Rudy Quit Iraq Study Group: Couldn't Be Bothered With "War On Terror"

Rudy quit the Iraq Study Group last May after he was told he would actually have to show up and work on the issue:

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.

Now if Rudy missed a meeting to get a haircut, perhaps the Media would think this a big story. But since it was not for a haircut, but rather in order to travel and collect 11 million dollars in speaking fees, I think Josh Marshall's prediction that this might end Rudy's campaign will be wrong. But the funniest thing is Rudy just plain lies about why he quit:

As someone considered a potential presidential candidate, the Mayor didn’t want the group’s work to become a political football. That, coupled with time restraints led to his decision.

Here's the thing -- Rudy did not voluntarily resign. He was told to show up or quit. He chose to turn his back on working to help the country on the Iraq issue BECAUSE he needed the time to cash in on 9/11.

< Missing Emails and Casual Compliance With the Law | Sure He Was "Overly Optimistic," But Don't Mess With Petraeus >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Rudy... (none / 0) (#1)
    by desertswine on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 04:46:31 PM EST
    had to quit fighting the 'War on Terror' because he was better suited to fight the 'War on Anxiety' by padding his stock portfolio.

    You've been working against Rudy (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 05:14:21 PM EST
    since before I even heard of him, I think. I have family in NYC, and they have mixed opinions of him. The line I hear from those I trust is that he likes to take credit for other people's accomplishments.

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 05:18:39 PM EST
    With the likes of Kerik involved in his administration, taking credit became a less important issue later in his tenure.

    My bioggest problem with him is he is a stone cold liar and is batsh*t crazy.

    He is the scariest prospect for President.


    I agree (none / 0) (#4)
    by squeaky on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 05:24:32 PM EST
    And he is also megalomaniacal enough to try for world conquest.

    That he got Kerik so far (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 05:32:06 PM EST
    makes my blood turn cold.

    OT:TPM reports Rudy SC chair indicted (none / 0) (#6)
    by Molly Bloom on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 05:42:31 PM EST
    for selling cocaine. .

    Should be interesting!

    Heh (none / 0) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 05:51:51 PM EST
    Another fallen soldier in the wot? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 19, 2007 at 07:32:37 PM EST
    That Is Why Rudy Doesnt Have Answer to Iraq (none / 0) (#9)
    by john horse on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:24:43 AM EST
    Now we know why Rudy recently said "Iraq may get better; Iraq may get worse. We may be successful in Iraq; we may not be. I don't know the answer to that. That's in the hands of other people."

    He doesn't know the answer because he never spent the time on the Iraq Study Group to find out.  As I mentioned in a previous post, we got into this mess because of poor analysis and poor planning.  Guiliani apparently wants to continue Bush's Iraq legacy.

    I think the answer to Iraq is in the hands of people other than Giuliani.  

    Kind of a cheap shot BTD (none / 0) (#10)
    by Slado on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:16:14 AM EST
    Maybe he wasn't in favor of the ISG or politically didn't want to be associated with something that ultimately didn't matter to a hill of beans.  If he had worked on it you probably would have criticized his recommendations so he can't win with you no?

    You keep trying to bring the guy down.  Why?  He isn't even the nominee yet.  Are you worried he would wipe the floor with any democrat?

    I want Thompson to win because he's awesome but I'd vote for Gulliani.

    It always amuses me with liberal democrats try to attack Republicans from the right.  Repulicans smell it from a mile away.  

    Aw come on Slado (none / 0) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:07:58 AM EST
    HE quit cuz he did not want tohave to do the work.

    What part of ... (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sailor on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:30:13 AM EST
    either attend the meetings or quit, several sources said.
    don't you understand?

    rudy just can't stay away from crooks (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:34:24 AM EST
    The Rudy Giuliani campaign announced Wednesday that Barry Wynn will serve as the South Carolina Chairman of Mayor Giuliani's presidential campaign, following South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel's federal indictment on cocaine charges.

    Wynn, a former chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party has been serving as South Carolina Finance Co-Chairman in the Giuliani Campaign.

    May I ask a question? (none / 0) (#11)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:45:51 AM EST
    I want Thompson to win because he's awesome

    In what unfathomable way?  This is Ronald Reagan without the keen insight and subtle nuance, or Richard Nixon without the legendary honesty.

    Fred Thompson is an ACTOR who has dabbled in the field of politics without leaving a ripple.  He was paid for years by foreign powers to lobby the United States government.  He has not contributed an original thought to any public discourse in his life.  He thinks Iraq is a wonderful place and an American success story.

    But he can read a teleprompter convincingly, as long as someone else types some words into it.

    What the $%^&* is "awesome" about a man whose wonderfully tailored, English Leather smelling suit does not appear to contain a human being?

    What is it about Republican candidates that all they have to do is look good, and ideas or intelligence are immaterial?  After Reagan and George W. Bush, isn't the idea of electing an empty suit a little dated?