Rudy Giuliani is a bully, and the best way to defang bullies is to fearlessly rebuke them. But after Giuliani arrogantly counseled Ron Paul to "withdraw" his supposedly unique contention that military intrusions breed resentment in the Middle East just as they do or would anywhere else, America's Mayor has been subjected to nothing sterner than the suggestion he ought to expand his reading list. Instead of cutely proposing that he edify himself, Giuliani's opponents should tell him he is not only ill-equipped to be president, but unqualified to participate in presidential debates. But unfortunately, there is nary a candidate with the nerve to say such a thing to the megalomaniac from New York.
My criticism of Giuliani is not hyperbolic. Imagine a pro-choice advocate stating at an abortion debate that he or she had never before heard the standard pro-life position, and suggesting that the opposing argument be silenced. For that matter, imagine a pro-life exponent claiming to be unfamiliar with, and refusing to discuss, the widely known pro-choice position. Either way, such ignorance and unwillingness to address a contrary opinion, would render the advocate unfit to engage in a public disputation about abortion. Likewise, Giuliani doesn't belong in a debate about foreign policy, because whether or not Paul's analysis is correct, what the congressman said is nothing new.
Giuliani has handed his ideological foes the means to marginalize him as the kook he is, but they are so far squandering the opportunity. This meekness illustrates the folly of relying on the Democratic Party. It is now broadly recognized that those who opposed invading Iraq were censored just prior to the incursion, and this suppression enabled the president and his fellow warmongers to sell the impending offensive as necessary and righteous. It is appalling that no debate was allowed about such a grave matter, and beyond depressing that there is still virtually no attempt by Democrats to hold the Bush administration accountable for its immoral aggression and probable war crimes. Instead, the "opposition party" issues impotent threats to challenge the president about his management of the ongoing occupation. It's no wonder Cindy Sheehan is fed up with this nonsense.
If lazy followers of Democratic politicians refuse to address their party's (and their own) glaring weaknesses, they should not be surprised when the Republican nominee captures the White House in 2008. But they will nonetheless feign shock and horror, and dwell on scapegoats such as Ralph Nader and voting machines. In the meanwhile, the dangerous Giuliani continues to intimidate his pitiful opponents as Democrats bicker about whether or not to boycott Fox News. What a strategy!