July 21, 2007

TPM thinks it's found a video of Giuliani "screaming" "bullsh*t!"

Here. I've watched it. 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.

Shouting is not "screaming."

Some people don't like the harsh word "bullsh*t" -- and I'm modifying it here with an asterisk out of my bullsh*t fear of filters -- but it's a normal and useful word. I'm sure cops appreciate it. Using it doesn't make you crazy, and I'm positive TPM doesn't think it does. TPM is simply trying to hurt Rudy's chances with conservatives so he won't get the nomination and get his chance to win over liberals. So acting like he's "unhinged" in that video is bullshit.

UPDATE: Here is some background on the context of that speech (from a NYT analysis of Giuliani and race):
... Mr. Giuliani took a fateful step that would for years prompt questions about his racial sensitivities. In September 1992, he spoke to a rally of police officers protesting Mr. Dinkins’s proposal for a civilian board to review police misconduct.

It was a rowdy, often threatening, crowd. Hundreds of white off-duty officers drank heavily, and a few waved signs like “Dump the Washroom Attendant,” a reference to Mr. Dinkins. A block away from City Hall, Mr. Giuliani gave a fiery address, twice calling Mr. Dinkins’s proposal “bullshit.” The crowd cheered. Mr. Giuliani was jubilant.

“If you’re acculturated to like cops, you don’t necessarily see 10,000 white guys who don’t vote in the city, don’t write political checks and love you for the wrong reason,” an aide said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he is working with the Giuliani presidential campaign.

Mr. Dinkins has not forgotten that sea of angry cops. “Rudy was out there inciting white cops to riot,” Mr. Dinkins said in a recent interview.

Mr. Giuliani said he never saw racist signs. “One of the reasons those police officers might have lost control is that we have a mayor who invites riots,” he said at the time. The Giuliani campaign later conducted a “vulnerability study” to identify their candidate’s weaknesses in 1993. This study, obtained by Wayne Barrett, author of “Rudy!” — an investigative biography — offers an unsparing critique: “Giuliani’s shrieking performance at the cop rally may be his greatest political liability this year. Giuliani has yet to admonish those who attacked the mayor with racist code words on signs and banners. Why not?”
MORE: After TPM attacks me for this post, I respond here.

AND: I wrote more on the NYT coverage of Giuliani and race here.

58 comments:

Doyle said...

Surely we can agree your standard of what constitutes "unhinged" behavior is awfully high.

peter hoh said...

Note to liberals, from one who may or may not be one, too: stop crying wolf. Wait until you get the really good clip and/or dirt.

downtownlad said...

I think it's complete bullshit, that you felt the need to write "bullsh*t" for fear of filters, but then you end your post with an uncensored version of that word.

I mean - what the F*CK.

Saul said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Saul said...

that video is totally innocuous, and if anything it helps Guilliani

Rick Lee said...

I agree with Saul... that video is a campaign ad for Guilliani.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Looks hinged to me. And, for the record, I thought that Howard Dean's 'scream' was way overblown, too.

Biff said...

Yeah, TPM writes that the video "might tell us something about the reliability and temperament of this man who is asking us to make him our next Commander in Chief..."

It shows a Republican who has the "reliability and temperament" to get rank-and-file union members fired up enough not only to cheer for him...but to vote for him.

Let's not forget that he was directing his remarks against his Democratic opponent, Mayor David Dinkens.

It's interesting that TPM thinks that a Republican who is willing to call BS against his opponents will not be popular with "values voters." Seems like another case where Democrats are more comfortable dealing with caricatures of "values voters," rather than understanding the range of human beings who think that "values" issues might be important.

Modern Otter said...

Not unhinged, but characteristically simplistic.

rhhardin said...

(searches neurons) Harry Frankfurt had an essay ``On Bullshit'' in an ancient _Raritan_ that starts :

``One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted. Most people are rather confident of their ability to recognize bullshit and to avoid being taken in by it. So the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern, or attracted much sustained inquiry. In consequence, we have no clear understanding of what bullshit is, why there is so much of it, or what functions it serves. And we lack a conscientiously developed appreciation of what it means to us. In other words, we have no theory...''

Harry Frankfurt, ``On Bullshit,'' _Raritan_ VI:2 Fall 1986 pp.88-90

I believe it's now a book title.

Anyway the conclusion was that bullshit is distinguished by the bullshitter not being particularly concerned about the truth of what he says, as contrasted with humbug, say a 4th of July speech describing the nation's great heritage, that is concerned with what the audience thinks of the speaker.

Giuliani would be most likely to be characterized by humbug, and say John Kerry by bullshit.

Pablo said...

TPM is simply trying to hurt Rudy's chances with conservatives so he won't get the nomination and get his chance to win over liberals.

Which should work out well because all of your staunch conservatives get their opinions from TPM.

Nels said...

I love the camera zoom that was added on the word in question to make it look as though Giuliani is coming right for me.

Is Washington ready for a foul-mouthed president?

EnigmatiCore said...

"Surely we can agree your standard of what constitutes "unhinged" behavior is awfully high."

She lets luckyoldson post here, so yes, I would say it is awfully high.

M. Simon said...

I think Thompson will be referred to as "actor".

SMGalbraith said...

Surely we can agree your standard of what constitutes "unhinged" behavior is awfully high.

Well, Ann is a force for evil in the world. That's a fulltime job as you must understand.

It's hard to also be a monitor of unhinged behavior while also sowing malevolence throughout the world.

C'mon Doyle, a person can only juggle so many balls at one time. Give her abreak.

SMG

rebel said...

Typical liberals trying to find fault when there is no fault in our republican candidates.

Thanks for being on top of this Althouse. The service you provide by detailing liberal lies is invaluable to our conservative cause.

I don't know if I can vote for Rudy because of his liberal social issues. You have seem to found your winner though and if it is between him and any defeatacrat I am there with you!

Althouse and Atlas Shrugs two strong conservative women, who are nice to look at, helping our conservative cause. you can't beat that!

Daryl said...

Note to liberals, from one who may or may not be one, too: stop crying wolf. Wait until you get the really good clip and/or dirt.

No, that misunderstands the way campaigns work.

You have to make false and baloney charges, again and again and again and again and again, until people start to believe them.

The "Candidate X is unhinged" meme is one we can expect to see again and again and again, especially against any candidate whose strength is making people feel secure.

Daryl said...

This is exactly what Bob Krumm was talking about in his recent blog post (linked by Instapundit) where he said:

One difference I’ve noted between certain elements of America’s two political parties is that Republicans tend to criticize Democratic primary candidates as being 'too liberal,' while Democrats criticize the GOP’s potential offerings as not being conservative enough.

For example, Fred Dalton Thompson is criticized for helping pro-choicers. Now Rudy is criticized for using bad language.

Rudy knows public speaking. He was a prosecutor. They know how to get a point across, because they've done it so often, under high-stress circumstances (in Court, during a trial, to a jury).

Tully said...

Is Washington ready for a foul-mouthed president?

If not, Hillary hasn't a chance. Her abusive usage of the F-word as First Lady set new records.

Peter said...

I'm not any kind of expert on Yankee politicos but it seems to me that anyone calling the Dinkins Administration bullshit to a police union merely has a clear eye for the obvious.
Rudy isn't my first choice but I'd vote for him over any Donk.
There is a large number of people out there who want to kill my grandchildren. And the Donks think the enemy is George Bush.

Simon said...

Well, it'll get him Penn & Teller's endorsement, I guess. ;)

HA HA HA said...

Tame stuff. I'll vote for the first candidate who says "We're going to murder those lousy... c*cksuckers by the bushel-f*cking-basket."

cartographer said...

Hey, wasn't this the occasion when Giuliani rabble-roused a horde of off-duty police officers into blocking traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge? With nasty overtones of "we are the police; we do what we want" (not to mention overtones of "we don't take orders from a black mayor")? Rudy wan't off his nut, he knew that he was stoking rage. I later voted for Giuliani, and don't regret it, but always kept that scene in mind. It was harbinger of much that occurred in his mayoralty. There's no separating the good Giuliani from the bad Giuliani; the rest of the country should be aware of that before making him president.

a psychiatrist who learned from veterans said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dan said...

Hey, if it's good enough for Henry Fonda in "On Golden Pond", it's certainly good enough for Rudy.

You ever notice how the Right usually attacks the Left for being too liberal, and the Left usually attacks the Right for not being conservative enough? There's an interesting story and/or moral there, somewhere.

Mister Snitch! said...

Guess no one's visiting Doyle's site (as usual), so he's stopped by hoping for a traffic boost.

Imagine the useless liberal Dem machine pol Dinkins in charge during 9/11. Let's thank TPM for reminding us of those dark days.

Random Numbers said...

As I told Dan Riehl, the idea that anyone can make a bullshit issue over Rudy calling bullshit bullshit is pure bullshit.

David said...

Democrats really don't understand Republicans. We learned this when Kerry/Edwards decided that it would turn the Republican base against Bush/Cheney if they kept bringing up Mary Cheney's sexual orientation. You really misunderstand conservatives if you think they won't vote for Dick Cheney because he loves his gay daughter.

Richard Fagin said...

Actually you don't even have to imagine the useless Dem machine pol Dinkins in charge during a crisis - he was during the Crown Heights riots, when he let the savages go hog wild for days, and his beyond contempt racist police chief (subsequently inflicted on us poor slobs in Houston as mayor) let at least one murderer get off scot free - and his performance was found to be unconscionable.

Jim C. said...

"might tell us something about the reliability and temperament of this man who is asking us to make him our next Commander in Chief..."

It certainly does. He's telling the truth, and his opponents think it's hell, just like Harry Truman did. Works for me. And it tells me more about his opponents.

Recounted by Margaret Truman: "Harry addressed the Washington Garden Club and kept referring to 'good manure' that must be used on flowers. Some society ladies complained to me, 'Bess, can't you get the President to say fertilizers?' I said, 'Heavens, it took me 25 years to get him to say 'manure!' "

Mister Snitch! said...

"Actually you don't even have to imagine the useless Dem machine pol Dinkins in charge during a crisis - he was during the Crown Heights riots, when he let the savages go hog wild for days"

You're right. That's the legacy of the Dinkins' years: You just want to put them out of your mind. Of course, it's best we DON'T, lest we repeat them.

wgsalter said...

Ronald Reagan in response to a claim by the Soviet government: ”We have a word for that. A word with a long and honored history in our rich agricultural tradition.”

Dave said...

Lefties have become such hothouse flowers. Think of Rudy as "speaking Truth to Power" since he's obviously aiming the remarks at Mayor Dinkins.

Funny how it's okay to say all sorts of nasty things (think Amanda Marcotte, e.g.) when you're on the Left, but those on the Right (is Rudy even that far Right?) must mind their tongues.

I suppose that is but a taste of how the First Amendment will be interpreted if the nutroots has its way.

Larry said...

Has anybody mentioned the famous Bess Truman quote?

"Heavens, it took me 25 years to get him to say `manure!'

LoafingOaf said...

I wanna thank the hyper-partisan political blogosphere. I don't read most of those political blogs anymore because they're mostly run by silly characters. But I had been feeling less enthusiastic for Rudy. Sometimes I fear I won't vote for any of the candidates.

If the silly man at TPM hadn't brain-stormed real hard about some "gotcha" memory from Rudy's days as mayor, and hadn't excitedly scoured the earth to find this "gotcha" video - smiling to himself that he's gonna bring Rudy down once and for all with his "Howard Dean moment" - I wouldn't have been reminded of one of the reasons I like Rudy. He calls bullsh*t what it is.

So, let's see. They've tried to find a Howard Dean moment for Rudy. They've tried to Swift Boat Rudy. Keep trying, folks! You're making fools of yourselves.

Daryl said...

If Rudy had said the same thing, except replaced the word "Bullshit" with "Flim-Flammery," I would think he was unhinged. "Bullshit" is pretty sane and stable.

James said...

Remember the response when Cheney told Lahey to go F*** himself.

This religious conservative sent in a donation!

Wildmonk said...

I sometimes wonder if left-liberals like Marshall (of TPM) have any clue whatsoever what makes a conservative tick. My sense is that he has a straw-man view of conservatives as a bunch of old church ladies and "stick-up-the-ass" white guys who should be horrified at the thought of someone using foul language. Of course, when we're not, that works too: it just shows that conservatives are hypocrites for not living down to his idea of how they're supposed to act.

Meanwhile, reality goes marching right on by...

Steven said...

I fail to see how that video makes Rudy look bad. God forbid someone call Democrats on their crap, and do it so bluntly.

tweedburst said...

Harper's magazine's latest cover has a sinister cartoon of Rudy proclaiming him to be "worse than Nixon" or something like that.

The goose-stepping left is really crapping themselves with fear of Rudy. They've already crowned Empress Hillary and won't stand for anyone else.

Dovid said...

One thing's for sure. Any a**hole who gives this bullshit the time of day ain't from f**kin' New York.

From Inwood said...

Is this an example of "defining screaming up", "defining unhinged up?

BTW, I heard back in the late '70s that “Conservatives”, “fundamentalists”, “those on the Religious Right”, or whatever the put down du jour was, would never vote for Reagan, a divorced man, over a truly, deeply moral man.

wildmonk & daryl, you've got it: heads they win tails we lose. Hil can use the F bomb, ‘cause she’s not stopping other inarticulate people or other tough-guy poseurs from using it.

I’m all for civility, however, & it’s disheartening to hear or see people, including Prof A, celebrate such gutter word as “normal” & “useful” (yes, BS is a mild one) when we have a language as rich as the English language. Moreover, it seems to me that Prof A would not let her classroom be full of even non-screamer students using “bulls**t” in discussing a decision or a particular law, rule, or reg. And I assume she would concede that it would have no place in a Presidential debate. But, hey it’s easier to cop out about the use of bulls**t by saying: “not that there’s anything wrong about that”, so that no one would think you an old fuddy duddy. Sorry, tho it’s not unhinged, it’s poor form, except, perhaps at a Cop rally on the Bklyn Bridge (tho not later in a You Tube viewing) & definitely with TPM here a case of kettle calling.

Revenant said...

Note to liberals, from one who may or may not be one, too: stop crying wolf. Wait until you get the really good clip and/or dirt.

Or at least wait until you find a video clip that doesn't make potential Rudy supporters like him even more. Its nice to see the bulldog in Rudy again (even if the clip is an old one).

I mean, seriously -- just who do they think is going to be offended by Rudy saying that a Dinkins comment is "bullsh*t"? Is the Religious Right supposed to get the vapors or something?

# 56 said...

Bullshit is rather tame for NYC. Rudy was coming off LCN prosecutions, after all.

AlphaLiberal said...

Giuliani has let his pandering and opportunism get out of control here. He is stoking a fight with powerful racist overtones that he does not question, his language "coarsens the culture," as so many Republicans claim to care.

And the underlying question is how to deal with police misconduct. Giuliani papers over the problem, but abuse victims and other citizens disagree and want civilian oversight.

That Giuliani stood with racists in opposing this reasonable proposal with such venom reduces his viability as a President.

AlphaLiberal said...

And, to head off the inevitable "race has nothing to do with this" argument, from the article:
"Hundreds of white off-duty officers drank heavily, and a few waved signs like “Dump the Washroom Attendant,” a reference to Mr. Dinkins."

and..
"Giuliani has yet to admonish those who attacked the mayor with racist code words on signs and banners. Why not?"

We should not ask minority Americans to live under such a President.

Nichevo said...

We should not ask minority Americans to live under such a President.

If you knew, or rather if you cared, how many minority Americans Giuliani saved from crimes, including murder, during his tenure as Mayor of New York City, you might feel differently.

(And if they don't like it they can move. Isn't that what Alec Baldwin did? ...D'oh!)

Revenant said...

We should not ask minority Americans to live under such a President.

I don't plan to ask them. If they have a problem with it, they can move some place else.

Robert Cook said...

As illustrated by his incitement of these drunken police even before he became mayor, and later at the end of his term by the shabby treatment he subjected his wife and children to when he went public with his adulterous affair and even wanted to install his mistress in the Mayor's mansion even as his family still resided there, (he was blocked by a court order obtained by his then wife), Rudy Giuliani--first, last, and always--is a pig.

Spoken as a NYC resident.

Nichevo said...

NYC resident? Well, as a NYC resident I'm here to tell you that a) Donna Hanover is the pig, b) Giuliani was right, it was bullshit, because c) Dinkins and everything he stood for was bullshit.

But of course you knew all three of those things, because you're a NYC resident. A longtime resident, I'm sure, who was here in the seventies and the eighties and saw what was happening here.

You just don't care, because he is not of your party. And probably because you live isolated from the filth, so it doesn't matter that the Deuce is full of hookers and needle freaks, except inasmuch as it provides you with a little frisson in your pants as your limo driver whisks you by.

Or are you another one of those "values voters?"

I guess, then, that you wouldn't want to vote for a woman complicit in her own husband's adultery (among other crimes, sins, and general offenses to God and man).

James said...

It's all context, isn't it. Giuliani started as an admirer of the Kennedys, and a big fan of the civil rights movement. So he finds himself running for office, against a black mayor, so he goes along, not with the reasonable criticisms of the Dinkins regime you could make, but cheering on a drunken crowd of out-of-town cops, whose cause is -- wait for it -- no civilian review board for police brutality. That's what's "bullshit" to Rudy. Nothing necessarily wrong with the word bullshit, although I wouldn't say it to a nun if she wasn't drunk, it's the demagoguery that Rudy has exhibited on so many occasions that's repulsive.

In this moment is the blindness that ended up with Diallo and the other incidents of racial brutality of his regime. He had a point, as the article implies, in rebuffing the opportunists like Sharpton; but he didn't talk to any black leaders during that time.

I don't, for the record, think that Rudy is a racist, just a garden variety demagogue. Sort of the white Sharpton.

Nichevo said...

This is so confusing. Was he addressing the Boston Police Department? No, wasn't it in fact the NYPD? Then it isn't out-of-town cops. Any more than busboys and traders in the WTC on 9/11 weren't local.

This is not Russia where you have to have permits to live and work in certain places. It's not exactly Hessian mercenaries oppressing the colonists, although you might like to make it seem that way.

Unless you are dwelling on the fact that it had become tough-to-impossible for middle-income families to raise their children within the city limits under any decent standards.

Limiting the force to five-boroughs recruits is so silly that I'm gonna have to have my own little laugh over this - shall we say demagoguery? - and move on. I suppose the next thing is that Manhattan cops have to live in Manhattan? Maybe, Harlem cops gotta live in Harlem? They tried that once, I think.

But of course you weren't serious. Boob bait for suckers, that's fine, nice try.

(All the Kennedy-admiring...Isn't it so sad that he didn't stay on your side? Then none of these criticisms would ever have to be made.)

As for the review board, well, there are arguments on both sides. I'm not here to present the NYPD case but you could try to see what their point is.

Diallo-type incidents happen all the time, everywhere, including under Dinkins and Koch before him, and Bloomberg after him. If it were racism, then no doubt it wouldn't happen in New Orleans or Washington DC...but it does. Oh, you bet it does.

What is to be regretted about that incident is the demise of the Street Crimes Unit, which was doing good work in a tough time. Diallo's neighborhood was not exactly one where a redheaded virgin could walk naked down the street with a bar of gold in each hand.

As for demagogues, if you object to demagoguery, why was Giuliani supposed to meet with the demagogues you call black leaders?

Besides, even if he had strangled Calvin Butts with the intestines of Al Sharpton, you would still have to love him for kicking Yasser Arafat out of Lincoln Center. Has Hillary! ever done a thing like that in her life? Has Obama?

No, Hillary! kisses Suha Arafat after listening to her speech on Jews using poison gas on Pals; and Obama...like I was saying, what's he done again, period? Maybe he rescued somebody from drowning once, that would be nice. Coming from the lush life in Hawaii (IIRC) I would hope he can swim.

Demagoguery indeed.

Nichevo said...

BTW there should be no idea that I am criticizing Obama because he is black, or a Democrat, or rich, or anything. Just that he is a nonentity.

Rich Rostrom said...

nichevo:

"Even if..." You write as though that would be a problem.

Nichevo said...

Rich,

Muahahahahahhaa! It wouldn't film well, he'd be sure to lean over and the sun would shine off his bald spot...the cameras would eat it up. You know how visual everything is now. Besides, a real executive delegates.

And to people, maybe it was on this thread or another "Bullshit" thread, who protest about his refusing the Saudi prince's money:

He did not refuse because it was a Saudi prince. He refused because Prince Alwaleed bin Talal accompanied it with a line of Islamo-nutsy blame-the-victim commentary that rated nothing more than the classic retort from Stephen King's Stand By Me:

"Suck my fat one, you dime store hood."

Now that would be an objection to the Butts-Sharpton thing. Priorities. He had bigger fish to fry, assuming one could bear to touch either Arafat or Alwaleed (or their viscera) with bare hands.

Actually his response was even better. This clarity, actually, is why Giuliani is the best candidate I have seen. You may not like him, you may not like what he does, but you have to admit you can see that he knows the core.



http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/10/11/rec.giuliani.prince/index.html

CNN.com - Giuliani rejects $10 million from Saudi prince - October 12, 2001


NEW YORK (CNN) -- Mayor Rudy Giuliani said Thursday the city would not accept a $10 million donation for disaster relief from Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal after the prince suggested U.S. policies in the Middle East contributed to the September 11 attacks.

"I entirely reject that statement," Giuliani said. "There is no moral equivalent for this [terrorist] act. There is no justification for it. The people who did it lost any right to ask for justification for it when they slaughtered 4,000 or 5,000 innocent people."

Prince Alwaleed gave the mayor a check after a Thursday morning memorial service at Ground Zero, the site of the World Trade Center towers destroyed in the attacks.

The prince offered his condolences to the people of New York, but after the ceremony he released a statement suggesting the United States "must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack."

"The check has not been deposited. The Twin Towers Fund has not accepted it," Giuliani said in a statement late Thursday.

The prince's statement said the United States "should re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stand toward the Palestinian cause.

"While the U.N. passed clear resolutions numbered 242 and 338 calling for the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip decades ago, our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek," the statement said.

Giuliani flatly rejected the prince's position. "To suggest that there's a justification for [the terrorist attacks] only invites this happening in the future," he said. "It is highly irresponsible and very, very dangerous.

"And one of the reasons I think this happened is because people were engaged in moral equivalency in not understanding the difference between liberal democracies like the United States, like Israel, and terrorist states and those who condone terrorism.

"So I think not only are those statements wrong, they're part of the problem," Giuliani said.

Nichevo said...

Corrections:

Any more than busboys and traders in the WTC on 9/11 weren't local tragedies because they schlepped in from Jersey or the Island..

You may not like him, you may not like what he does, but you have to admit you can see that he knows the score.


Gordie Lachance had the line, "Suck my fat one, you dime store hood," in Stand By Me (actually the novella The Body, in the collection Different Seasons; I should have remembered that).

However, in the movie version, for the record, it seems to have been "Suck my fat one, you cheapdime store hood." I remember it the other way, but I was always more into the book (though a great movie it was),

szewczyk said...

Then why was Howard Dean's howl played and replayed by the "liberal" mainstream media as evidence that HE had come unhinged? What's good for the Democrat is good for the Repugnantcrat

The Town Crier said...

actually i remeber the news clips from that day very vividly and clearly. the same clips were also used in nyc mayoral campaign commercials. he had been leading people in chants of "bulls**t, bulls**t" repeatedly. he said a comment and reposnded "bulls**t" trying to entice protestors to scream it with him. "good friend guy molinary, bulls**t! bulls**t!""
look up any newspaper article from that week concerning the rally and they all report accurately that he was a raging lunatic cursing with foul languagei n the street on a megaphone in front of everyone, women and children included.