What is wrong with you people?

Is that a record?

No, on most blogs this usually happens in the first 1-2 comments.

(Triumph, I'm not really sure why personalizing this into a criticism of JJ is especially productive -- but perhaps I'm misreading you?)

Misread---I'm not sure where I've criticized James. I was just predicting how he would interpret the issue. Sometimes I don't agree with his interpretations, but that is the nature of debate in a democratic society.

In the comment above, I was taking issue with his implication that Giuliani hasn't responded to the Newsday article--which, in fact, he had.

No wonder why he blew it off, ISG doesn't even know what Iraq's neighbors are doing to facilitate the militas/AlQaeda.

Anyway, now that JJ has posted this, we can see if the world-famous OTB Commenters can give us a preview of how the conservative base might react.

(Triumph, I'm not really sure why personalizing this into a criticism of JJ is especially productive -- but perhaps I'm misreading you?)

I’ll be interested to see how Giuliani handles this question. I’d be perfectly content if he simply says, “Hey, I wanted the money. I’ve been in public service for decades and I wasn’t going to miss the opportunity to cash in to attend a couple of meetings.” My guess is he’ll offer something less candid as an answer.

I think I was pretty on-target in my prediction on how you would tackle this issue, James.

Of course, you fail to acknowledge that he HAS handled the question already. His campaign explained yesterday that: "As someone considered a Presidential candidate, the mayor didn't want the group's work to become a political football."

This, of course, is absurd because he had publicly expressed interest in a candidacy months before he was asked to be on the panel.

Giuliani, just last week, when asked about why Iraq is not figuring prominently in his campaign declarations he offered no analysis on what to do about the quagmire, saying that it was "in the hands of other people."

If he is running as Mr. "War against Terror" and he is afraid to discuss--or even think about--the biggest foreign policy challenge facing the country, his viability as a candidate must be questioned.

Had this really been his concern, why did he agree to serve in the first place? The explanation makes no sense.