I've lived in New York City my whole life.

Rudy is a self-absorbed megalomaniac loser, and we're happy to be rid of him. By the time 9/10/01 rolled around, Rudy couldn't have been elected dogcatcher, much less re-elected mayor, because he was a thin-skinned, divisive guy in a bad toupee. I honestly believe that he was happy about what happened the next day, because if it hadn't happened, he would have been forgotten long ago, as footnote in New York City history.

I guess not many people know that, as he stood on top of 2500 of my dead friends and neighbors, he was looking across the way at the smoking ruin of 7 WTC, which arguably fell because Rudy decided to build his executive emergency bunker there and load it up with fuel. So, if he's going to claim to be "America's mayor" after 9/11, I suppose it's fair to ask why he made such stupid decisions after an attack on the same buildings in 1993.

Unlike our current mayor, who actually rolls up his sleeves and gets to work, Rudy spent most of his time talking about himself and not getting anything done, other than turning the city into an armed and divided camp. It's the same geographic place now, but people are much happier now that Rudy is gone and we've got Bloomberg.

I'm gleefully looking forward to Rudy's coming political implosion, because it couldn't happen to a worse human being.

Your comments are typical of leftist with no response to the problematic aspects of Islam but ad hominem and moral equivocation arguments.

Did I say Chirstian and Jewish or even Hindu fundamentalism for that matter weren't problems in the world? The jamartinjr letter brought up "Islamofascism"; that was his exact choice of words . I merely responded to him by quoting it and focusing on the topic he brought up.

When you instantly bring up Israel, the Bush administraton and health care all you do is admit that Islam is so incompatible with liberal values that you can't offer one word in its defense and have no choice but to change the subject.

Like many at Salon you two demonstrate a really disturbing prejudice against anyone who breaks rank and voices criticism of Islam. We're supposed to be good little soldiers marching in unison against the all-encompassing evil of the Bush-Israeli axis?

Look at the way meffert refers to "your people" as if I were suddenly in league with the Bush adminisration and Anonymous implies without a shred of evidence that I hold racist views: "no one even counts those less-than-human dogs". Anonymous even brought up the Nazis in a rather dubious comparrison which is always a sign the debater is more about making an emotional appeal rather than offering evidence.

Finally meffert wrote: "PS: I agree we shouldn't use terms like flyover state although why that is racist is a little unclear."

meffert shows some inability to read and consider the actual content of my actual comment: "FIrst [sic] of all the slurr "flyover states" belongs alongside racial epithets in terms of mature conversation." Thus I merely stated that terms like "flyover states" ought to be seen as unacceptable as racist terms, because both blanketly characterize a person's ideological views based on arbitrary aspects. I did not say "flyover states" was racist and am astounded that I even have to explain that to someone.

It's a bullshit topic propped by demagogues for the benefit of frightened stupid soccermoms

I am concerned about the violent islamic radical movement. I am also concerned about the violent Christian movement (Eric Rudolph, etc.). I don' lose sleep over either. More americans will die, directly or indirectly, of the lack of basic health care in the next 24 hours than will die in a terrorist attack in the next year (and I'm including those brave and loyal soldiers your people are using as human flypaper overseas as we speak.)

There will be other terrorist attacks. Some people are just no damn good and will do evil things to innocent people. What I really resent is the "pre-blame" strategy of the republicans who have done so much to bring us to where we are but wish no part of the blame for what is happening now, has happened in the past, or will happen in the future.

PS: I agree we shouldn't use terms like flyover state although why that is racist is a little unclear.

As a flyover state product, I will point out that not all of us from the Midwest underestimate the threat of Judeo-Christian fascism and how that has helped inflame Islamofascism.

It has been alleged that followers of Islam were responsible for 9/11 (I say "alleged" as we have no trial, just BushCheney's word and a grainy video supposedly of Bin Laden bullshitting around the kitchen table). That took out 3,000 people.

Since then, the US has taken out who knows how many Arabs/Muslims - no one even counts those less-than-human dogs -- those "Islamofascists" -- but it's at least 100,000. Israel has taken out around 3,000 in the occupied territories and Lebanon. (And the body count from this Judeo-Christian tag team before 9/11 is also huge.)

Sure, both the US and Israel claim they were "protecting themselves." Well so was Germany before and during WWII -- according to Germany. So if you're going to tack fascism on the end of a religion, don't leave out other religions whose right-wing branches live out those values.

...it's going to happen again. The rubes in the flyover states are going to get scared of big bad "Islamofacism" and stick us with another loser.

FIrst of all the slurr "flyover states" belongs alongside racial epithets in terms of mature conversation. It is an ignorant, elitest term which just alienates people. Of course I am biased myself, residing at one of those bastions of ignornace in the Big Ten university system (where an awful lot of kids from the coasts seem to come).

As far as being concerned with "Islamofacism" what do the Islamist insurgencies in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Thailand, Sudan and Iraq mean to you? What about the politial radicalization of Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, Nigeria and other Muslims countries? Just because Bush has abused and mishandled the threat of Islamic terrorism is now reason to dismiss its importance. Do be so dismissive of it is chilling in it ignorance.