Giuliani Pretends He Has No Idea What Character Assassination Really Is
Rudy Giuliani's claim that Sen. Hillary Clinton participated in character assassination for questioning Gen. David Petraeus about his assessment of progress in Iraq shows that Giuliani is the one engaging in personal attacks. by Walt Thiessen
(libertarian)
Sunday, September 16, 2007
First, let me state for the record that I do not support Hillary Clinton for president. I think she would be another bad president in a long list of bad presidents. Having said that, I must take presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani to task for his comments about Clinton in a full page ad he ran in the New York Times this past week.
According to the Associated Press, Giuliani accused Clinton of character assassination for saying, "The reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief," to Gen. David Petraeus during Senate hearings on the Iraqi situation.
Problem is, Mr. Giuliani, that's not an attack on character. Yes, it's an attack on his testimony, but attacks based on facts (in this case, the recipient's testimony) are not personal attacks! Contrary to Mr. Giuliani's claims, Mrs. Clinton has every right to express an opinion of that kind precisely because it is not a personal attack. Now, if she had called Gen. Petraeus a bad name or lied about what he said, that would be different, but she didn't do that.
Therefore it is Mr. Giuliani who is engaging in a personal attack, and he did it for the most crude and cynical reason of all. He was trying to play the patriotism card by insinuating that anyone who questions our top military leader in Iraq is a traitor. No, he didn't actually say that, but that was clearly his intention.
Now, in fairness, there is one part that Giuliani got right. He was right when he said that the organization MoveOn.org engaged in a personal attack when it called Gen. Petraeus "Gen. Betray Us." Yes, that is a personal attack, unless they can prove that Petraeus is guilty under the law of treason. Since they can't prove that, their attack is definitely ad hominem.
Everyone knows that MoveOn.org is a left-wing organization. Since Clinton is associated by some as being left-leaning (personally, I suspect she's more of a statist than a liberal as measured by the Nolan Chart), Giuliani asked readers to make the mental leap that she therefore is responsible for what MoveOn.org said. He is wrong. She is not responsible for MoveOn.org's comments at all, and Giuliani knows it. Again, he demonstrates that his motivations are cynically political and aimed at smearing Clinton.
Giuliani's ad hominem falls into the same category as another cynical political device used by neo-cons (including Giuliani) in the past: questioning whether anti-war critics "support the troops." It's a question whose intention is to insinuate that if one is opposed to the war in Iraq, that same person can't possibly be supporting the troops. The intention is to suggest that war opponents are ungrateful that members of the military are willing to put their lives on the line. In truth, nearly all Americans, including both those who support the war in Iraq and those who oppose it, are grateful to the troops who are willing to place their lives at risk. But gratitude is not the issue where evaluation of the war in Iraq is concerned.
What's worse is that Giuliani (and the other neo-cons) know this to be true. They raise false and misleading charges purely for political gain. Their motives are therefore despicable.
MoveOn.org should apologize to Gen. Petraeus, Rudy Giuliani should apologize to Sen. Clinton, and both MoveOn.org and Giuliani should apologize to the American people.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 2
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Walt Thiessen only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Walt Thiessen is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
