Giuliani vs. Clinton vs. Our Freedom

In the New Hampshire Union Leader, David Boaz has an op-ed laying out why a likely Guiliani-Clinton match-up come November presents America with a choice between two barely distinguishable visions of the expansion of federal power.

Comments

[JasonL]

I didn't need Boaz to tell me this. No offense. Sigh.

[Dangerman]

Yes Jason, but the Union leader is the only statewide paper in NH, and the people HERE need to be told.

[LarryA]

Given little difference between Republicans and Democrats, why should we be surprised there's little difference between the uberrepublican and the uberdemocrat?

[Hugh Akston]

Boaz is a great clearinghouse for libertarian opinion, and has the background to get himself published where other freedom-likers would be turned out, but if you are a regular reader of the libertarian opinion rags, he doesn't say anything you haven't heard before.

[John-David]

Obviously, this newspaper columnist doesn't realize that USNEWS&WORLDREPORT named Giuliani "The most Libertarian politician since Jesus came to Omaha".

[joe]

Hmm, higher taxes.

Federal government turned into one big Street Crimes unit.

Higher Taxes.

Guys pointing guns in people's faces.

Gee, that IS a tough choice.

[David]

Maybe they can recycle some of the posters from Alien vs. Predator.

"Whoever wins... We lose"

[de stijl]

Huckabee vs. Obama is starting to look as likely a matchup, if not more so.

Giuliani is toast unless he turns it around fast. He's cratering per the latest

[paulie]

Adolf "Rudy"
Ghouliani

vs.

Madame Clinton

Which representative of the Imperial State is worse? We report, you decide.

[robc]

joe,

I agree, it is a tough choice. Fortunately, there will be more than 2 names on my ballot come November.

[joe]

Hmm, having to pay for some kids' health insurance.

Physical torture of captives.

A little less money.

Fucking TORTURE!

I'm not saying you should like Hillary's platform, but seriously, how is this remotely equivalent?

[robc]

joe,

Its MY money.

Its someone else's torture problem.

I wouldnt vote for either, but MY problem is more important than someone elses.

[TrickyVic]

Freedom is so pre-9/11

[paulie]

You think Hillary Clinton will hesitate to use torture?

[paulie]

All the heimland security / police state programs Giuliani wants cost money.

He'll have to either raise taxes or increase debt, a hidden tax on future generations.

[Michael Pack]

Joe,Hillary will use force too,just just against other folks.Waco come to mind?Both Rudy and Hillary do not trust people to make choices and live there lives with as little intrusion from gov. as possible.

[TrickyVic]

"""Its someone else's torture problem."""

SWAT teams shooting occupants at the wrong address is someone elses problem too. Until the wrong address is yours.

It's always someone else's problem until it's your problem. But by the time it get's to you, precedence is well established.

[R C Dean]

In what universe has the expansion of the nanny state, the regulatory state, and the redistributionist state (and who can deny that Hillary is in favor of all three) been accompanied by a reduction in police powers and an expansion of civil liberties?

C'mon, joe, do you seriously believe Hillary is going to roll back the drug war and put a leash on any law enforcement agency?

[Kwix]

de stijl (and anybody else),
Re: The ABC poll
I noticed this in a number of other polls, when people are asked what their primary concern is XX% say "Iraq War".

But what is their exact concern? Are they concerned that the war is still going on or that not enough resources are being directed to it? Are they concerned that too many troops engaged or not enough? Dammit, that "question" is the most bullshit I have seen in a poll in a long time, and it keeps showing up.

[joe]

You think Hillary Clinton will hesitate to use torture?

I think Rudy Guiliani has been spending his time defending and minimizing torture, and Hillary Clinton has been condemning it.

[joe]

C'mon, joe, do you seriously believe Hillary is going to roll back the drug war and put a leash on any law enforcement agency?

I'd want to change the subjec, too, if I was arguing your side, RC.

WTF does the drug war have to do with this thread?

Hey, look over THERE!

[jimmydageek]

Hopefully we won't have to make this choice :/

[MarkH]

The epitome of the douche and turd conundrum.

[paulie]

I think Rudy Guiliani has been spending his time defending and minimizing torture, and Hillary Clinton has been condemning it.

The latter pater brings to mind the phrase "lying lies and the liars who tell them".

[paulie]

*part

[robc]

It's always someone else's problem until it's your problem. But by the time it get's to you, precedence is well established.

Sure and thats why I cant support Rudy, no matter who he is running against. But, I KNOW higher taxes are going to be my problem.

Its simple risk analysis:
risk = Size of problem * probability of problem

Taxes are a small problem compared to torture/no knock raids/etc but the probability of it affecting me is much smaller.

Its close, but I think a tax increase is the bigger risk. If I had a crack dealer on my block, the numbers might switch.

[Elemenope]

*Nobody* gets points for opposing torture. You can only *lose* points for supporting it. C'mon, "no torture" is supposed to be the goddamned default! Anyone who says otherwise doesn't deserve to run for any office, much less the president.

More pointedly, a stance on torture is no indicator of a pol's views on the police state. The reason I give no points to Hillary for "no torture" is that the greater practical atrocities (no-knock warrants, habeas violations, property seizure abuse, etc.) that are visited upon thousands of Americans because of the police state (primarily due to the WoD) she cares nothing about.

I care that my government tortures foreign captives. I care a helluva lot more that my government wantonly destroys lives of my fellow citizens on a wide scale. That Hillary cares about the first makes her a human being (or a shrewd pol), that she doesn't care about the second makes her a scumbag every bit as dirty as Giuliani.

[Typo Mcsans]

Clinton v. Guiliani?

Hello President Bloomberg!

[Rattlesnake Jake]

"Hopefully we won't have to make this choice :/"

Yeah, it may be Obama vs. Huckabee. Wait, is that much better? LeBoutiller in a op-ed in Newsmax.com believes that if it's Obama and Huchabee, we may end up with the first elected independent president.

[paulie]

It all depends on what the meaning of torture is?

[robc]

we may end up with the first elected independent president.

I forget, which political party did Washington belong to?

[joe]

Elemenope,

I'm not giving Clinton points. I'm noting that Guiliani loses points where she doesn't.

On the issues related to men pointing guns in your face, throwing you in cell, beating you to a pulp, or torturing you until you submit, there are many, many areas where Rudi Guiliani is worse than Hillary Clinton, and none I can think of where Clinton is worse than Guiliani.

Hillary supports the Drug War. So does Rudy. Rudy has a history of defending cops who've killed innocent people as part of that drug war, and Hillary doesn't. Just as one example.

[joe]

robc,

Do you think "which candidate is better for me personally?" is really the most important question to ask?

What about, you know, the other 300,000,000 of us? Shouldn't we enter into your thought process when you're choosing who will govern us?

[J sub D]

I despise HRC. That said, as I've posted before, if it's Hillary vs Rudy in November 2008, I'm voting for Hillary. Hell if it's Rudy or Mitt, I'm voting Democrat. Hell, I've voted for Harry Browne more times than Democrats for president (1-0). The Republicasns should be sooo proud of their party makeover.

Ron Paul gets my vote. John McCain could probably get my vote. The rest can go fuck themselves.

[robc]

What about, you know, the other 300,000,000 of us? Shouldn't we enter into your thought process when you're choosing who will govern us?

Well, I want the same rules that apply to me to apply to you, so I am thinking of you. I dont think a "dont torture robc and make his tax rate 0%" candidate would be a good thing. Unless he/she was willing to apply it to all of us.

Other than that, I figure everyone else votes for their self interest, I might as well vote for mine. As long as seniors keep voting for candidates who promise to steal robc's money to pay them Social Security, Im going to vote for what's best for me personally.

Also, I think maximizing freedom is what is best for everyone, so voting for what I want is voting for everyone.

[JasonL]

Lets just say that you have to be predisposed to see a functional difference here to actually find one. If you are skeptical about political outcomes and the process of creating politicians and laws both, there is no bright line distinguishing these guys.

It isn't healthy to take rhetoric during primary season as an indication of anything.

[Rattlesnake Jake]

"her unfavorables are high enough that many will throw her under the bus if Obama takes Iowa and / or New Hampshire."

The latest Rasmussen poll showed her with a 55% unfavorability rating and she's in danger of losing Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Some people predict her to come in 3rd in Iowa. But Hillary is still saying she WILL be the nominee. She says it will be official on Feb. 5 with her expected victory in California. I hope to hell she's wrong.

[Aresen]

It doesn't seem to matter which one you choose. Both HC & RG favor expansion of government power, with only minor differences between them.

Your republic is seriously ill, though not terminally so. Yet.

The cause of the disease is that everyone wants the government to "do something".

The "which candidate is better for me personally?" test is valid only if that means "which candidate is going to do the least to interfere with my rights - including my personal property rights". If it is taken to mean "which candidate is going to provide me with the most goodies at someone else's expense", then you are part of the problem.

[Rattlesnake Jake]

"there are many, many areas where Rudi Guiliani is worse than Hillary Clinton, and none I can think of where Clinton is worse than Guiliani."

They're both big time statists. There are some areas where I think Giuliani is worse and other areas where I think Hillary is worse, IMO.

[Hugh Akston]

joe,

Is Clinton condemning torture, or is she condemning the Bush administration for its use of torture?

[joe]

Well, I want the same rules that apply to me to apply to you

That's not the impression I got from "It's not MY torture problem."

[joe]

Rattlesnake Jake,

They're both big time statists. There are some areas where I think Giuliani is worse and other areas where I think Hillary is worse, IMO.

Sure, as I said above. From a libertarian pov, Hillary is worse on taxes and nanny-state stuff. You might end up with less money and the food on the shelves at the grocery store might be made differently.

Rudi is worse on things like torture, police brutality, free speech, war, surveillance, and imprisonment without a trial.

I like to have more money. I like to buy what I wanna buy. But we're talking about torture, war, disappearing people, tapping their phones...totalitarian stuff here. I can't see how someone can claim to be concerned about freedom an have difficulty prioritizing here.

[robc]

joe,

That's not the impression I got from "It's not MY torture problem."

Thats because you cant read. It isnt my problem. That doesnt mean I want it to continue. Im just not worried about being waterboarded between now and the end of the year. I know for a fact I will be taxed multiple times over the next few weeks, so its a more immediate problem of mine.

[robc]

joe,

Some of us consider taxes to be "totalitarian stuff" too.

[TrickyVic]

""""there are many, many areas where Rudi Guiliani is worse than Hillary Clinton, and none I can think of where Clinton is worse than Guiliani.""""

Having lived under 20 years of the Clintons and 8 years of Guiliani, I agree with that statement.

[paulie]

Ron Paul gets my vote. John McCain could probably get my vote. The rest can go fuck themselves.

McCain
does not get my vote.

[Rattlesnake Jake]

"Rudi is worse on things like torture, police brutality, free speech, war, surveillance, and imprisonment without a trial."

I'm not so sure Hillary is for free speech either. It was her group, Media Matters, that was largely responsible for getting Imus fired and for going after Rush. The Clintons have been after the right wing media for a long time. Several right wing periodicals were audited by the IRS during the Clinton years. Bill Clinton practically blamed right wing radio for the OKC bombing. I believe Hillary will do everything in her power to try to shut down dissent.

[R C Dean]

I'd want to change the subjec, too, if I was arguing your side, RC.

And I'd want to dodge the question if I was arguing yours, joe.

And when I see someone writing this:

On the issues related to men pointing guns in your face, throwing you in cell, beating you to a pulp,

my first reaction is that there is an awful lot of that going on in this country that, frankly, I am more concerned about (see, e.g., Radley Balko). So my question about why you think Hillary would be better for civil rights is not really the non sequitur you seem to think.

[joe]

I've been thinking more about this, and to the author's credit, he doesn't just talk about "taxes and nanny state" stuff i/r/t Hillary. He also mentions something near and dear to my - her opinion on executive power.

I loathe Clinton's, and Biden's, opinions about the reach of executive power. They're not as bad as Bush/Cheney, but they are way, way out of my comfort zone. I ruled out voting for Hillary in the primary a long time ago on exactly that issue. If Ron Paul is up against Hillary, I don't know how I'll vote - largely because of their positions on executive power.

I was not concerned enough about it in the 1990s, and boy have these last seven years taught me a lesson.

But even on that score, I think about Rudy's term in New York, and how he went after the victims of his police force, and he makes Clinton and Biden look like the freaking ACLU.

[joe]

RC,

I can see how it's relevant to the issue of general government thuggishness, but what does it have to do with Hillary vs. Rudy?

The only connection I can think of is that I don't want the next president to stand up for the DEA's abuses the way Rudy stood up for the Street Crimes Unit.

You don't like that model of law enforcement? Bill Clinton gave us community policing grants. Rudy Guiliani fired William Bratton, who brought communinity policing to Boston, so he could replace him with Bernie Kerik.

Hillary's no saint on LEO thuggishness, but Benito? It's no contest.

[bigbigslacker]

Speaking of government goon street crimes units, is Hillary back on the 100,000 cops kick again?

I'm voting for the candidate advocating 100,000 fewer cops and 100,000,000 more guns in the hands of the people. After the crime, I'm not all that concerned about how long it takes the LEO to show up to do the paperwork, and I'm not convinced more cops will prevent the crime or even catch the bad guy (unless he speeds or has a headlight out when he drives away from the scene)

[Eric the .5b]

Its MY money.

Its someone else's torture problem.

I wouldnt vote for either, but MY problem is more important than someone elses.

Rob, you are a Red little wanker.

[Another Phil]

I really don't like Hillary, but I'm with joe this time. If a candidate can't even muster up a convincing "I'm against torture," and be taken seriously, we're in real trouble.

[Eric Dondero]

From the Rudy Campaign:

Clint Bolick has just been appointed to Giuliani's Educational Advisory Board.

Giuliani now has more prominent libertarian supporters than all other GOP Presidential candidate combined, including Ron Paul: Steve Forbes, Cong. Ed Royce, Bill Simon, Dennis Miller, Ryan Sager, Gerald Reynolds, Clint Bolick, Ward Connerly, Sally Pipes, et.al.

[Chris S.]

Awesome. After a substantive article and dozens of posts discussing Guiliani's totalitarian tendencies, your defense amounts to "But what about Sally Pipes? She likes Guiliani!"

[de stijl]

Don't forget Dennis Miller!

[TrickyVic]

"""Giuliani now has more prominent libertarian supporters than all other GOP Presidential candidate combined,"""

I thought libertarians believed in liberty. If that's true, Rudy clearly is not libertarian dispite whoever supports him.