You still have not linked me to a quote where Giuliani says he supports the Roe v Wade decision. I looked around for one and could not find anything. So maybe you want to change your table to something that more closely resembes what he did say.
For some people, myself included, there is a difference. Roe v Wade is not just about abortion. It is about how the Constitution is to be interpreted. And as the issue in this thread is just that - whether Giuliani will appoint strict constructionist judges - your table is misleading.
I gave you a quote where, in 2000, Giuliani said that Roe v. Wade was "good law." I'm looking for a link to the actual transcript, but it's a bit dated for there to be one online. Just Google for it and you'll find the quote.
Here's a challenge for you. About the only defense the Giuliani has on this issue is the shibboleth that he's going to appoint "strict constructionist" justices "like Roberts and Alito". Never mind that his history in appointing judges while he was Mayor of New York City was quite the opposite in that respect, but I challenge you to find a recent quote from Roberts or Alito wherein either one says that they oppose or want to overturn Roe v. Wade. Giuliani and the RudyRooters want to pretend that Giuliani is somehow saying in codewords that he's against Roe v. Wade and wants to overturn it by invoking Roberts and Alito. In truth, neither Roberts nor Alito have come out against Roe v. Wade. Their answers in their confirmation hearings were similar to Giuliani's on the matter - it's been precedent for a long time, it's settled law, you have to respect Roe v. Wade, etc. You have to go back over 20 years on both of them to find anything wherein they remotely demonstrate opposition to Roe v. Wade. The White House even called the Joe Scarborough program (scroll down near bottom) on MSNBC and asked them to correct an on screen banner they were using that said "Roberts: Overturn Roe v. Wade". So, it is NOT "settled" that either Roberts or Alito want to overturn Roe v. Wade. Yet that's Giuliani's very Clintonesque way of finessing the issue and trying to pretend that he secretly (despite a lifelong history of ardent support for abortion) doesn't totally, completely, unequivocally support Roe v. Wade.
There's no problem with the accuracy of the chart I created on this issue. You can argue semantics all day but that won't change the reality of Giuliani's well established support for abortion to include the Roe v. Wade decision.
Here's your damned link. But I see you're already in the thread spinning the damage as fast as you can. Pathetic, actually...