Rudy opposes gay nups ban (3/8/2004)

New York Daily News ^ | 3/8/2004 | JAMES GORDON MEEK

[Ol' Sparky]

WASHINGTON - Rudy Giuliani came out yesterday against President Bush's call for a ban on gay marriage.

The former mayor, who Vice President Cheney joked the other night is after his job, vigorously defended the President on his post-9/11 leadership but made clear he disagrees with Bush's proposal to rewrite the Constitution to outlaw gays and lesbians from tying the knot.

"I don't think it's ripe for decision at this point," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"I certainly wouldn't support [a ban] at this time," added Giuliani, who lived with a gay Manhattan couple when he moved out of Gracie Mansion during his nasty divorce.

Giuliani took his gay rights stance just as speculation hits a fever pitch that he's in line to replace Cheney on Bush's ticket.

Cheney and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton fueled the vice presidential talk at Saturday night's Gridiron Dinner in Washington.

To a mock question from the audience asking Cheney to step aside for someone with "new energy and vitality," the veep turned to Giuliani and zinged: "You need to do a better job of disguising your handwriting."

Asked yesterday whether he would run with Bush if Cheney stepped aside, the mayor-turned-businessman mimicked Marlon Brando in "The Godfather": "An offer I couldn't refuse, right?" But he didn't say no.

Giuliani conceded he's "out of sync" with his party's conservative base, but likened himself to other moderate GOP stars like Gov. Pataki and Calif. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

And while he was cagey on the veep talk, the former mayor said he will run for elected office again, but didn't say which one.

Giuliani is considered a leading GOP hopeful in the 2008 presidential race, though he may decide to challenge Clinton in her 2006 Senate reelection bid.

But for now, Giuliani has been making the rounds burnishing the President's terror-fighting credentials and joining in Republican attempts to portray Kerry as a would-be waffler-in-chief.

He once more defended Bush's use of footage of a flag-draped coffin coming out of Ground Zero in controversial new political ads.

"To leave [Sept. 11] out of a political campaign when you're running for reelection cuts out half your leadership," he said. "I mean, it would make no sense."

But Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who ran against Bush in 2000, disagreed.

"I might not have used the ad of the coffin coming out, or the body coming out of the ruins with a flag on it," he told ABC's "This Week."

Originally published on March 8, 2004

[lormand]

That's the one!

[Spiff]

Also, watch MSNBC from yesterday where he again asserted his Pro-Choice views.

I missed this. Can you give me a link where I can see Giuliani reassert his pro-abortion views? Or at least a rough transcription or description of what he said? Thanks.

[trumandogz]

Okay, now:

How am I going to explain to my children the President Giuliani thought that it would be okay for their mommy to kill them while they were still in her womb?

[TommyDale]

And many people within the GOP are opposed to such killing of innocent unborn children on moral and religious grounds. Why can't the liberals just accept that? The Giuliani Partners employees here are not winning any votes for Giuliani.

[TommyDale]

http://www.rightwingnews.com/category.php?ent=6320

[AFreeBird]

Giuliani conceded he's "out of sync" with his party's conservative base, but likened himself to other moderate GOP stars like Gov. Pataki and Calif. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Yes, well, Rudy might indeed be in line with Pataki of NY, and Ahnold of CA; two states that are bastions of liberal elitism, but for those of us in the flyover country between those two points: I wouldn't vote for those two RINO governors, and I won't be voting for Rudy.

Sorry Rudy, you seem like a fairly likable guy, an able administrator, and I'd have a beer with you (but not in a non smoking NY bar), but I couldn't trust you NOT to sign liberal legislation, or trust you with judicial appointments.

[areafiftyone]

He is going to run and he is going to win the primaries. Whether you guys vote for him or not. Then in the General election the people here who don't want him will vote for Hillary because that's the way they decided to do it. But in the end it won't matter because Free Republic DOES not represent the voter block as a whole!

[TommyDale]

http://www.rightwingnews.com/category.php?ent=6320

[NormsRevenge]

What lots of these people do not understand is the a Republican President represents what policies are Right of Center on the American political spectrum.

If Rudy were to be elected, gun grabbing, abortion on demand and pro gay marriage would all be considered to be on the right forcing the political center further left. Over night the ideas of RWR would be as archaic as the views of Calvin Coolidge.

--

On a Gubernatorial level, California is reaping the "rewards" of said potential shift of the political spectrum that some are raising legitimate concerns here about Rudy. He has and will have every opportunity to clarify his position or refine or re-define those of most interest nd concern as this run to the primaries plays out.

Such threads and exchanges that we witmness here and will likely see daily are not likely to cease until he does.

[TitansAFC]

Well,

I see a bigger split in the Rockfeller Republican vote, which is very split right now between Rudy, McCain, and Romney.

The Wild Card is Newt Gingrich - who I feel would be the most likely candidate to unite all the elements of the party behind him. That being said, he's not yet running.

The polls at this point in 1999 showed Libby Dole ahead and in 2003 showed Dean ahead. So I don't give the polls too much merit just yet. 80% of the questions asked in a typical GOP debate are those hot-button issues on which Rudy falls short. I still remember the 2nd debate for the 2000 election, which turned into the "Abortion debate." Gary Bauer and Alan Keyes brought it up at every chance, and the audience wouldn't let it go either.

I think we've seen Rudy max at about 30%. He's dropping in the state caucus polls, and slowing dropping in the national ones. I really don't believe he'll win the nod - but what frightens me is that I think McCain just might.

[Dolphy]

I believe you share the same view as the current Vice President :)

[perfect_rovian_storm]

I've read all that horsecrap the previous 9000 it was posted here. You guys are pathetic.

[BunnySlippers]

We were FISCAL conservatives before you folks started shaking the GOP down a la Jesse.

Stockmarket closed. I'm on the freeway for awhile. BRB :)

[TitansAFC]

I'll e-mail it to you if I can find it, but right now my company's firewall won't let me even visit the site. I fear the day they find out about Free Republic! Ack!

[areafiftyone]

I just want you to look at one thing - Take a look at each Rudy threads that has been posted and tell me exactly how many of you guys post anti-Rudy posts on each one. NOT MANY if you count it. If you think you guys have any pull in the primaries or general election you have a big surprise coming. If you did, do you really think Rudy, or Romney or McCain for that matter would even decide to run because a few Freepers didn't like them over certain social issues? You better think again. You guys have no pull except to aggravate every single Rudy post that there is. So have fun. You are only convincing yourself and no one else NOT to vote for Rudy.

[Buck W.]

Exactly. On the matters that the President can control or influence, Rudy is rock solid.

[penowa]

"He's one of those 80-90% friends Reagan talked about..."

He's no friend to anybody who respects the 2nd Amendment.

[NapkinUser]

On President Bill Clinton: Shortly before his last-minute endorsement of Bob Dole in the 1996 presidential election, Giuliani told the Post's Jack Newfield that "most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine." -Rudy! An Investigative Biography of Rudolph Giuliani, Wayne Barrett.

The Real Rudy Giuliani:

From Human Events:

Rudy's Strong Pro-Abortion Stance

As these comments from a 1989 conversation with Phil Donahue show, Rudy Giuliani is staunchly in favor of abortion:

"I've said that I'll uphold a woman's right of choice, that I will fund abortion so that a poor woman is not deprived of a right that others can exercise, and that I would oppose going back to a day in which abortions were illegal.

I do that in spite of my own personal reservations. I have a daughter now; if a close relative or a daughter were pregnant, I would give my personal advice, my religious and moral views ...

Donahue: Which would be to continue the pregnancy.

Giuliani: Which would be that I would help her with taking care of the baby. But if the ultimate choice of the woman - my daughter or any other woman - would be that in this particular circumstance [if she had] to have an abortion, I'd support that. I'd give my daughter the money for it."

Worse yet, Giuliani even supports partial birth abortion:

"I'm pro-choice. I'm pro-gay rights,Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. "No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing," he responded." -- CNN.com, "Inside Politics" Dec 2, 1999

It's bad enough that Rudy is so adamantly pro-abortion, but consider what that could mean when it comes time to select Supreme Court Justices. Does the description of Giuliani that you've just read make you think he's going to select an originalist like Clarence Thomas, who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade -- or does it make you think he would prefer justices like Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy who'd leave Roe v. Wade in place?

Rudy's abortion stance is bad news for conservatives who are pro-life or who are concerned about getting originalist judges on the Supreme Court.

An Anti-Second Amendment Candidate

In the last couple of election cycles, 2nd Amendment issues have moved to the back burner mainly because even Democratic candidates have learned that being tagged with the "gun grabber" label is political poison.

Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani is a proponent of gun control who supported the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapon Ban.

Do Republicans really want to abandon their strong 2nd Amendment stance by selecting a pro-gun control nominee?

Soft on Gay Marriage

Other than tax cuts, the biggest domestic issue of the 2004 election was President Bush's support of a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Unfortunately, Rudy Giuliani has taken a "Kerryesque" position on gay marriage.

Although Rudy, like John Kerry, has said that marriage should remain between a man and a woman, he also supports civil unions, "marched in gay-pride parades" ...dressed up in drag on national television for a skit on Saturday Night Live (and moved in with a) wealthy gay couple" after his divorce. He also very vocally opposed running on a gay marriage amendment:

His thoughts on the gay-marriage amendment? "I don't think you should run a campaign on this issue," he told the Daily News earlier this month. "I think it would be a mistake for anybody to run a campaign on it -- the Democrats, the president, or anybody else."

Here's more from the New York Daily News:

"Rudy Giuliani came out yesterday against President Bush's call for a ban on gay marriage.

The former mayor, who Vice President Cheney joked the other night is after his job, vigorously defended the President on his post-9/11 leadership but made clear he disagrees with Bush's proposal to rewrite the Constitution to outlaw gays and lesbians from tying the knot.

"I don't think it's ripe for decision at this point," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"I certainly wouldn't support [a ban] at this time," added Giuliani..."

Although Rudy may grudgingly say he doesn't support gay marriage (and it would be political suicide for him to do otherwise), where he really stands on the issue is an open question.

Pro-Illegal Immigration

As Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics has pointed out, Rudy is an adherent of the same approach to illegal immigration that John McCain, Ted Kennedy, George Bush, and Harry Reid have championed:

"While McCain has taken heat for his support of comprehensive immigration reform, Rudy is every bit as pro-immigration as McCain - if not more so. On the O'Reilly Factor last week Giuliani argued for a "practical approach" to immigration and cited his efforts as Mayor of New York City to "regularize" illegal immigrants by providing them with access to city services like public education to "make their lives reasonable." Giuliani did say that "a tremendous amount of money should be put into the physical security" needed to stop the flow of illegal immigrants coming across the border, but his overall position on immigration is essentially indistinguishable from McCain's."

That's bad enough. But, as Michelle Malkin has revealed, under Giuliani, New York was an illegal alien sanctuary and "America's Mayor" actually sued the federal government in an effort to keep New York City employees from having to cooperate with the INS:

"When Congress enacted immigration reform laws that forbade local governments from barring employees from cooperating with the INS, Mayor Rudy Giuliani filed suit against the feds in 1997. He was rebuffed by two lower courts, which ruled that the sanctuary order amounted to special treatment for illegal aliens and were nothing more than an unlawful effort to flaunt federal enforcement efforts against illegal aliens. In January 2000, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal, but Giuliani vowed to ignore the law."

If you agree with the way that Nancy Pelosi and Company deal with illegal immigration, then you'll find the way that Rudy Giuliani tackles the issue to be right down your alley.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE OF GIULIANI'S LEFT-WING POLITICAL POSITIONS

[ecurbh]

I didn't agree it should be a Constitutional Ban either as did a lot of others. States Right's Issue IMHO

I agree completely... this kind of issue has no place in the consititution.

[evad]

We're not even near the General Election yet. This is Primary Election time and we're trying to ensure that the MOST LIBERAL REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE EVER does not make it to the nomination.

That's fine, in theory. But if you don't have someone who can appeal to a broader base than die hard single issue conservatives, we may as well get ready for the coronation of the Beast right now.

I have no problem with planning ahead, even 2 years ahead, but we still have people on this forum who think the reason we lost control of congress is because conservatives stayed home. If you proceed from a false premise, your likelihood of reaching a successful conclusion is remote.