Giuliani's Newest Lie

[Agent Smith]

9/11 Workers Outraged by New Rudy Claim
By Celest Katz
The New York Daily News

Friday 10 August 2007

Rudy Giuliani drew outrage and indignation from Sept. 11 first-responders yesterday by saying he spent as much time - or more - exposed to the site's dangers as workers who dug through the debris for the missing and the dead.

Speaking to reporters at a Cincinnati Reds ballgame he caught between fund-raisers, the GOP front-runner said he helped 9/11 families and defended himself against critics of how he managed the attack's aftermath.

"This is not a mayor or a governor or a President who's sitting in an ivory tower," Giuliani said. "I was at Ground Zero as often, if not more, than most of the workers. I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them."

His statement rang false to Queens paramedic Marvin Bethea, who said he suffered a stroke, posttraumatic stress disorder and breathing problems after responding to the attacks.

"I personally find that very, very insulting," he said.

"Standing there doing a photo-op and telling the men, 'You're doing a good job,' I don't consider that to be working," said Bethea, 47.

Ironworker Jonathan Sferazo, 52, who said he spent a month at the site and is now disabled, runs a worker advocacy group with Bethea and called Giuliani's comments "severely" out of line.

"He's not one of us. He never has been and he never will be. He never served in a capacity where he was a responder," Sferazo said.

In the aftermath of the attacks, admirers dubbed Giuliani "America's Mayor," praising his leadership in the face of an unprecedented disaster. Detractors, including the International Association of Fire Fighters, which put out a scathing 13-minute video on his performance, suggested he profited politically and financially from the attacks.

"[Giuliani] is self-absorbed, arrogant and deluded," said IAFF spokesman Jeff Zack.

Responded Giuliani spokesman Michael McKeon, "Americans saw Rudy's performance for themselves during the aftermath of 9/11 and will dismiss this as the ridiculous and partisan rantings of a Democratic front group, because that's what they are."

Giuliani backer Lee Ielpi, a retired firefighter who lost his son, said no one's saying Giuliani dug through the rubble personally, but that doesn't mean he wasn't exposed to toxins.

"For me to say I saw him every day [would] not be fair," said Ielpi, who participated in the recovery effort for nine months. "But I can say I did see the mayor there a large number of times, [trying] to be as helpful and supportive as possible."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007...udy_claim.html

[KeithPA]

I saw that John Edwards went after him on this comment, they are both pathetic.

He had a lower approval rating before 9/11 than Bush has now. Very few people in NYC even like the man, yet somehow he is America's mayor. We definately know he is anti-gun. His "it's up to the states" gun motto clearly shows he likes gun control and sees that NYC needs it.

I really feel bad for all those NYC rescue workers who now have asthma, cancer, and the complications from working at ground zero. Those ailments that NYC is constantly fighting and claiming aren't real. Hopefully if Giuliani did truely spend that much time there he will be gone shortly.

[reels18]

All politicians are hardwired to lie. He is no different than the rest of the pack.

Accusing him of being a gun grabber has its merits. There may be some doubt in the minds of some gun owners.

On the other hand, there are no doubts in the minds of all gun owners what the other side will do. They did it before and they are eager to do it again.

Unless Fred announces, or an even longer shot, Ron Paul wins the nomination, Rudy is our best hope against the dark side.

American gun owners should be well acquainted with the two handed voting method.

One hand to pull the lever, the other to hold your nose while doing so.

[Lougotzz]

I come from NY and I think Rudy is a real liar. I dont like him one bit.


The problem is if Ron Paul doesnt get in who would you rather have. Rudy or Hillary. Is there a chance Rudy can do a few things good? I dont know. I would love to see Ron Paul in but that is like wishing for the right lotto numbers. Very small chance. Even if Ron gets in he has a congress to deal with. They are not going to go along with his plans. They want exactly the opposite of what he wants. The only hope Ron Paul has if he is lucky enough to be president is to make massive grid lock. Veto all their spending and be an absolute road block for the self centered politicians that want to destroy America.

[steve762]

I'm not trying to attack them, but let's assume that those attacking Giuliani (an ironworker couldn't be a big union guy, right?) have their own agenda, illness or not.

I don't think his statement was accurate, but I'd call it exaggeration more than a lie.

Rudy's not my choice, but if by some chance he does (and I'm spending some personal time, effort, and money to ensure that he doesn't) get the GOP nomination, he's all we've got.

I really don't want to wake up on January 21, 2009 to hear President Clinton. I shudder to think what she and a Democrat Congress would do to the 2nd Amendment.

So file it away as a reason not to vote for Rudy in the primaries.

[D-FENS]

Originally Posted by steve762

I really don't want to wake up on January 21, 2009 to hear President Clinton.

Is there any discernible difference between the two?

[Lougotzz]

THC I have to agree with you is there any real difference between the 2. Maybe on some issues but I think they would sign the smae type of bills into law. It is a bad situation no matter how you look at it.

[Turbinesaint]

Is anyone else getting tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils? I know that I sure as hell am.

[D-FENS]

Originally Posted by Turbinesaint

Is anyone else getting tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils? I know that I sure as hell am.

Welcome to Ron Paul's entire Base.

Lougotzz:

I honestly don't see them differently on anything. Feel free to correct me. They're both for Amnesty for illegals, both for gun control, both have no stand-out position on the FedResv, both support a campaign through the Middle East. Both want to give extra rights to Gays.

I would be interested in seeing if there is any real difference between them and by "real" I mean historical, not just the BS they spew on the Campaign trail.

[Agent Smith]

Originally Posted by TheHighChild

Welcome to Ron Paul's entire Base.

Lougotzz:

I honestly don't see them differently on anything. Feel free to correct me. They're both for Amnesty for illegals, both for gun control, both have no stand-out position on the FedResv, both support a campaign through the Middle East. Both want to give extra rights to Gays.

I would be interested in seeing if there is any real difference between them and by "real" I mean historical, not just the BS they spew on the Campaign trail.

I'm with you on that. They seem pretty much the same to me.