Why I - a Staunch Pro-Lifer - Am Voting for Guiliani

American Thinker ^ | 2/21/07 | Kyle-Anne Shiver

[areafiftyone]

(((((RUDY PING)))))

[Peach]

Great post and the author makes terrific arguments against the single issue voter. Thanks for posting this, areafiftyone.

[areafiftyone]

You are welcome. I'm just trying to get into my armor plated vest waiting for incomeing - I think I gained some weight - it's getting too tight! LOL!

[Corin Stormhands]

Thanks for the ping!

JoinRudy2008 * Virginia is for Rudy * The Ward View

[CharlesWayneCT]

Well, there are more things the president can do:

4) He can use strictly pro-life principles when enacting executive regulations, Clinton did a lot of pro-choice stuff by executive order, a good pro-lifer can do the same.

5) He can use the presidency to push for new pro-life legislation, rather than simply promising not to veto it. He can include it in his budget for example.

I'll gladly argue against people who, at this stage of the race, assert that a good conservative would have to stay home rather than vote for Gulliani if he was the nominee of the party.

At this point though I can't go along with arguments from supposedly "pro-life" voters that they are backing Gulliani. There are too many other good candidates that lack little more than exposure. If they can't GET exposure by next january, then jump on the gulliani bandwagon if you must, but why settle so early on in the process?

[Peach]

LOL.

The ragers are so out of tune with what most Americans thinks is most important that I generally ignore them. They're irrelevant.

[Joan Wilder]

You are certainly helping me get the information I need to decide who I will eventually vote for, thanks. :)

[OldFriend]

I'll guard you!!

[VRWCmember]

One, he can appoint strict constructionist judges who interpret the Constitution as written, as opposed to the hocus-pocus, magical finding of things that are not there in reality. Guiliani has demonstrated to my satisfaction that he intends to do exactly that.

In other words, Rudy said he believes in strict constructionist judges, so the author takes him at his word with no ACTUAL demonstration of his actual commitment to do so.

[TommyDale]

Opposition to Giuliani cannot be reduced to "single issue" voters. There are a number of issues besides abortion, including:

Partial Birth Abortion
Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Euthanasia (What IS Rudy's position on this one?)
Gun control
Amnesty/Safe havens for illegal border invaders
Homosexual Civil Unions and/or marriage
School choice (vouchers)
Personal character issues
History of selections and appointments (Bernie Kerik)
Business practices and conflicts of interest

We don't seem to get a straight answer from Giuliani's campaign or supporters.

[areafiftyone]

LOL! Thank you Old Friend. I glad you're on my side! :-)

[quantim]

The article contains a logical approach to practical politics. Nothing one could really add it to it, thanks for posting.

[Joan Wilder]

Good post and I am myself still hanging out there, but some of the people against Rudy do not help themselves with their rudeness. Instead of showing me a picture of a man in drag, I would enjoy hearing why say Hunter is better then Rudy and this should include all issues relevant to the presidents 'executive' role in government.

[VRWCmember]

Great post and the author makes terrific arguments against the single issue voter.

For those who still believe in most of the traditional planks of the conservative republican party, it is hardly the "single issue voter" that Rudy has to worry about. Instead, it is the 2nd Amendment, Traditional Family, Small Government, Lower Taxes, Individual Responsibility, Freedom OF Religion (not "from" religion), AND Pro-Life voters who will have a hard time supporting Rudy.

[areafiftyone]

You are quite welcome. More and more strict conservatives are going over to Rudy's side. They are starting to realize the WOT trumps social issues. Especially when we have a Democrat Congress and Senate.

[DKNY]

Whether we like it or not, we are in a war, a war we neither asked for, nor started. And, no matter what happens in the short run in Iraq, we are going to be at war for a long time.

Good article ... most people understand domestic issues are on the back burner this time around.

http://www.joinrudy2008.com/

[Roland Hand]

Exactly!

[Neverforget01]

We've had Reagan and Bush--both very pro-life and Roe v Wade rages on. I'm convinced this issue of our times is terrorism and Islamofascists. I think Rudy is the only Republican running who has the guts to stand up to it. I don't know anything about Hunter (there's a problem) and I'm a news junkie. Is he electable? Of course I'll be listening and watching.

[Little Ray]

Actually he demonstrated quite the opposite. He got to appoint a bunch of judges to family and criminal courts - and only two of them were Republicans. There is no reason to believe him about appointing "strict constructionist" judges.

Then again, a man who believes the 2nd Amendment is about hunting probably wouldn't know "strict constructionist" if it bit him on the @$$.