Russert lets a Republican off easy. The only tough questions were the meaningless horse-race questions as to how his campaign will do.

Adolf Hitler could go on that show and Russert's idea of a tough question would be, "Do you REALLY expect to make significant inroads into the conservative Protestant vote?"

Tim Russert is a lapdog.

Barbara Walters and Larry King are more hard hitting and exciting.

Katie Couric could do what Tim Russert does and no one would notice anything different except the face and the voice.

"We never forget who we are working for - our sponsors."

It's gaffe, by the way, unless you mean a fishhook?:)

He's a neo-con.

I thought he came off as an arrogant, smooth talking, slimy bastard. which is exactly what he is. Russert "forgot" to ask him why the terrorism task force, or whatever it's called, has it's HQ INSIDE THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. that might have actually been a question he would not have been able to explain away easily.

does anyone believe that Judith Nathan had threats made against her before the affair was public?? Russert also fucked that question up: it was not December 2000 that that was made public but in May of 2000. so any security before that was clearly not needed. Rudy might not have liked having the security detail, but you know a trashy bitch like Judy loved the attention and the valet.

Russert also screwed up on the Kerik issue: this is not tantamount to the "thousands" of appointments that Rudy has made. This guy was a fucking chaufer that Rudy took under his wing and made the police commissioner. without Rudy, Kerik is nowhere. This was all about nepotism and Tim should know that.

Overall, Russert is not as tough an interviewer as he has the reputation for. This was obvious when he did he did the softball interview with George W. in 2004. he's too much of a "washington insider".

NOTE that most articles about Rudy are essentially "Chancellor Hitler denies any concentration camps or executions of jews"

You don't say!

WHY does anyone reprint what a proven pathological liar says????

It defies logic, unless the media was using Rudy's constant flip flops and lies against him (which they aren't).

Russert is one of the worst hacks in the country.

EX:

Rudy is on record thousands of times supporting Iran! ANd iraq!

EX:

"Rudy, Bush gave the Taliban $41 million american taxdollars in the summer of 2001. Do you think people who fund terrorists like the Taliban should be imprisoned?"

You NEVER hear smart or actually tough questions from any CIA hacks, er, "reporters" in this nation. It's criminal. (They're goal is to help crooks win elections, duh.)

EX:

when Rudy refuses to answer a question, NOTE how many reporters then remind him that PROSECUTOR RUDY said not answering questions proves guilt!

Scary.

GiulianiScandals.blogspot.com

He let slip the opportunity to post a number of very pertinent follow-up questions.

On Judi Nathan, the crucial questions were: would any citizen of NYC have gotten personal police protection just because they were threatened? Why did your mistress merit this special treatment? And: Was it appropriate for the New York City taxpayers to be asked to shell out many tens of thousands of dollars so you could go up to the Hamptons to bang your mistress? And: you say the decisions on Judi's security were made by NYPD professionals, without any participation by you. How can we believe that, knowing your special relationship with Bernie Kerik, and knowing as we do that he was a corrupt, mobbed-up, ass-kissing hack?

On OBL and 9/11: You say you didn't recognize the enormity of it? So why did you make the speech (which Russert had just quoted) in which you touted yourself as having seen the threat more clearly than others did?

On Giuliani Partners: After Rudy said he had already separated himself from the business as much as possible, Russert should have aked: why not simply sell your interest in this business?

Russert let Rudy get away. That's okay. Russert isn't the last word in this game. Besides, how much of the electorate really pays attention to the Sunday talk shows? The relative few who do already know about Guiliani's many sins.

Fear not. While Russet might have screwed up, Guiliani's opponents won't. You can count on Romney or Huckabee, or perhaps even Thompson if he's running third after Iowa, to tear Rudy apart. After all, these men are ruthlessly ambitious (consider the prize they're seeking). Unlike Russert, they have no need to polish Rudy's apple; indeed, they will do all they can to smash it into sauce, and they'll have Dobson and the other religious crazies on their side. The thrice-married, adulterous, gay-friendly, cross-dressing thug from New York doesn't stand a chance.

Of course, that means that we'll still be faced with the prospect of a President Romney, Huckabee, or Thompson (not McCain -- he's finished). While that is bad, a Guiliani Presidency is downright unthinkable. Let's all just sit back and watch the gangsters rub each other out. After the dust has settled is when the real battle begins: to elect the Democrat, whoever she or he might be.

My sweet lord I hope this crook isn't elected to any office!!!

Lord hep' me

There are a whole batch of Beltway/media figures (Matthews and Maureen Dowd among them) who share--and approve of--Rudy's Catholicism-twisted, punitive mind-set. These people want a disciplinarian as president, period. It doesn't matter what sins he's committed so long as he'll take care of the "bad" people--which, of course, are never anyone like them. They think it's cool he dumped his wives--women are just disposable property, anyway. It's great he was a racist as NYC mayor--gotta keep those dark folks down. And ripping off taxpayer money--well, anything to keep His Discipline-ship safe and comfortable, because his word is second only to God's and he's so much greater than those teeming masses below him.

His big-hearted, sincere book about the hard-working man his father is was written by an uncredited ghostwriter. What a class act.