Just for the record, I’m a Hispanic guy who is also a conservative.
I KNEW you were Emilio Garza.
That would be cool, but I am reasonably sure he has let slip clues he is a lawyer that does Goverment Contract work. Of course I am now reasonably sure I am whooshing myself again. Oh Well.
Jim
At the risk of not being taken at tongue and cheek level: don’t you know your Latino, not Hispanic. 
I don’t know any openly conservative black people (that’s a joke people, (but really I don’t)), but I know a lot of conservative Hispanics.
You’re an idiot. Try asking the Irish people about their history of oppression under the British, and THEN come baack and say it was “to a lesser degree”. BTW, the Ireland hasn’t even been independent for a full century yet. Ask someone in Northern Ireland if things are still fine and dandy.
I’m not trying to say “Oh, I suffer because I’m white!” But I’m so sick and tired of this notion that such and such group is the ONLY ONE to have ever experienced prejudice and persecution. Try asking a Holocaust survivor about that some time.
Well aren’t we peas in a pod, then. You don’t know what you are talking about. We didn’t treat the Irish anywhere near as bad as the British did. And for what it is worth, the British never treated the Irish as bad as America treated black people. First enslaving them outright, and then treating them as subhuman, peaking in the 1910s and 1920s. And Irish people in this country (US) have had it pretty damn good for the last 50 years at least.
Yeah, my very white European ancestors (the generation before the oldest now living) were peasant class and sold into apprenticeships that were a step above slavery and every bit as bad as what the Irish put up with. And you don’t hear me whining about it because it has nothing to do with me. I have lived a good life without any prejudice towards me and mine. I live within the upper 1 percent of wealth worldwide, never miss a meal etc.
I know people who were born in Ireland 60 years ago and live here now. They are not the victims of racism in the US.
I’m not sure what you mean about cleaning up the police department. The incident I mentioned, the Diallo incident, Abner Louima - all occurred under Giuliani, and he backed up the NYPD all the way. How could that not be considered divisive by the black community? Why did he consistently refuse to meet with state comptroller McCall or manhattan bp Virginia Fields? (not meeting with Sharpton being a given) He called them enemies, supposedly because they were democrats. But if it truly wasn’t racial, then it was playing on partisan politics, which is just another way to be divisive.
As far as lowering crime - whether or not you can attribute that to Giuliani alone and not credit much of it as the results of the Dinkins/Ray Kelly era is very debatable. The squeegee men you mention were gone before Giuliani took office. Giuliani certainly took credit, but even his own commish (Bratton) gave most of the credit to Dinkins and Kelly. But perception trumps reality, and Giuliani was perceived as tough on crime by the press and the public, just as Dinkins was portrayed as weak.
By now you can guess I don’t share your enthusiasm for him, but it wasn’t as much about his policies as his attitude. Look at Bloomberg - same social liberal republican policies - but agree with his policies or not, he is in no way divisive, racially or as a partisan. Maybe it is a question of personal style. IMO, September 11th was the luckiest day of Giuliani’s life because it wiped out his past record for many people. Some people get the chance for redemption, and some people don’t.
Thanks for answering. Since I read this thread, I’ve been trying to think of a white leader equivalent to Sharpton (same mix of the bad and the good). I don’t know if Giuliani qualifies, but he was the anti-Sharpton during his era. Maybe it would be a better fit for comparison if Giuliani hadn’t lucked out on September 11th. He certainly wouldn’t be known as America’s Mayor without it.
Still like your style. I’d like to be as forgiving and open minded as you seem to be.
Guin, I gotta disagree with you here. As badly as the Irish were treated by the British, I doubt the worst-treated Irish would have traded places with [a captive on a slaveship/url] or [url=http://www.whatwasthen.com/lalaurie.html]a victim of the LaLaurie family](Aboard a Slave Ship, 1829).
Lalaurie victims were rare, but millions suffered the conditions of the slave ship.
Fearlessreader, maybe you’re not leftist, but I’m not sure I believe your protestations. I have never heard anyone but another leftist use the sort of slogans that you use, e.g., talking about unexamined racism. In any case, I don’t care: the specific aspect of leftism that you’re hurting is the anti-racist thread of leftism.
Daniel
I am having trouble with much of what you say.
I know the squeegee men were still there because I was going to the Bronx many times a year. Between the Yanks, my Nanny (grandmother) and the Zoo. I would be up there 10-20 times a year. It was a year into Rudy’s first term that the Subway’s were cleaned up, overpasses had graffiti being removed and Squeegee men were gone. The city was in terrible shape under Dinkins. I thought in four year he had undone the positive steps forward Koch had made. It was almost as bad as the Beame years. Dinkins was a well meaning but incompetent mayor.
Rudy supported the cops 100%. Even in the face of them being wrong. He also charged the department to root out it corruption. Is he perfect, of course not? Did he make the city a better place for all? Yes. Is he very tough of crime, Yes!
I find your choice of using 9/11 as a lucky event, extremely distasteful. But for a case of Flu, my Cousin would have been there that day. Rudy Giuliani lost friends that day.
The response was as good as it was because he had planned ahead and built a special response team. He had restored moral to the NYPD & FDNY. He promoted the terms “NY Finest and Bravest” and meant them. Part of leadership is morale building. Part of ending corruption is having a leader that stands by his men until they are actually proven guilty and sending out the constant word that corruption will not be tolerated.
A typical politician would have found scapegoats for the Abner Louima nightmare. He waited until the facts were in place. Politically a dangerous decision but if you think about it the right one.
If you look at the statistics, crime decline throughout the country during the Clinton years. This was a combination of a good economy and more money to police forces. The same statistics show NYC decline in crime was greater than any other large city and far ahead of the national average. Rudy basically went into office on a platform of cleaning up NYC and he did it. He is not a racist. He is not anti-gay. He is not a member of the religious right. He made most of NYC a better place and Bloomberg is continuing this and deserves another 4 years. His biggest crime is probably being a die-hard Yankee Fan.
Do you prefer the politician that throws people under the bus before they get all the facts or one who stands firm and maybe belligerently until the facts are in. Rudy is a flawed but generally upright man. As politicians go he is more honest than the vast majority and will actually say what he means. How many politicians could have turned NYC around the way he did? Of course if you don’t think he did, I can see where we will probably not be able to agree.
Lastly I am not immediately open-minded but I try hard to be. Life should be a process of learning. Gut instincts are often wrong and deeper analysis is often needed. If I went by Daily News headlines and 15 second news stories, I would think Rev Al was a complete Jerk, by learning more about him and taking time to listen to him, I learn to appreciate him. Take a little time to re-examine the pre 9/11 Giuliani. He had already made the city better and not all the issues were really how I think you perceived them.
Jim
Very classy.
You accuse me of lying rather than admit that you might have misunderstood my post. Why would I lie about something like that? You and your friend insulted me for no reason. I don’t know the leftist code phrases. Maybe I was brainwashed by a lefty professor, or actually cracked open a book without your guidance. Or maybe I, one of the unwashed, came up with the concept on my own (gasp!).
You don’t care? Fine. But if you’re so worried about your fucking cause, maybe you should take your head out of your ass and stop coming across like the stereotype of a self-righteous reactionary condescending leftist. Your real opponents love to see that in action, don’t they?
Thanks for nothing.
I agree with you about Dinkins. It was Ray Kelly who was shafted by the squeegee man story. It’s not just my perception - Bratton admits it too. Here are some cites for that:
Gotham Gazette:
Great Donald Rumsfeld impression. 
I’ll ask you again what you mean about cleaning up the police department in light of what you’re saying here. You admit they were wrong, and I understand why it put Giuliani in a tough spot. But I’m looking for talent. That’s what was needed - the talent to take charge without alienating either side. I’m sorry to disagree with a guy like you, but Giuliani just didn’t have that talent. IMO, because he didn’t build the foundation of trust within the minority communities prior to the incident. Compare that to Ray Kelly:
I’m sorry I offended you. I had people there too. I went to a lot of funerals and memorial services back then. I’m not a politically correct person, and I’m not a politician, but truth is truth - some people cashed in on the tragedy. Is my remark any more distasteful than what Giuliani said at the GOP convention (“My first thought was ‘thank God George Bush is President’”) or what Bush said (“Laura and I had a pretty good year” or “I hit the trifecta”)? The political posturing broke my heart.
But sensibilities aside, I was trying to say that Giuliani was given a second chance after September 11th, so he cannot be easily compared to Sharpton.
Maybe we have to agree to disagree here. I’m not saying he was all bad, or incompetent, but he was very divisive. Democrats are 5 to 1 here, and he referred to them as the enemy. He refused to meet with democrats or any minority leaders. What, was he only the mayor of republicans? In a city like this, you’ve got to be able to work with everyone. That’s not a partisan comment - it’s pragmatism. That’s what I most admire in Bloomberg.
Bloomberg is a completely different story. He hired a lot of democrats. He meets with Al Sharpton. He doesn’t try to alienate some communities by toadying to his base voters (something I think Giuliani did deliberately). Right now it’s a little uglier than usual because of the election, but without that stress, Bloomberg comes off a lot better. I voted for him last time, but I am thinking of withholding my vote now, mostly because of his excessive spending. He didn’t need to spend 100 million to beat Ferrer (who only has 6 or 7 million to spend). He said last time he wouldn’t spend as much and run on his record, so I think I’m going to hold him to that. Better to spend the money for something useful.
All politicians are flawed - we can agree there. I don’t vote strictly party, and I don’t even vote strictly on issues. I vote the person, figuring if they are reasonable and competent and working for the good of all, I can hold their feet to the fire on issues I disagree with. Anyway, that’s my reasoning.
But I believe Giuliani used divisiveness to further his own ends - much the same as the charges against Sharpton (lest we forget the origin of this thread). He refused to listen, or reach out to anyone who disagreed with him. Because of that, I can’t even think of supporting him on a national level (I wouldn’t support Sharpton for the same reason).
Honesty is a tough call for a politician. So is decency (as in the title of this thread). I try to avoid those calls because they are so complex and debatable based on perception and bias. Think about the national political scene and the “Bush lied” debate. I’m not above it all, but I’m so tired of it. I believe he lied, but I don’t have absolute truth. Thing is, I don’t think it’s necessary to prove it. If he didn’t lie, then he was incompetent, and that’s enough for me to justify firing him (and the easiest firing I can think of - as a small business owner - I wouldn’t have to lose sleep worrying about how he would take care of his family). Am I wrong about that?
Enough. Too bad about the Yanks this year, eh? 
Deeper analysis takes up a lot of my time. I don’t want to shatter your ideal of a hero - but I’m still curious about why you chose Giuliani as a hero. Personally, I try to avoid an emotional investment in politicians. But I’ll take your advice and try to keep an open mind. Jury is still out on all of us still breathing, right?
Thanks Jim.
Fearless Reader Thank you & I agree to disagree.
Our debate is a hijack anyway.
Jim
No problem, Jim.
I agree - if Giuliani ever runs for national office, these arguments will have more relevance.
But I’m sorry if I offended you again somehow.
You didn’t offend. I just thought we should let the debate go back to Rev Al.
Sorry
Jim
I didn’t accuse you of lying before–but since I didn’t and you said I did, I’ll accuse you of it now.
Or maybe your posts are actually typed by a collective of sponges growing across a keyboard. I don’t much care: as I said, I care that you’re hurting the antiracist cause with your idiotic posts.
Wow, bud. I really don’t think you want to get in a pissing match with me about which of us is coming across as more the stereotype of a self-righteous reactionary condescending leftist. But if you do, I welcome you to ask around.
Daniel
Fair enough, and that’s very true. I just don’t like to see people playing the whole “Well, this group has been more oppressed than anyone in history!” I think you could argue that what Ireland went through over a period of hundreds of years (since the 12th century, as I understand it), and what the Jews went through ranks up there.
I meant to respond to this earlier–no, Finn, not only wasn’t I offended, but I can’t imagine why I woulda been. I’ve been enjoying your posts in this thread.
Daniel
In Guin’s defense, weren’t a million Irish killed in the 5 years of the potato famine alone. The mass deaths of the Famine was basically really evil politics. This is a million death from a population of around 8 million.
For what was a very small population this was devastating and this is only the most glaring event in an 800-year history of oppression that is only eased up in the last 100 years. It is on a different scale than African slavery but almost as bad.
However this is not a part of American History and Slavery was. In the 20th century, many group were treated as badly as blacks at the same time. Japanese interments. Jews, Italians, Polish, Chinese and Irish treated like 3rd class citizen with hordes of insulting names. I agree that things improved for these other group quicker than for African American but it was very bad for all these groups at times and was on a scale.
The biggest difference I see is the KKK and lynch mobs of the Deep South. It was an organize horror.
The extreme prejudice against Blacks has also lasted longer and seems to run deeper. We all must continue to educate against this.
Please don’t think I’m saying the Irish had strawberries and cream every day. They had it really, really, really tough I’m just saying–as you said–that it was on a different scale than African slavery.
There are plenty of groups that had it worse than the Irish. How many Irish, do you think, would have been willing to trade places with a random black Congolese during the reign of Emperor Leopold? How many would have traded places with a random Carib Indian on Columbus’s second landing? A random Australian Aborigine during their genocide?
I think that even at the height of the Irish Potato Famine, as horrible as things got, they didn’t make it into the top tier of atrocities in history.
Daniel
Some people are funny about accepting help, I’m glad I didn’t offend.