Highly unlikely to gather together

GiulianismilingYou think your family is dysfunctional? Ponder this roundup of prominent families most at risk of broken crockery or strained silences at dinner today, including the Bhuttos, Craigs, Vitters and Giulianis. In the last case, “the former New York mayor’s son is not speaking to him, and his daughter is working for Obama. Even the Keriks might not stop by this year.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman

13 Comments

  1. Lonnie
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 7:51 am | Permalink

    Well uh…one thing Rudy has always exceled at is having a lot of women folk is his company. His crowded relationships and exploits with multiple women “friends” were legendary during his years as mayor of New York. Maybe what Rudy wants and needs for his crusade for the White House is a quiet holiday…with his third wife.

  2. Posted November 22, 2007 at 7:52 am | Permalink

    Sounds like the people who know Giuliani best hate him the worst.

    How fascinating that he’s the Republic Party’s leading candidate.

  3. Pedant
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    Yeah, I suspect that if Giuliani ends up running against Clinton then next summer and fall we will “enjoy” a campaign season that’ll make 2004 seem like a kindergarten sock hop by comparison.

    It’ll be brutal no matter what, though. G v H would be toxic, but any way it’s sliced it’ll be brutal — given the elections of 2000 & 2004 plus of course the 8-year-long, failed presidency of you know who.

    Thanks so much to Karl Rove, the kid brainy enough to think his way through dealing with his insecurities (apparently massive, especially earlier in his life) the emotional scars of which, in his adulthood, led directly to his unshakeable belief in the man known as Bush 43, and of course to the subsequent election of our Augustus Stupidus. Twice. And of course thanks to Augustus Stupidus himself, at whose clumsy feet will lie the lion’s share of responsibility for the ugliness to come.

    In biz school, one of the most important lessons to be learned is this. The strength of the brand is directly related to 2 things, the marketing campaign and the perceived utility of the good. If those 2 attributes are disconsonant, the brand dies. So Rove’s brilliant marketing in both 2000 and 2004 delivered a steaming turd swathed in Brooks Brothers each time…and the brand will die (ie, the GOP).

    It won’t go down without a struggle, though, I’m sure.

  4. JWink
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 10:00 am | Permalink

    As far as I am concerned, Rudy Giuliani is the only current candidate qualified to serve as President. He has a long track record of success in management and decision making on public issues, under fire in the nation’s largest city.

    Regarding his disfunctional former wives and girlfriends, and family members … these don’t concern me. Obviously his personal relationships haven’t kept up with him and are now taking their personal acrimony out on him.

    Regarding Ron Paul, I like some of his ideas. But he is long on political philosophy and short on track record of management under fire. Unfortunately Ron Paul FAILS to rise even to the V.P. level.

    For Vice President, I nominate our own Wichita product and East High School graduate, the brilliant and highly experienced Bob Gates … even for President if Rudy G. stumbles along the way.

    I see the professional ranters and gadflies waving fancy scrolled paper law degree certificates, generally earned to escape military service, living off the public trough as U.S. Senators, SPECIFICALLY BROWNBACK, OBAMA AND EDWARDS, AS TOTAL ZERO’S AS PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES. I would include Mrs. Clinton in this list but can’t remember if she has a law degree.

  5. Steven Davis
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    H. Rodham has a law degree from Yale. Had she not failed her first bar exam in Washington, D.C. she might not have hooked up with Bill Clinton.

  6. American Way
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    Posted by Rhonda Holman

    The liberal media is desperate to publish any trivial information to cast negatives on our presidential candidates – even on the day of Thanksgiving.

    Control of the press cannot get much better than this. Or could it?

  7. Posted November 22, 2007 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

    I’d say he’s more qualified than Rudy or Hilary. Read up on his history.

  8. Posted November 22, 2007 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    Wow, “JWink” –

    Your admiration for Rudy Giulani’s skill for “management and decision making on public issues” astounds me.

    I had no idea you were pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control, pro-abortion rights! Thanks for clearing that up.

  9. Econ101
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 11:52 am | Permalink

    I wonder how Bill Clinton handles holidays?

    How does he excuse himself to make all the phone calls he needs to make, to those who can’t sit at the same table with Hillary?

  10. American Way
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 1:38 pm | Permalink

    Econ I don’t think Hillary even cares who Bill is humping, as long as it isn’t her and as long as he smiles and waves for her election.

  11. JWink
    Posted November 22, 2007 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    MHawk: Your reply makes feel cornered, like a candidate which I’m not. One answer to your three items is the President has very little control over any of them. The first two are controlled by state legislatures. The third one, abortion rights, is under jurisdiction of the U.S. congress.

    In regard to gay marriage … I don’t want to alienate KsFarmgrrl because we strongly agree on Kansas water issues, or a member of my high school graduating class who lives in California, and perhaps other people “who don’t ask and don’t tell.” That said, I tend to oppose it because I don’t want to enlarge providing government employment perks. I’m thinking particularly of providing health insurance to the same-sex partner who might not have contributed a dime for it. I think free perks are the primary driver behind supporters of gay marriage.

    In regard to guns, my dad gave me my first “22″ rifle at age 12. I soon added a “22″ pistol and “12″ gauge shotgun. We lived on the edge of a small Kansas community so I often walked out to go hunting. At about age 14, I joined the National Rifle Association (NRA) ran by the local mayor/dentist using a rifle range under a local downtown building. Early on, I fired five bullets through one hole in the target … or missed the target altogether as some contended!

    Regarding abortion, that is a tough one. I know abortion methods are inhumane. I have met abortion doctors in the business world who are extremely obnoxious at best. I have also known women over the years who desperately wanted/needed abortions. Who should make the decision … the individual or the collective?

  12. indy
    Posted November 23, 2007 at 10:23 am | Permalink

    Paul – At least the Clintons are still married, unlike Rudy Guliani and his multiple ex-wives.

    But let’s put aside the ex-spouses. What interests me is the the attitude of Rudy’s children. Both of them must hate the man so much that neither one will even support him?

    What does that say when your own children will not vote for you? This is very telling about the character of the man and isn’t character of the man the ONLY reason the Republicans hounded Bill Clinton, and still hound him to this day as is evident by your posting?

    If the Republicans spent millions of dollars investigating Bill Clinton because of a BJ from Monica, then you had better expect the exact same treatment of Rudy Guliani if by chance he gets into the White HOuse. After all, fair is fair and I’m sure you want Republicans to be honest and have integrity in all that they do – correct?

  13. Econ101
    Posted November 23, 2007 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    LindaIt was the fact that Bill Clinton lied under oath about the BJ that got him in trouble, got him impeached and got him disbarred.

    I wish the Republicans had gone after the financial misdeeds, instead, but lying under oath can’t be tolerated.

    Liberals turned the whole “sexual harrassement” thing into a political tool, after the Clarence Thomas hearings.

    Then, when one of their own was accused, by multiple women, and he has to give court depositions, he LIES about it.

    That is what happened.