Giuliani Cannot Win in 2008

SeaMax News ^ | 11/24/2006 | Fr. Michael Reilly

[PerConPat]

...does that mean we have to forget out all our principles and vote for a liberal?

I'm an old, worn out observer of fifty years of American politics. When I was a kid, my father had me watching the McCarthy hearings on our tiny TV. I'd like to think that I've learned something in my time, but I'm beginning to think that there is only one remedy for the divisions that haunt US governance. IMHO, trouble, and especially big trouble from abroad, is the only effective catalyst for unity.

I place firearms ownership at the top of my list of essential freedoms. If I was asked to choose just one item to keep from the Bill of Rights, it would be the Second Amendment. But, I guess due to advancing age, I don't worry about Rudy, Hillary, or Rosie O'Fat grabbing my gun.

I will vote for the person whom I feel will act most forcefully to control borders and deal with foreign threats. I oppose abortion on demand, excessive taxation, and the rest of the Liberal agenda; however, I'm putting my X down next to the candidates who get the national security issue Right. If that's Rudy, I'll support him- I could not care less if he's been divorced a dozen times.

[HitmanLV]

Depends on how you ask the question. If the question is 'should first trimester abortions be legal,' it's certainly possible that the spread would be 51-42 in favor of pro abortion.

[McGavin999]

BRAVO! Well said.

[Types_with_Fist]

Unless it's Lyndon LaRouche, you never say cannot in politics.

I'm not so sure. Put an "R" by his name and run him against Hillary and...

[durasell]

Is that the line at the Vegas sports books? I hear Dallas still can't be ruled out -- a strong defensive line. Can you get me first trimester +3?

[CyberAnt]

I've never seen a breakdown - it's either for or against abortion. Either way .. you're still killing a human life so those who are anti-abortion would never consider it even in the first trimester.

[HitmanLV]

No bookie I know would tough this one with a 10 footcattle prod!

[HitmanLV]

I agree with you. The problem is, we're in the minority and not the majority.

If the spread on first trimester abortions really is close to 10 points in their favor, it doesn't matter much.

If most Americans want it legal, it will be legal. I'm afraid that's the position we are in. In other words, 'we lost,' or at best, 'we're losing.'

[durasell]

...and pols will get tired of using it as a campaign issue.

[NeoCaveman]

Republicans don't own anyone's votes.

Damn straight!

[kjo]

Agreed. Rudy leaves a lot to be desired as a president but look at the field...Romney can not win, the media would kill him with Mormonism; McLame could win, but he's no Republican. McLame is for McLame. They'd throw the Keating thing at him, plus he has to answer for McCain/Feingold.

It's going to come down to Rudy and Hillary; and for me, that's a no-brainer.

Rudy.

[HitmanLV]

I think Roe should be overturned and people should just vote on a number of positions on abortion policy and let the chips fall where they may.

It won't happen, though - everybody has something to lose.

[NeoCaveman]

Conservative SD just told 'all or nothing' pro lifers to go to hell - the problem with 'all or nothing' is you usually end up getting 'nothing,' and the pro life leadership (again) is smarting with a loss that they didn't see coming but almost everyone else saw coming a mile away. Horrible.

That law was not orginally intended to be a referendum, it was intended to be a challenge to Roe. One could not attack from the front that the baby is human life if you had rape/incest exceptions.

If they had wanted a referendum style bill, they probably would have had those exceptions.

Personally I think testing Roe is foolish without one more good judge.

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

"I'll hold my nose and vote LaRouche"... I can hear it already.

[durasell]

What is more likely to happen is have the thing go back to the states. That will create an interesting phenom of folks (who can afford it) traveling to some states for abortions. Not to say this isn't already happening. But those who can't afford it will have the kids -- so you'll see the poor populations rise in some states.

[HitmanLV]

That law was not orginally intended to be a referendum, it was intended to be a challenge to Roe. One could not attack from the front that the baby is human life if you had rape/incest exceptions.

Right, and it lost.

[NeoCaveman]

Right, and it lost.

Nah, really?

/sarc.

[HitmanLV]

That's what I was saying - it would be decided by the states, either by their legislatures, voters, or judges.

Yep, every state has a courts system and there's no reason to think that many of those courts wouldn't find a right to an abortion in their state constitutions.

Plus plenty of states will find it legal through more democratic means. In the end, a post-Roe world, I fear, would look much like a Roe world, as a practical matter.

This whole thing is a mess.

[durasell]

I remember talking to an old society woman once about it. She was against Roe, but then added, "Anyway, a girl in trouble could always go to Bermuda or Havana."

[HitmanLV]

Hey, that was in an old Three Stooges short, right?