Playing Hooky with Rudy G.

Jesse Walker | June 20, 2007

If Rudy Giuliani sometimes seems a little uninformed about foreign policy, it could be because he has more pressing interests:

Rudolph Giuliani's membership on an elite Iraq study panel came to an abrupt end last spring after he failed to show up for a single official meeting of the group, causing the panel's top Republican to give him a stark choice: either attend the meetings or quit, several sources said.

Giuliani left the Iraq Study Group last May after just two months, walking away from a chance to make up for his lack of foreign policy credentials on the top issue in the 2008 race, the Iraq war.

He cited "previous time commitments" in a letter explaining his decision to quit, and a look at his schedule suggests why - the sessions at times conflicted with Giuliani's lucrative speaking tour that garnered him $11.4 million in 14 months.

Comments

|6.20.07 @ 3:53PM|#

Paging Eric Dondero....

|6.20.07 @ 3:58PM|#

No foreign policy experience? Rudy? Why, he was mayor of New York! And he fended off the foreign terrorist attacks on September 11! Rudy!

What crappy candidates we have this time around. . .with one exception from Tejas.

This is reminiscent of Rome ignoring the age and experience requirements for the magistracies just prior to the fall of the Republic. We have a bunch of candidates who just don't seem to have the right credentials for the job. Except maybe for Richardson, which doesn't make him great, but at least he's not total fluff.

Russ 2000|6.20.07 @ 4:01PM|#

At least he understands finance.

Fluffy|6.20.07 @ 4:01PM|#

Rudy has lots of demands on his time. He has to find Bernie Kerik jobs, he has to shag socialites, all those divorce attorney meetings...it's really taxing.

Urkobold™|6.20.07 @ 4:08PM|#

GIULIANI? HA! HE KNOWS NOTHING. WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT A CANDIDATE WHEN YOUR SOLE SUCCESS STORY INVOLVES BEATING UP SOME HOOKERS AND LAYING PROSTRATE BEFORE SOME AMATEUR PILOTS?

ZOD, ON THE OTHER HAND, KNOWS FOREIGN POLICY FIRSTHAND, HAVING CONQUERED MUCH OF KRYPTON. AND IF ZOD HAD BEEN MAYOR OF NEW YORK DURING 9/11, THE HEAD OF BIN LADEN WOULD'VE MYSTERIOUSLY APPEARED ON TOP OF THE COMPLETELY UNDAMAGED WORLD TRADE CENTER.

AI|6.20.07 @ 4:09PM|#

He didn't need to show up anymore because his standard plan of "arrest them all and sodomize them with broomsticks" was already implemented.

alec|6.20.07 @ 4:24PM|#

Rudy Giuliani or Vampire?

|6.20.07 @ 4:25PM|#

Nosferatu walks in the sun! Aiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

|6.20.07 @ 4:27PM|#

Let's see - sit on a panel to offer opinions that will never be used...opinions that your future opponents can use against you for an entire presidential campaign, or make 11 mil?

Rudy just might get my vote on this one.

|6.20.07 @ 4:30PM|#

It was also noted on the front page of the NYT today that Rudy's campaign manager in Arizona was busted for running a cocaine distribution ring. Not that there's anything wrong about cocaine distribution, but ha and double ha to that gun and drug grabbing fascist.

|6.20.07 @ 4:34PM|#

Pro Libertate,

Feh. The Roman Republic sucked. Good riddance. ;)

|6.20.07 @ 4:36PM|#

Grotius,

Take your pro-Carthaginian attitudes away!

The Republic beat the Empire, even if it wasn't anything like our little republican experiment.

|6.20.07 @ 4:37PM|#

South Carolina, not Arizona. oops.

|6.20.07 @ 4:39PM|#

Pro Libertate,

The Republic should have been known as The Aristocracy. Plus, the plebs had it far better under the Empire.

|6.20.07 @ 4:47PM|#

Did anyone hear about the one speech by Giuliani to a University somewhere (not sure where, IIRC South Carolina). He was talking about "the terrorist threat" then started yelling "They HATE you! They HATE you! They want to kill you, you and YOUUU!" while he pointed to members in the audience.

What a fear-mongering bastard.

|6.20.07 @ 4:50PM|#

"They HATE you! They HATE you! They want to kill you, you and YOUUU!"

I know that, Mr. Mayor. That's not why people disagree with you.

I know they want to kill me. I know they pulled of a big attack five and a half years ago.

I want to live as a free man anyway. Don't you get that?

lunchstealer|6.20.07 @ 4:53PM|#

Cesar,

If he was at USC, he may have been pointing at the jackasses from Borat. Although to be honest, like most people, the terrorists don't so much hate them as just intensely dislike them.

lunchstealer|6.20.07 @ 4:53PM|#

But who doesn't want to kill them, if only to put them out of their misery?

LarryA|6.20.07 @ 4:56PM|#

No foreign policy experience? Rudy? Why, he was mayor of New York! And he fended off the foreign terrorist attacks on September 11!

And he put up with all the U.N. folks.

|6.20.07 @ 5:00PM|#

Cab's, right: make $11 mil giving the same stump speech or sit on a panel and maybe hear about the blowback theory. Groups that pay big bucks for blowhards like Rudy and Clinton to speak, when you can read their ideas for free in TIME, are obviously offering thinly disguised bribes and downpayments on future
favors and contracts.

|6.20.07 @ 5:01PM|#

Now, Grotius, the reforms in favor of the plebs pretty much all happened under the Republic. What are you, some sort of Caesarian apologist?

One interesting thing is how much the provinces remained the same under the Empire. Even the crazy and/or evil emperors mostly limited their craziness to the city of Rome.

|6.20.07 @ 5:34PM|#

Pro Liberate and Grotius,

Perhaps, but what have the Romans ever done for us?!?

*the aqueduct*

What?

*the aqueduct*

Ok... but besides the aqueduct, what have the Romans ever done for us?

|6.20.07 @ 5:41PM|#

Pro Libertate,

I dunno, one of my favorite classics professors described the Empire as a far more humane place than the Republic.

As for the provinces, yeah, they continued to be run just as Rome had been under the Republic, with local aediles, etc. running the show.

|6.20.07 @ 5:42PM|#

Taktix,

As far as the east was concerned, they already had all that shit long before the Romans came. What capital development that came as a result of Roman rule largely happened in the west.

|6.20.07 @ 5:45PM|#

Not a huge fan of Giuliani, but since when is it a libertarian POV to beat up on someone for raising money instead of attending a bunch of statist government meetings?

tlxtftrf|6.20.07 @ 6:10PM|#

something that I noticed at the last debate that was notably absent from reason was when rudy asserted that we stuck it out and won in vietnam. everyone already knows rudy doesn't know anything about international affairs.

|6.20.07 @ 6:15PM|#

jh,

Personally, I'm attacking Rudy because I don't like his authoritarian ways. I'd probably insult him if he helped an old lady across the road at this point. He's earned my disdain.

Fluffy|6.20.07 @ 7:13PM|#

I often think that had the Gracchi won, the history of Europe would be much, much different. I think the resulting republic would have had a chance to stand. The republic fell because its true power base was too narrow, and this allowed adventurers to build up competing power centers that were loyal to persons and not to institutions. Had the Gracchi won, or had the Social Wars turned out differently, it might have ended better.

Jesse Walker|6.20.07 @ 7:27PM|#

Not a huge fan of Giuliani, but since when is it a libertarian POV to beat up on someone for raising money instead of attending a bunch of statist government meetings?

If he were out making money instead of running for president, I'd agree with you.

|6.20.07 @ 9:31PM|#

...since when is it a libertarian POV to beat up on someone for raising money instead of attending a bunch of statist government meetings?

Sorry, it's his job to attend the meetings if he's appointed to the panel. Surprisingly enough if you attend meetings you frequently end up learning facts.

Indeed, this is somewhat reminiscent of John Kerry's performance on Intelligence Committee Hearings. Perhaps if he had bothered to attend enough hearings instead of showboating around (as he seems to have done with his life since about 1964) he might have learned, along with Chairman Graham, that the Mesopotamian Adventure was a real bad idea.

|6.20.07 @ 11:56PM|#

Correction: "ranking Democrat Graham"

Sorry.

|6.21.07 @ 12:23AM|#

"Not a huge fan of Giuliani, but since when is it a libertarian POV to beat up on someone for raising money instead of attending a bunch of statist government meetings?"


Notwithstanding Jesse Walker's point about running for President, I'd be a bit more sympathetic if Guiliani had resigned on his own, or better still, had declined to participate in the first place. The suspicion here is he wanted to have the Study Group on his resume, but did not show up in order to avoid generating any quotes for his opponents to attack him on.

|6.21.07 @ 2:18AM|#

joe says: "I want to live as a free man anyway. Don't you get that?"

Ummm, based on your previous posts, I'd say no, you don't. But if you've had an epiphany and are now ready to eschew statist nonsense -- welcome to the libertarian club!

/Ducks. Runs out of room.

|6.21.07 @ 5:02AM|#

Hmmm... A choice between serving your country, or making some dough. Not too hard a choice for a guy like him to make.

|6.21.07 @ 5:27AM|#

Again, I don't much care for Giuliani, but this article and thread has been bugging me all day. I finally figured out why (at 11 p.m. Hawaii time):

Substitute "Ron Paul" for "Rudy Giuliani" in this story, and instead of the headline reading "Playing Hooky with Rudy G.", it would read, "Ron Paul raises $11.4 million!" -- and the content would entirely ignore the AWOL at the statist government meetings thing -- and the posts on this thread would be ecstatic that Ron Paul had accomplished that.

If our goal is to be called partisan hypocrites, we're off to a good start here. My advice would be to slink into a corner and hope nobody from the MSM reads this thread and decides to hang libertarians with the rope we've so generously handed them here.

|6.21.07 @ 9:47AM|#

jh,

The confusion you're experiencing is a consequence of not understanding the difference between money and freedom.

|6.21.07 @ 1:44PM|#

Not a huge fan of Giuliani, but since when is it a libertarian POV to beat up on someone for raising money instead of attending a bunch of statist government meetings?

jh -

Look at the first sentence in the post; it's talking about Giuliani's lack of foreign policy knowledge. We're not beating up on him for raising money; we're beating up on him for being a willfully ignorant piece of shit.

Heck, let's assume your hypothetical is correct, and Ron Paul skipped Iraq Study Group meetings to fundraise, and we praised him for it (I clearly disagree with you on the likelihood of these things happening, but skip that for now).

Here's a big difference in your imaginary scenario: One of these candidates didn't stand on a stage recently claiming that he'd never heard of the concept of blowback. If one person is allowed to play hooky from an "Iraq Study Group," shouldn't it be the one who already shows at least a little understanding of the material?