Submitted by jennifer solis(United States), Oct 19, 2007 at 14:08
Newsweek and Time magazines claim Giuliani "out-Bushes Bush"; one illustration of this is Rudy's choice of advisors, they say.
Daniel Pipes goes on to illustrate that in fact Giuliani's choice of the six advisors reveals a "fresh start" on the part of Giuliani, as all six advisors had many dissagreements with President Bush's administration policies, and lacked impact on them.
Daniel Pipes goes on to provide proof of this (via articles he has written throughout Bush's Presidency).
I dissagree with you that Dr. Pipes is providing "bona fides", as you call it. He's simply backing up his point.
How many high-profilers bother, or in fact are capable of doing the same? -JS
P.S. - what does "bell that cat" mean?
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.