Rudy Giuliani & The Memory Hole

Published December 20, 2006 in Rudy Giuliani.

Wannabe presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani somehow omits his first two wives and children from his online bio.

21 Responses to “Rudy Giuliani & The Memory Hole”

Feed for this Entry

1 Bill L.
Dec 21st, 2006 at 12:30 am

Uh, couple of problems with your argument there, tyfoc.

1.)There was no such thing as an online bio until just a few years ago, so at best, you have to limit your examples to Clinton and later, and including Clinton is a bit of a stretch at that.

2.)Similarly, only the last 3 men you cite are potentially running for Preznit in ‘08, with McCain being a virtual lock, followed by Edwards and finally, Gore.

3.)Gore worked for Big Tobacco and then decided they were scum, and ….? How many years ago did he work for them? In what capacity? You would have a point if Gore were campaigning against smoking while accepting campaign funds from Philip Morris or something. Trying to say that he was for smoking before he was against it doesn’t carry any weight.

2.)Is Edward’s supposed to police his staff? A staffer tries to snag a hard to find item and goes to Walmart, possibly as a one time, hold-your-nose effort to get something special for Edwards’ son for Christmas. Again, this isn’t like, say, bashing Walmart in public while taking their money and rolling over for every pro-business bill to hit the floor.

3.)Giulani is trying to position himself as a right wing candidate for a possible run for the White House. To that end he is working overtime to shake off any liberal taint from his past, i.e. his tolerance of gays (co-habitation, in his case), his support of pro-choice legislation, and so on. Multiple marriages and infidelity don’t exactly burnish his “family values” credentials.
2 fd10801
Dec 21st, 2006 at 2:29 am

Sorry, Bill L. tyfoc is much closer to the mark than you are. Politicians regularly fudge on their bios, be they in the Congressional Record, or WhiteHouse.gov

tyfoc’s point with which I agree is that Oliver does this only when Republicans do what every other politician does routinely.
3 Wilbur
Dec 21st, 2006 at 2:50 am

I’m beginning to understand something about our right-wing brethren. There are many different types of intelligence; most of us excel at some types and are deficient in others. Most right-wing commenters on this site aren’t unintelligent, they are just deficient in the type of intelligence that allows them to think logically enough to form and follow appropriate analogies. Thence flow all the false equivalencies and vacuous analogies that are the bedrock of right-wing rhetoric. Perhaps this deficiency explains why so many otherwise intelligent people become Republicans.

In the present case, all the omissions that tyfoc lists are things that, if valid (which I’m not for a minute acknowledging in every case), are things that the people in question should be ashamed of. So if tyfoc’s analogy were valid, tyfoc would be saying that Rudy should be ashamed that he was previously married, and should be ashamed of his children from that marriage.

But somehow I don’t think that is what he meant to say.
4 fd10801
Dec 21st, 2006 at 6:13 am

Actually, Wilbur, despite your use of really big words like “thence” and “vacuous”, are wrong.

The things politicians leave out of their bios are those things that it would be inconvenient or troubling to deal with during a campaign, which include, but are not limited to, things to be ashamed of.
5 August J. Pollak
Dec 21st, 2006 at 9:55 am

Does Robert Byrd include his KKK membership in his bio?

You think having two kids from a previous marriage is the same as joining the Klan?

Did Ted Kennedy mention the unfortunate midnight swim?

I’m sure it’s on the same site that mentions Laura Bush’s little car accident. How are you fuckers not bored with this yet?
6 August J. Pollak
Dec 21st, 2006 at 10:00 am

And by the way, since like everyone else attacking the Byrd straw man, you clearly couldn’t be bothered to Google it yourself: yes, Byrd in fact addresses the Klan in his biography. He wrote entire chapters on it. The book is called “Robert C. Byrd: Child of the Appalachian Coalfields,” which is a stark contrast to “Rudy Guiliani: What Child?”

The things politicians leave out of their bios are those things that it would be inconvenient or troubling to deal with during a campaign, which include, but are not limited to, things to be ashamed of.

So answer Wilbur’s question: is Giuliani ashamed of his kids or not?
7 fd10801
Dec 21st, 2006 at 10:53 am

AJP: I didn’t know he asked a question, but I’ll say this: There is no way of knowing whether not Giuliani is ashamed of having children from a previous marriage.

I can only surmise that he doesn’t want attention drawn to the previous marriage.

The rest, like Kennedy and Chappaquidick, is between him and his maker
8 Dr. Anatole Gavage-Huskanoy
Dec 21st, 2006 at 11:03 am

I think Giuliani’s kids are in a spider hole with Newt’s first wives. Maybe they should all just have a group marriage, like on Big Love. That’d be a hell of a reality show, come to think of it.
9 Jay
Dec 21st, 2006 at 11:11 am

This is so freaking stupid. As if anybody who knew about Guiliani didn’t know about his previous marriage or that nobody would find out about it.

Yet the theory is this was specifically done by him and his team so that they could better position themselves for the GOP primary.

Are you people really that retarded?
10 Wilbur
Dec 21st, 2006 at 2:13 pm

Frank: “thence” and “vacuous” are “really big words”?

Jay: you can take all your insults and turn them on your self if you think that there’s anything on Giuliani’s website that was not “specifically done by him and his team so that they could better position themselves for the GOP primary.”

Same goes for the website of every serious politician who’s considering a run for president.
11 Duros62
Dec 21st, 2006 at 2:14 pm

jay, don’t use that term, please.

Didn’t Rudy marry his cousin or some such? Does he mention that
part as well?

Tyfoc’s point is well taken. Everybody has crap in their closets they’d rather not address, expecially on the campaing trail. I appreciate your bipartisanship as well, T.

Heh heh, Bill said “taint.”
12 Jay
Dec 21st, 2006 at 2:34 pm

Wilbur, sorry if the insults bother you, but it just seems unlikely to me that Guiliani did that for that reason. First of all, the media is not going to stop reminding people that he’s on his third marriage. Second of all, it’s pretty common knowledge. It’s just absurd to think that he was doing it so it would shield him from kind of criticism.

Duros, my apologies. I won’t use that term.
13 Duros62
Dec 21st, 2006 at 3:28 pm

Jay, it’s just that Quaker called me on it when I said to you a few weeks back, so…. you know.
Nothing wrong with name calling , right? as long as we keep it civilized.
14 Jay
Dec 21st, 2006 at 4:00 pm

Duros, I do remember that. I’ll keep it civilized….putz.
15 Bill L.
Dec 21st, 2006 at 4:09 pm

Hey, somebody actually seems to know the definition of “taint.” I came within a whisker of working in “tea-bagging.”

While it’s pretty well impossible to pretend that politicians aren’t constantly fudging history to better present themselves to their adoring public, the laundry list of past offenses doesn’t address Rudy’s omissions, it just plays the “I know you are but what am I” card for the umpteenth time.

The online aspect of this is particularly meaningful, I think, in light of the fact that efforts to fudge facts in the past had to get past quite a number of formidable barriers to become widely accepted. The net has made the dissemination of information a far simpler task. How long before Rudy’s bio is linked to other blogs and news services, which will elevate it to the top of any search engine query, which will be the first thing a research assistant on MSNBC will hit when rushing to get background for a segment? Fiction can rapidly become fact. The only credible explanations, really, are either that Rudy doesn’t want to “dwell” on his past, that it’s a “mistake,” or that he is hoping a certain percentage of the population will ignore troubling facts and cling to “Saint Rudy” in much the same way many cling to “Saint McCain.”
16 Duros62
Dec 21st, 2006 at 4:45 pm

I’ll keep it civilized….putz.

Atta boy!!1!!
17 fd10801
Dec 21st, 2006 at 6:15 pm

Wilbur: See if Target has any “Sense of Humor” Kits left.
18 fd10801
Dec 21st, 2006 at 6:15 pm

Wilbur: See if Target has any “Sense of Humor” Kits left.
19 Adam Herman
Dec 28th, 2006 at 10:48 am

So? First, why would a liberal care about such a thing? Secondly, you can’t claim you are pointing out hypocrisy because Giuliani himself is a liberal on family issues.
20 Shorter Frank
Dec 28th, 2006 at 6:59 pm

If you’re insulted by my insults it’s entirely your fault.
21 awardspa
Jul 28th, 2007 at 7:02 pm

http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la casino-in-la [url=http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la]casino-in-la[/url]
http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la/casino-la-shreveport.html casino-la-shreveport [url=http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la/casino-la-shreveport.html]casino-la-shreveport[/url]
http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la/casino-la-posta.html casino-la [url=http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la/casino-la-posta.html]casino-la[/url]
http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la/casino-kinder-la.html casino-kinder [url=http://caz678.awardspace.co.uk/casino-in-la/casino-kinder-la.html]casino-kinder[/url]
[url=][/url]