[tobyhill]

I'm really not interested in having to choose the "lesser of two evils" when it comes to moral values and especially the subject of abortion. The GOP has plenty of time to find someone that will be as strong as some proclaim Rudy would be with the War on Terror and someone that has moral values with regards to abortion. This national abortion rights issue has been a nightmare for our country for 30+ years now and it's long past time it ended. We should not have to accept moral bankruptcy in our leaders because it's all we have. Every time an abortion issue has become a state issue it gets creamed by some FEDERAL activist judge and even our Supreme Court has not been very favorable to state's rights so I'm just not ready to proclaim Rudy free and clear of the issue.

[Ethrane]

Well, who do you think appoints the federal judges?

It's not as simple for the Republicans to just find someone with the qualifications you insist on and then throw them up there as a candidate....they have to be ELECTABLE, they have to have SUPPORT and they have to have a NAME at this point.

And, once again, I will state that Rudy is NOT my first choice...but I understand the rationale for this discussion and would gladly cast my vote for him IF he was the Republican nominee.

I just cannot understand the thought process of those that are threatening NOT to vote in the next election if the Republican nominee is not avowedly 'pro-choice' as not voting or voting for some other candidate only makes the situation for the 'pro-choice' crowd WORSE for the foreseeable future.

I can understand casting a dissenting vote in the primaries...that is what they are for.

But not the general election.