Rudy is better than whoever you support

The contract to Motorola was because the FDNY had a long-term no contest relationship with the company stretching back to the late 70's. I fyou actually noted the structure of the radio system for the FDNY, instead of listening to 9-11 conspiracy theorists and their blame games, you would know that the faulty radios were hardly the problem. Each radio has exclusive contact with the base radio with the exception of low power, close contact walky-talky like functions. This means the order would have been relayed through a lengthy chain in order to reach the firefighters in time. Furthermore, on the same website you cited, there are people stating that firefighters had not updated their radios. The blame should be on Motorola for distributing faulty equipment. Giuliani simply made the same decision that mayors had made in the past three decades. There was no way to know that Motorola would drop the ball this time, after twenty five years of no problem service. As for the terrorist command center, the WTC was the hub for countless critical offices in NYC. It was at the center of downtown and would be easily accesible and nearby. Again, hindsight is twenty twenty, but the WTC housed much more vital offices, which is part of the reason it was attacked. Its resources and location made it fitting. As for crime, Bratton was appointed by Guiliani! This was a highly contreversial decision at the time. They are famous for being the most dynamic crime duo since batman and robin. Federal funding plays a part in every police station. But, Guiliani and his appointees decreased crime with the same amount of federal funding as before. As for driving him out, Bratton got in trouble for being egotistical and questionable hiring standards. The exact same thing he is getting in trouble for now in LA, void of Rudy. Rudy's record on crime is impeccable. "Under Mayor Giuliani's leadership, overall crime was cut by 56%, murder was cut by 66%, and New York City—once considered the crime capital of the country—became the safest large city in America according to the FBI. New York City's law enforcement strategy has become a model for other cities around the world." Even if this is partly in thanks to Bratton, that just shows that Rudy is an excellent appointer(?) a presidential skill which is critical. Sanctuary city how? You give me no evidence of this. He regarded illegals in a practical and applicable sense, as he does every other issue. He recognized that illegals wouldn't report crime at the risk of getting deported, so, in order to get criminals off of the streets, he gave illegals immunity in certain circumstances. He applies theory in an applicable and efficient manner. The polls aren't indicative of who is a better candidate. People like to vote for a winner. Its no suprise that a guy who is winning primaries is getting bumped in the polls. This comes just days after McCain wins SC. I am personally disappointed in the campaign approach that Rudy has taken. But, the poll numbers are not a reflection of his presidential aptitude. Edwards has one second and numerous thirds. Does this mean your candidate is least apt on the Dem side? You have provided no evidence that Rudy has cheated on his wives. Note that these allegations of infidelity are coming from a Clinton supporter. If you watch ANY press conference or question session, Giuliani NEVER takes credit for 9-11. He always thanks the volunteers and the servicemen he has been loyal to throughout his tenure. He gets a bad rap for his 9-11 reputation because he was so heavily involved, but he has been very humble about his role, despite popular opinion. Obviously, we have policy differences, but there are some common sense, universal issues with John Edwards. The fact that Edwards wants total and immediate withdrawal is not a good thing. I don't have time to even attempt to perrsuade you on Iraq, but even if you desire and support a pullout, Edwards strategy is a bad one. It flies in the face of all military advisors and is more radical than either of his opponents'. Even if you support a pullout, Edwards is a bad candidate. I don't want a president who disregards any military advice or rational safety in order to take a popular stance. We see Edwards pandering in every issue he takes on. He says he fights for the middle class. Who doesn't think they are in the middle class in America? This is an obvious attempt to appeal to as wide a base as possible. He masks his socialist ideals with fighter rhetoric. Edwards has admitted garnishing wages in order to make health care mandated. This so-called fighter for the middle class has nothing but distrust for the very people he claism to defend. He thinks people aren't capable of making decisions and wants to make the government HUGE in order to protect citizens from themselves. You think Bush and the Patriot Act infiringe on your liberites? Just wait for an Edwards presidency. If he is admitting his big government, no regard platform now, imagine the steps he will take as president. We have our policy differences, but even as a Democrat, John Edwards is terribly socialist and a fundamentally BAD candidate. The fact is, there are always going to be disgruntled oppositions to every candidate. Obama has an entire group committed to convincing voters that he is a Muslim terrorist infiltrating our government. Rudy has a proven record of turning the most terrible stain on America into the safest big city in the country. You admit that he makes awesome appointments. The fact is, even after the worst possible scenario happened he handled the situation well, despite what 9-11 conspirators say.