"That article has been dissected several times on the Rudy threads and it is highly dubious. The national abortion rate declined twice as much as NYC during that period."
I just re-read the article and you completely misrepresented what it said. The article mention that California, the largest state in the country (and one likely having the most abortions) stopped reporting it's abortion numbers in 1997. This falsely inflated the percentage at which abortions decreased nation wide. When California was accounted for in these studies, New York's abortion decreased slightly more than the national average. Therefore, at worst all that can be said is that he had no effect on the number of abortions in New York.
I value Free Republic for our adherence to facts and truth. Getting an article to say what you want it to say and not what it says is neither factual or truthful. If you cannot prove the merits of your position on facts and truth, then you should either find facts to support your position, not post anything or change your beliefs. Distortion and misrepresention is the domain of the left.
That version of the piece did not contain the information on reporting discrepancies in the national data. Perhaps Murdock revised the piece for NRO after his attention was called to it.
In any case, I was not trying to distort factual information, I was merely too lazy to read something I already read. Obviously, the new data paints a more favorable picture for Giuliani, although I must confess I still find it meaningless.
Giuliani's own statements are clear on the issue and until he modifies, revises or repudiates them there is no softening his position.