Another witness confirms Romney’s “no Muslims in cabinet” comment.
In political conversations we frequently talk about government-funded abortions, birth control and miscellaneous other stuff. But what about the actual boffing itself?
I’m not sure it’s directly relevant to the larger debate about fiscal discipline. But is Rudy going to get asked for some explanation or tabulation of many New York City tax dollars he used to go do the wild thing with his mistress?
Were extra expenses incurred to travel without tipping off the then-wife Donna Hanover?
Alan Krueger, a professor of Economics and Public Policy at Princeton and an adviser to the National Counter-terrorism Center, is blogging this week at TPM Cafe’s Table for One about his new book, What Makes a Terrorist: Economics and the Roots of Terrorism.
Krueger starts with a post on, go figure, What Makes a Terrorist, follows that with a post on Defining Terrorism, and continues with a post on Searching for the Causes of Terrorism.
Hmmmm. Tuned in late here to the Youtube debate. I was thinking Rudy’s big problem tonight was the govt-funded shagoramas with then-mistress Judith Nathan. But I think that this answer about gun control might be a bigger problem. Don’t know how you explain away, in a GOP debate, why you said you would support written tests to purchase guns. But even at that I think that was one of the most incoherent answers I think I’ve ever heard. He’s lucky it was a Youtube debate. If there were a moderator that would have gotten ugly. Actually, that’s only Russert and Blitzer in Dem debates. But still …
9:21 PM … Mike Huckabee is super conservative, believes in biblical literalism, doesn’t believe in evolution. But, man, that answer to the Bible question was good. Just judging in pure political terms, he knocked that one out of the park.
Made Rudy and Mitt look like idiots that wanted to be anywhere else but on that stage.
9:24 PM … I’ve seen four or five Rudy answers now. Is it just me or does he seem rattled?
9:28 PM … Interesting. Inappropriate for a presidential candidate to say whether waterboarding is torture?
9:29 PM … All you can say about McCain, he does have these moments: whacking Romney about the ridiculousness of not admitting that waterboarding is torture. (ed.note: Really, if you want to be for torture, just say it.)
9:43 PM … Sigh. A real aviation hero like Chuck Yeager supports Duncan Hunter.
9:46 PM … Rudy 2.0: 9/11 plus the Haiti boat treaty.
9:54 PM … Have to say, again just judging in political terms, Huckabee’s the only real pro up there on the stage. (ed.note: That said, that was a pretty cheap crack about Hillary. Pretty tasteless.)
One thing that actually sort of surprised me was that Mitt Romney kept ducking the question of whether or not he still ‘looked forward’ to the day when gays could serve openly in the military. I find it odd because Romney’s shown he’s willing to flip-flop on virtually every issue and kow-tow to every Republican dogma. I’m not just saying that as a dig. He’s actually one of the few pols you heard frequently saying, “I was wrong about this, wrong about that.” But he just wouldn’t say it on this one question. It really stuck out from the standard Romney MO.
Andrew Sullivan flagged something in the debate that really jumped out at me too. In explaining why he doesn’t support gays in the military he basically said that if the military were a cross-section of America, gays in the military might work. But the military is really a Christian conservative institution, and they won’t put up with gays.
Late Update: From a few emails from readers, I think I wasn’t clear enough in this post. I’m not agreeing with Hunter’s characterization of the military. I was struck by the audacity of his rationale for barring gays from service.
TPM Reader JE comments …
Are the Republican hopefuls really that naive? I’m an active duty officer currently in Korea. If they believe that the military is a Christian-right, conservative institution they need to spend a few nights in the “ville” around a military base here…they would be “shocked!” by what they saw. After 17+ years in the military, most of it overseas, nothing amazes me anymore. It would make most people’s heads spin what goes on, on a daily basis, at bars and clubs here.
On the Rudy shagonomics story, the details are even richer than the headline. Not only did Rudy pick obscure public agencies to bill for his trips out to hang in the Hamptons with Judy Nathan, he seemed to pick them to guarantee the maximum impression of tastelessness and chutzpah should he ever be found out.
Admittedly he only charged $10,000 to the people with disabilities fund. Chump change for the shag fund. But the office charged with getting counsel for indigent defendants got stuck with $400,000.
Rudy and Judy aren’t like us little people. But even that high in the stratosphere, half a million dollars covers a lot of shagging.
I’d heard a lot that Rudy’d done a lot to screw poor folks caught up in the criminal justice system but this puts the matter in a whole new light.