The June issue of Vanity Fair has an article by Michael Wolff (free link) on "Crazy for Rudy." Shorter version: He may be nuts.

Wolff writes that almost anyone who’s ever worked for Rudy Giuliani expects his presidential campaign to implode at any moment, thanks to his propensity for periods of mania, outbursts, and frequent forms of behavior that generally don’t win elections.

Bernard Kerik, his frosty relationship with his children, his famous smackdown of a listener (and ferret owner) who called in during his radio show, Judith Giuliani’s stint at a medical company that experimented on live dogs (killing them in the process), the list goes on—there are plenty of past deeds that may block his path to the White House.

But what is it about Rudy that makes him so compelling? Wolff opines that the consensus among people who know him best is that, “He is nuts, actually mad.” And Wolff argues that maybe that’s just what he needs to win. After all, he writes, “You can better trust a crazy man, lacking normal artifice and equivocations, not to sh*t you.”

I'd rather see his campaign implode. I don't think you can trust a crazy man, I think you need to beware of him and watch him like a hawk, which I have no doubt, the liberal blogs will do.