From a Whisper to a Scream

Last week Greg Sargent found video of Rudy Giuliani's infamous speech at a 1992 rally when 10,000 cops protested, then rioted, in front of City Hall.

Sargent speculated that "it might tell us something about the reliability and temperament of this man who is asking us to make him our next Commander in Chief -- especially now that he's trying to win the support of GOP 'values voters.'" Skeptical (mostly conservative) bloggers thought Sargent meant that the word "bullshit" would alienate conservative voters -- Michelle Malkin here, Ann Althouse here. Althouse, in an awesome moment of irony, simply denied that Giuliani was "unhinged" or "screaming."

He's not "screaming" "bullsh*t." Nor has he "come unhinged" (as TPM puts it.)

He's addressing what appears to be a police union rally and giving a rousing speech, which contains the shouted expletive "bullsh*t." Reminds me of one of my favorite TV shows.

If that was Sargent's point, yeah, he'd be wrong. But as he clarifies today, the problem was that he was whipping up emotion at a racist rally. Here's Wayne Barrett's account in Rudy! An Investigative Biography of Rudy Giuliani:

Cops carried signs that said "Dump the Washroom Attendant," "Mayor, have you hugged your dealer today" and "Dinkins, We Know Your True-Color--Yellow Bellied." Drawings on their homemade posters depicted the mayor in a '60s Afro with giant lips, or engaged in kinky sex acts. They broke through police barricades and stormed the steps of City Hall, cheering "Take the Hall!" and banging on windows... They chanted "Rudy, Rudy," in thunderous rhythm, as he worked his way through the nearly all-white mob, beaming, backslapping, posing for photos, pumping his fist. WCBC-TV camerman John Haygood was called a nigger. Una Clarke, a city councilwoman from Brooklyn, was stopped by an off-duty copy with a beer in his hand who said to his sidekick: "This nigger says she's a member of the City Council."

As Sargent points out, this was a disaster for Giuliani: New Yorkers were ready for a tough-on-crime white mayor to replace Dinkins, but they didn't want a thug or a bigot. When Giuliani's campaign comissioned a vulnerability study at the end of the year, the rally was addressed near the top of the document:

When dealing with direct questions about the rally, Giuliani should acknowledge and criticize the underlying racial nature of the protest. The biggest problem most voters may have with Giuliani's participation in the rally is his unwillingness to criticize those taking overtly racial pot-shots at the Mayor. Giuliani has yet to admonish those who attacked the Mayor with racist code words on signs and banners. Why not?

When answering Dinkins' attacks on this issue, Giuliani should never engage in the kind of personal sniping at the Mayor that characterized his responses last fall. Mean-spirited counter-charges will do nothing to disprove Dinkins's [sic] assertion that Giuliani is an out-of-control hot-head incapable of governing the city; they only reinforce what Dinkins is trying to prove.

This was 15 years ago: Is it still relevant to the Rudy campaign or to a possible Rudy presidency? If presidential temperment matters at all, then yes, it is. Giuliani refused to denounce the rally, saying that "one of the reasons those police officers might have lost control is that we have a mayor who invites riots." It took the concerted efforts of a campaign task force to tell him, hey, maybe you should distance yourself from a white riot.

UPDATE: Ann Althouse responds in the comment section:

David, it's very obvious that Sargent's original post, that is the post I responded to, this one, was about Giuliani yelling a bad word and how that would supposedly shock what he called "values voters." If he had meant to bring in the racial politics, he'd have put it in that post, which he didn't. Your criticism of me is completely off mark. He's not "clarifying" his real meaning in the newer post, but taking a different tack, which I also respond to. I think you owe me an apology.

Althouse is right about the first Sargent post: It implies that Giuliani's tone of voice and curse word are the scandal. Sargent and I were both aware that Giuliani yelled "bullshit" during a police rally that was charged with racism and ended with a riot, and he should have added that context for people like Althouse, Malkin, etc, whose Googling fingers were sprained that day.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • dhex||

    donde esta dondero?

  • ||

    Why would you distance yourself from a white riot? It's a good Clash song

  • ||

    He didn't look unhinged to me. Dare I say, I agree completely with Althouse.

  • semm||

    No one who didn't already have a seething hatred of Giuliani could look at that and think 'unhinged screaming'

  • Dave Weigel||

    No one who didn't already have a seething hatred of Giuliani could look at that and think 'unhinged screaming'

    Right, Sargent's initial post missed the point. The problem was actually how cold and logical Rudy was in endorsing this racially-charged riot.

  • ||

    Daze, semm,

    If that was Sargent's point, yeah, he'd be wrong. But as he clarifies today, the problem was that he was whipping up emotion at a racist rally.

  • Dave Weigel||

    as he clarifies today, the problem was that he was whipping up emotion at a racist rally.

    BTW, I haven't asked Sargent, but since he's a long-time New York reporter he might have assumed readers knew the context of the "bullshit" speech. It was a huge deal for months and months in the city and through the mayoral campaign.

  • ||

    From Sargent's piece:

    Note to wingnuts: This moment actually had great resonance for African Americans in New York for many, many years. It was a key chapter in the history of both race relations in the city and of Rudy's own rise to power. And Rudy's own campaign internally conceded that this was really, really bad -- that he'd sought to rile up an audience carrying signs saying things about Dinkins like "dump the washroom attendant" without denouncing their crude displays of racism. This is all actually common knowledge to lots of people. You could have established this basic history and context with five minutes on Google or Nexis before holding forth on it.

  • ||

    At this point, somebody will post a comment denying that there is a racial implication tot he "Dump the Washroom Attendant" sign, arguing that because the term "washroom attendant" can be used in a non-racist manner, it is therefore impossible for it to ever have racial overtones.

  • jimmydageek||

    Well, since the N-word was officially laid to rest not too long ago...I only have this to say to joe...


    Washroom attendant, please!

    *I really don't mean anything by it. I just wanted to be the first to say those words.
    /disclosure

  • Chavez is a thug||

    Boy you gotta love the term wingnut. Evidently its definition is: not agreeing with the liberal using it, regardless of the issue. Also, I wonder how many people on this board will similarly denounce the Democratic Candidates for appearing at a convention sponsored by a site that spits more anti-semitic venom than the Ayatollah. I have a feeling those condemnations will be less than forth-coming.

  • Rhywun||

    Wow, I've lived in NYC since '97 and I've never heard of this incident. And racially-charged stuff like this gets dredged up all the time. If Sargent's description is accurate, how thoughtless of Giuliani.

  • Paul Dubuc||

    Sargent's original point was that Giuliani went nuts and screamed bullshit. This was offered in the typical fashion of primary oppo, wherein the goal of both parties is to portray the candidates in the other party as too liberal.

    "Sargent speculated that "it might tell us something about the reliability and temperament of this man who is asking us to make him our next Commander in Chief -- especially now that he's trying to win the support of GOP 'values voters.'"

    He did not "clarify" that today. He offered a whole new point based on information he does not seem to have been aware of when he originally posted. If Sargent thought Rudy is a Klansman, why only question his reliability and temperament?"

    Sargent is selling transparent bullshit, and you're buying it. For shame.

  • Ann Althouse||

    David, it's very obvious that Sargent's original post, that is the post I responded to, this one, was about Giuliani yelling a bad word and how that would supposedly shock what he called "values voters." If he had meant to bring in the racial politics, he'd have put it in that post, which he didn't. Your criticism of me is completely off mark. He's not "clarifying" his real meaning in the newer post, but taking a different tack, which I also respond to. I think you owe me an apology.

  • ||

    especially now that he's trying to win the support of GOP 'values voters.'

    I thought racism was a GOP value.

    I keed, I keed :)

  • Wingnut||

    You owe all of us wing-nuts an apology.

    Althouse may be a racist but she is no conservative.

  • ||

    If that was Sargent's point, yeah, he'd be wrong. But as he clarifies today, the problem was that he was whipping up emotion at a racist rally.

    In which case, the video clip of "unhinged screaming" is irrelevant.

    Sargent's first post seems a clumsy attempt to create an embarrassing gotcha moment -- look he's unhinged! he uses profanity!

    His second post is not a clarification, it's a very different point about the same event.

  • ||

    Dear Ann Althouse:

    Shut the fuck up, you disingenuous cunt! Once you apologize for all the crazy accusations and misrepresentations you throw around, maybe then you will have any legitimacy demanding an apology from ANYONE.

    Regards

    ChicagoTom

  • highnumber||

    Oh, yeah. I remember Ann Althouse now.

  • ||

    Icicle Works...
    Really?

  • ||

    ChicagoTom,

    Relax, buddy. Seriously.

  • ||

    The Ron Paul report "scandal" was Check. This is Checkmate.

    It's now impossible for at least one of the GOP frontrunners to sling race-mud at Ron Paul.

  • ||

    Bull Connor: Man, that guy sure was unreliable. If you could ask Smith and Shipp about the gentlefolk of Marion, IN, I'm sure their first point would be that they can't be relied on (not to put you in a tree).

    Kan't Kount on the Klan!

  • roy edroso||

    Skeptical (mostly conservative) bloggers thought Sargent meant that the word "bullshit" would alienate conservative voters...

    Oh, Dave, you're too polite. What those "mostly conservative" bloggers thought was, "The Frontrunner is under attack! Quick, start spinning!"

  • ||

    " a seething hatred of Giuliani "

    Isn't this the kind of Repbulican President that the Democratics NEED? Isn't there a great fear that with Bush gone there will be no one to hate, nothing to provide focus for the Democratics?

  • dhex||

    there's a whole routine i do when i'm a little snookered about rudy and the 9/11 effect that's very funny. by the end i'm slapping my leg and screaming "keep me safe, daddy! keep me safe! 9/11! 9/11! UNNNNNNNGH."

    if i could figure out a way to sneak hot yogurt into the bar i'd be ready for prime time.

    seriously though, lining up to blow a man who's not only been married three times and who spends his time dry humping a mass grave is probably very unhealthy.

  • ||

    Broken, at the bitter end
    Wasted, sacrificed for a new Nirvana
    Night time, sends us on our way

  • Rhywun||

    Icicle Works... Really?

    Thank you. I kept thinking Icehouse but that seemed wrong.

  • ||

    Ann,

    Dave Weigel will apologize when you can PROVE TO HIM THAT YOU'RE NOT A RACIST! PROVE IT! PROVE IT!!!

    *SOB*

  • Timothy||

    Doesn't Althouse have some crying to do? Crying and whining about boobies?

  • ||

    Check out Althouse non-response reponse to Sargent's update.

    Not a single word about the racist signs and the racist cops. Not worth mentioning, apparently.

    I have to say, she didn't exactly PROVE TO ME THAT SHE'S NOT A RACIST!!! PROVE IT!!! PROVE IT!!!!!!!

    *SOB*

  • ||

    So Giuliani is on the steps of City Hall at high noon sucking the balls of the cops' union. This comes as some sort of shock to you?

  • Paul Dubuc||

    "Hello, New Jersey Lottery? I would like "clarify" the numbers I picked for Saturday's NJ Lottery drawing. The one's I picked out, filled in on the card, had printed on my ticket and confirmed by inspection weren't the ones I MEANT to have. I wish to clarify them. Hello? Helloooo? Anybody there?"

    "Sorry, sir. Bad connection, could you repeat your question?"

    "Yeah, I want to CLARIFY the numbers I picked on Friday for the Saturday draw... Hey, am I on speaker?"

  • ||

    joe,

    Take a deep breath and count to ten. You sound like your coming unhinged. heh

  • Ice Something||

    Sargent and I were both aware that Giuliani yelled "bullshit" during a police rally that was charged with racism and ended with a riot

    You don't have to lie to kick Althouse. She's self-kicking.

    And joe's already taken the Reason-appropriate shill angle on this, pretending to sympathize with libertarians' already existing distaste for her to get them talking the Party's talk for him. You used to remember to do that sometimes.

    This is just sloppy work.

  • ||

    But what does Althouse have to say about thirteen-year-old sex fiends?

  • Dave Weigel||

    You don't have to lie to kick Althouse.

    Sorry, what am I lying about?

  • ||

    If I was going to title this post with an Elvis Costello song title, I think "Night Rally" fits better, even though this 1992 affair was in the daylight.

    Look, I don't think Rudy hates black folks. He doesn't want them around any more than necessary, sure, but hatred of them is not his deal. Now, exploiting the fear and hatred of blacks to get votes, that is most definitely his bag--but how does this differ from the general GOP strategy since 1968 (then called the "Southern Strategy")? He is just another Republican in that regard. In fact, considering his more "Democratic" views on any number of issues, perhaps this willingness to play on antipathy towards blacks is the DEFINING value that makes Rudy a Republican.

    It all makes sense now, doesn't it? A RINO except for what it takes to get elected in this country from the right--the distilled essence of contemporary Republicanism (well, at least before wanting to torture "towelheds" took over the #1 spot).

  • ||

    Joe... Dave... Where are you guys going with those goalposts?

  • highnumber||

    joe is a shill for Weigel? This is so, so confusing now.

    I'm a shill for Urkobold, who is a shill for Zod.

    Where will this all end?
    Now that _________ is dead, can we give up this game?

    I'm gonna ban myself now.

  • ||

    This is all so retarded. who gives a shit?

  • Paul Dubuc||

    "Dinkins's [sic]"

    Since this did not require "clarification," should I present this quote as

    "Dinkins's [sic{sic}]"

    or

    "Dinkins's [sic]"(sic).

  • dhex||

    "For shame."

    i forgot to comment on this earlier. there's no shame in trashing guliani. even if you're photoshopping pictures of him planting bombs inside infants and then stuffing them inside the walls of the wtc buildings, you're still not doing anything remotely near shameful. even if you create an entire newsletter about how guliani rapes puppies (with and without a broom handle, natch) and mail it to his children for christmas, you're still not anywhere near shame.

    it's like with hillary or bush. there's nothing shameful in piling on these animals. shame is reserved for when you harm thinking, feeling and sentient beings, not those who have sacrificed their claim to being part of us.

    shame is sticking up for benito mc41shots.

    it may not be the most subtle form of debate but i have to put up with the heartland types asking me directions to "9/11." i fucking kid you not, these fucking assholes actually call the place "9/11" - i usually look quite askance at the whole "conservatives get all their information from fauxnewsbushliedmchitlerburton but holy hell dontcha know it seems to be true sometimes? to be fair i don't know what part of the heartland they're from but judging by the sweat circles under their arms i'm going to guess its somewhere near saturatedfattisaw.

  • MattXIV||

    As much as I dislike Guiliani and as valid as Sargent's point in the second post is, he seems to be pretty obviously retconning it into the first post. Even the commenters at TPM cafe point out that the speech was hardly "unhinged" and that it was Guiliani's comfort with the racist elements of the rally that should be the cause for concern.

  • ||

    Josh | July 23, 2007, 3:23pm | #

    Joe... Dave... Where are you guys going with those goalposts?


    ...writes the guy trying to change the topic from Guiliani's performance at the rally to an in-depth discussion of the semiotics of the word "clarify."

  • ||

    Maybe you have me confused with a different Josh?

  • Jennifer||

    I was going to post something here in defense of Ann Althouse, but I think she'd disdain it because my breasts are too big for a feminist.

  • anonymous||

    Jennifer,

    The link was bad- it went to some old boomer lady law professors site

    tits or GTFO!

  • Eric Dondero||

    Rudy Giuliani was mayor of New York on 9/11. He provided great leadership on 9/11, and will lead the west to victory in the War on Terror. This is a civilizational struggle against Islamists who want us all dead, so who cares what these fucking race pimps think? Rudy is the libertarian choice, and he was mayor on 9/11.

  • Paul Dubuc||

    ""For shame."

    i forgot to comment on this earlier. there's no shame in trashing guliani."

    I don't care about Giuliani. I care about Weigel giving Sargent a pass on intellectual dishonesty under the auspices of a publication entitled "Reason."

    If Dave thinks Rudy's a Bircher, why not just open with "Sargent obviously missed it, but Giuliani's "bullshit moment" was no minor slip up on the stump..." Then go into all the sordid details. What, in fact, does Althouse have to do with this at all? Instead, he credited Sargent with points against Althouse for an argument he only made later. It was weak.

  • ||

    I care about Weigel giving Sargent a pass on intellectual dishonesty under the auspices of a publication entitled "Reason."

    Thanks, I was getting thirsty. It is time for a drink now that you mention it.

  • Dave Weigel||

    I care about Weigel giving Sargent a pass on intellectual dishonesty under the auspices of a publication entitled "Reason."

    I've explained this already. Since Sargent has covered Rudy for years, I gave him the benefit of the doubt and figured he left out the larger context of the rally because he over-estimated how famous it was.

  • Timothy||

    DONDEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

  • ||

    You know, the fact that people who think that counter-terrorist is a war against all Muslims ("a civilizational struggle" - Christendom vs. Dar al Islam) don't care if their leaders pander to racism is not terribly surprising.

  • Paul Dubuc||

    "I've explained this already. Since Sargent has covered Rudy for years, I gave him the benefit of the doubt and figured he left out the larger context of the rally because he over-estimated how famous it was."

    I recant. Though the original post seemed like a blatant "gotcha" stab to me.

  • ||

    OK, so let's assume for the moment that Sargent's original point about the BS quote and being unhinged was off the mark.

    Do the same "conservative" bloggers have a response to the content of his second post? Or does Sargent's sin of missing the mark absolve them from that responsibility?

  • ||

    Against anyone not named Clinton, Rudy is unelectable. His appeal to our nation's frightened urbanites just isn't enough to win the White House. Maybe, after we go broke, he'll be elected "President of the East Coast" or somethin'.

  • ||

    Guiliani and Romney have the same problem. Republicans eager for a victory in difficult circumstances think that their resumes demonstrate that they can win Democratic support.

    The problem is that each of them was only able to win because the overwhelmingly Democratic nature of NYC's and Massachusetts' political cultures meant that everyone knew that they could elect a Republican as a check on the Democratic legislature, without having to worry that those Republicans would actually be able to get any agenda through.

  • Gil||

    "Sargent and I were both aware that Giuliani yelled "bullshit" during a police rally that was charged with racism and ended with a riot, and he should have added that context for people like Althouse, Malkin, etc, whose Googling fingers were sprained that day."

    This is kind of a cheap shot.

    Do you google every noun in every article you respond to?

    In any case, I think Sargent meant exactly what Althouse thought he meant. He changed his message after the fact. Because his point was stupid.

    I don't like Giuliani either, but let's at least be honest when criticizing him and his defenders.

  • ||

    Timothy you beat me to it.

    If the VP's use of the F word didn't offend them, why would Rudy's use of bullshit do the trick?

  • dhex||

    "Rudy Giuliani was mayor of New York on 9/11. He provided great leadership on 9/11, and will lead the west to victory in the War on Terror. This is a civilizational struggle against Islamists who want us all dead, so who cares what these fucking race pimps think? Rudy is the libertarian choice, and he was mayor on 9/11."

    oh thank fucking god you showed up eric. it is not a party without you.

    (though i must confess i think this might have been a joke poster doing an impression of you, since the phrase "race pimps" doesn't scream "eric dondero" to me.)

  • Paul Dubuc||

    "OK, so let's assume for the moment that Sargent's original point about the BS quote and being unhinged was off the mark.

    Do the same "conservative" bloggers have a response to the content of his second post? Or does Sargent's sin of missing the mark absolve them from that responsibility?"

    I'd be interested.

    But Sargent doesn't really care, and neither does the rest of the media. It's still primary season, and that's when GOP candidates need to be portrayed as too liberal, not as too conservative, or too racist (see Thompson, Fred... pro-choice lobbying; Romney, Mitt... plural marriage; Giuliani, Rudolph... cross dressing; McCain, John... immigration).

    This is exactly what Sargent intended to do before he was forced to clarify. His second post wasn't scheduled until mid-2008, if required.

  • ||

    The rallying cry for Grover Cleveland and later was FDR, "We love him for the enemies he has made." And reminding people that Rudy Giuliani pissed off the David Dinkins-Al Sharpton crowd will do nothing but help him in a Republican primary and might even win him independents in the general.

  • Fluffy||

    If Ron Paul grabbed a bullhorn and started yelling that something was bullshit, I guar-an-fucking-tee you that the same people defending Giuliani would absolutely, positively seize upon it as evidence that Paul was unhinged. That being the case, I don't see why everyone is in such a hurry to defend Giuliani against Sargent's initial claim of derangement. Because it's not "fair"? Fuck "fair". Giuliani has no right to demand "fairness" from anyone in this race or anyone commenting on this race. Unhinge him and the horse he ran in on.

  • ||

    Rudy is both unhinged and deranged.

    And I don't need a video to show that to me. Just his answers to questions is enough to show how unhinged the guy is.

  • ||

    "Being unhinged means giving a great deal of discretion about what you do to the authorities..."

  • Azael||

    I seem to remember that Howard Dean's presidential bid was (in part) torpedoed during the primary because of a single YEEEEAAAAARRRRGGGG. This act earned him the "unhinged" reputation.

    Regardless of original intents or what have you (to me it was pretty clear what Sargent's original intent was), even the misinterpretation by the collective brain trust of the right is still sound given the current rules of engagement that they - themselves - have established.

  • ||

    How would that clip in any way hurt Guiliani. It makes him look tough and strong. No way is he unhinged in the slightest. The distinction with Dean who had a red face and looked like he was going to explode in big. The only images I saw in that clip were signs saying Dinkins must go. Sargent seems to think that clip was bad. I don't see it at all. The backstory may be bad but you can not tell from the clip.

  • ||

    BTW,

    Dinkins was piece of shit and NYC was falling apart at the time. Why do you think the cops and people of NY were so pissed at him. I am supporting Fred Thompson in the primary, but show me some more clips like this with the Rudy I know and love, when he was still just a Brooklyn boy and I will vote for him in a heartbeat. Talk about passion and wanting to bring about change. All things he did as Mayor, very successfully, in saving NYC from the crime infested cesspool it was.

  • ||

    BTW Why the hate on Ann. Her response was 100% correct. Sargent changed his story obviously. I am no big fan of Ann as she is mostly a liberal but at least understands the dangers of Islamism.

  • Eric Dondero||

    Look, only Giuliani can beat Hillary. Giuliani is a real libertarian. Me is right! Giauliani is the guy we all know and love, he saved New York and then saved American on 9/11.

    9/11 changed everything. Giuliani was fucking there on 9/11! 9/11 is why we are all here today.

    We need strong leadership to support Israel and the rest of the West in the upcoming struggle with Iran and the other Islamists. Only Giuliani can provide that strong leadership for us. Remember 9/11, it is why we are here today!

  • ||

    "[she]...at least understands the dangers of Islamism."

    Thank you, I am no longer going to vote for the Islamist party candidate. Islamism is about to take over the country.

    But anyway, re: the video. So what? Is there a there there? He says a bad word and alleges Dinkins is damaging the morale of the city police.

    Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't, but the video doesnt sell it at all. The real scandal will be the bad word among the more traditional crowd. He should be glad, nonetheless, he didn't do it in drag.

  • ||

    Dondero, if that really is your name; fuck 9/11. You and your hysterical bedwetter pals should all wrap yourselves in the flag and take the lemming expressway off a cliff. Good gravy; what a batch of pathetic, sniveling cowards.

    As I said the other day, making Giuliani President because of 9/11 is like making some guy who was passed out on his couch when a car crashed into his living room head of the NHTSA, only dumber.

    Remember the Maine!

  • ||

    If those two "Dondero" posts are not spoofs, he has sunk so far into absurd, pathetic, self-terrorisation that he needs one of those smoking jackets with the sleeves that tie together in the back.

  • ||

    I agree with Althouse. I don't know what the hell a "value voter" really is, but to the extent that the value voter stereotype exists, it certainly isn't associated with being especially sensitive to racial issues. When I see a politician ignoring a sign comparing a black mayor to a bathroom attendant, my first thought is not, "oh, he's going to have problems with the Evangelicals and Value Voters now!".

  • ||

    As somebody who actually knows a few people I assume are "values voters" I an assure everybody that the word "bullshit" isn't a big deal at all. In fact I've used the word in front of a couple of them and their heads didn't even come close to exploding. They are amazingly resilient. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that some actually use the word themselves.

    Sargent's original post focused on Rudy's temperament and the specific use of that word and provided the video as proof. The video failed to show anything he described. If Rudy was addressing a NYP klan rally then perhaps it deserves an entirely new post and debate but right now it all seems a big muddle.

  • ||

    I think the real problem issue for that rally was when they marched across the Brooklyn bridge stopping traffic. I think I remember something about the cops arresting some ralliers for doing the same thing weeks earlier.

  • ||

    It was viewed, by some, that the cops were acting illegally when they marched over the Brooklyn bridge stopping traffic.

  • ||

    Rudy is great! He really increased police morale by condoning shooting unarmed black men, planting drugs, and shoving broomsticks up suspect's asses!

    All hail Rudy for getting rid of that terrible darkie who probably thought it was not a good thing for police to murder and sodomize. Damn that washroom attendant was SOFT on crime.

    Rudy is great, like the fun step-dad who lets you do anything you want! Rape, corruption, murder! Thanks for being such a Fun Dad!

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement