invite them to the inauguration or the inaugural ball,” he added.

I know it was just a cheap applause line, but a leading Republican presidential candidate feels comfortable accusing two leading Democratic candidates of embracing Ahmadinejad and bin Laden? Is Giuliani running for president of the United States or president of Pajama’s Media?

Andrew Sullivan, who described Giuliani as “literally insane,” added, “If he is starting with this kind of unhinged claim, where will he end up?” It’s a discomforting thought.

For that matter, Instaputz offered an interesting thought experiment: “Let’s have Richardson or Biden (not even Hillary or Obama) suggest that George Bush has been so good for al Qaeda that he’s going to invite bin Laden out to the house in Crawford — and see what the response is.”

I suspect it’d be rather intense.

For what it’s worth, Giuliani seems anxious to prove to as large an audience as possible that he doesn’t know what on earth he’s talking about.

He argued that had the U.S. not invaded Iraq, it would now be facing two dangerous countries trying to become nuclear powers — Iraq and Iran.

“Suppose Hillary Clinton and John Edwards’ new position was their position back then, that it was a mistake to take him out,” Giuliani said, referring to former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. “Wouldn’t we be dealing with Saddam Hussein becoming nuclear right now? If Iran was becoming nuclear what would he be doing? Sitting there letting his arch enemy gain nuclear power over him? Or would we now be dealing with two countries seeking to become nuclear powers.”

Iraq didn’t have a nuclear program, we had U.N. inspectors on the ground, and Iran only scrambled to start a nuclear program as an insurance policy against a U.S. confrontation.

Giuliani’s foreign policy analysis has all the sophistication of a child who picked up a copy of the Weekly Standard and doesn’t understand what it means.

Rudy’s buddy Podheretz was on PBS last night telling us all how anyone who doesn’t want to get into another war (IOW the sane people) are just like the people who appeased Hitler.

This is going to be a long election cycle.

  • CB wrote: “Giuliani’s foreign policy analysis has all the sophistication of a child who picked up a copy of the Weekly Standard and doesn’t understand what it means.”

    I would say he has the sophistication of a child who picked up a copy of the Weekly World News and didn’t get the joke.

  • Is Giuliani running for president of the United States or president of Pajama’s Media?

    Pajama’s Media and all of their little friends;>

  • This one seems so easy that both Clinton and Obama need their butts kicked if they don’t fire back today immediately something to the effect of, Rudy Giuliani must either think the next president should meet with these people personally or else that we should refuse to talk to Iran until after they build nuclear weapons, the same way the Republicans in the White House now did with North Korea.

  • Stark’s comments “edgy”? The one guy who has spoken truth in all this deserved credit, not criticism. Unfortunately, like everybody else, he caved.

    Giuliani’s comments were certainly unhinged. But in a nation which approves of the death penalty and torture and theocracy and TeeVee, they hardly seem out of line. I just read that Huffington Post has added celebrity news feeds from People and US Weekly to its political news and blogs. Bread and circuses, here we come, and as long as the circuses are attention-getting enough, we do with even less bread.

  • Let’s have Richardson or Biden (not even Hillary or Obama) suggest that George Bush has been so good for al Qaeda that he’s going to invite bin Laden out to the house in Crawford — and see what the response is.

    Are you kidding? You don’t even need to have Biden say this – just have a prominent left-leaning BLOGGER say something like that and the media would have the long knives out ready to carve him/her up for thanksgiving dinner, nevermind the shrieks and howls from the right-wing crazy squads coming around to stalk their families and dig through their garbage.

  • I saw the clip of Giuliani saying the bit about inviting Ahmadinejad and Osama to the White House last night, and I’m pretty sure he actually said “Assad” (Syria) and not “Osama”. I’m certainly not excusing the remark, but I do think the transcript is wrong.

  • Comments are closed.