Posted on 02/06/2007 10:43:27 AM PST by ElkGroveDan
“Murder and graffiti are two vastly different crimes,” Rudy Giuliani once said. “But they are part of the same continuum, and a climate that tolerates one is more likely to tolerate the other.”
Good point, Rudy.
Now, what about a climate — not to mention a Republican presidential candidate — that not only tolerates, but allows unelected judges to legalize the practice of delivering a child until only its head remains within its mothers womb so the child can be killed by sucking out its brains?
What about a climate where same-sex couples are given the same legal status as married couples, whether the resulting arrangements are candidly called “same-sex marriages,” or are semantically papered-over with terms such as “civil unions” or “domestic partnerships”?
Apply the Giuliani Continuum to fundamental issues such as marriage and the right to life, and where does it lead?
Not where conservatives want America to be.
Rudy Giuliani’s observation about the “continuum” running from graffiti to murder was quoted in a piece in the winter edition of City Journal by Steven Malanga. The title of Malanga’s piece neatly encapsulates his argument: “Yes, Rudy is a Conservative — and an electable one at that.”
I believe Malanga is wrong on both counts. Rudy is neither conservative, nor electable — at least, not as a Republican presidential candidate.
As Malanga seems to define it, a politician dedicated to good police work and free-market economics qualifies as a conservative. “Far from being a liberal,” Malanga writes of Giuliani, “he ran New York with a conservative’s priorities: government exists above all to keep people safe in their homes and in the streets, he said, not to redistribute income, run a welfare state, or perform social engineering. The private economy, not government, creates opportunity, he argued; government should just deliver basic services well and then get out of the private sector’s way.”
But that’s not enough. While advocating law and order, self-reliance, and capitalism is laudable, it does not entitle a politician to a free pass for advocating other causes that are deeply destructive of American society.
While it is always wrong to take an innocent human life — whether on a New York sidewalk or in a mother’s womb — Giuliani is highly selective in applying this principle. In 1999, when he was pondering a run for the U.S. Senate, he was asked whether he supported banning partial-birth abortion. “No, I have not supported that,” he said, “and I don’t see my position on that changing.”
“I'm pro-gay rights,” he also said. Indeed, his position is so radical in this area that as New York City mayor he promoted a city ordinance that removed the distinctions in municipal law between married and unmarried couples, regardless of their gender.
“What it really is doing is preventing discrimination against people who have different sexual orientations, or make different preferences in which they want to lead their lives,” Giuliani said, explaining the ordinance to the New York Times. “Domestic partnerships not only affect gays and lesbians, but they also affect heterosexuals who choose to lead their lives in different ways.”
In other words, preserving a legal order that prefers traditional marriage and traditional families is “discrimination.”
Giuliani’s positions on abortion and marriage disqualify him as a conservative because they annihilate the link between the natural law and man-made laws. Indeed, they use man-made law to promote and protect acts that violate the natural law.
Given his argument that there is a “continuum” between graffiti and murder, you would think that Giuliani would understand the importance of the link between the natural law and the laws of New York City, let alone the laws of the United States. At the heart of Rudy’s “continuum” argument, is the realization that when society refuses to enforce a just law it teaches people to disrespect the moral principles underlying just laws.
The late Russell Kirk argued in The Conservative Mind that the first canon of conservatism is “[b]elief in a transcendent order, or body of natural law, which rules society as well as conscience. Political problems, at bottom, are religious and moral problems. … True politics is the art of apprehending and applying the Justice which ought to prevail in a community of souls.”
It is simply not justice to take the life of an unborn child. Nor is it justice to codify same-sex relationships so that, by design of the state itself, a child can be denied a mother or a father from birth, which is one thing legalized same-sex unions would do.
By advocating abortion on demand and same-sex unions, Rudy is doing something far more egregious than, say, defacing a New York subway train. He is defacing the institution that forms the foundation of human civilization.
That is not conservative.
Rudy will not win the Republican nomination because enough of the people who vote in Republican caucuses and primaries still respect life and marriage, and are not ready to give up on them — or on the Republican party as an agent for protecting them.
Brevity is the soul of wit. Any further thoughts, though, on your answers?
So, I am not going to quit before getting started.
Post #76 - very good.
Me too.
"As George Will said on “This Week,” “His eight years as mayor of New York were the most successful episode of conservative governance in this country in the last 50 years, on welfare and crime particularly."
George Will seems to have forgotten Ronald Reagan already. Welfare and crime are about all Rudy can boast about. His philosophy is a complete repudiation of most of what Reagan Republicans believed. Reagan did not compromise on abortion or other fundamental issues, but he drew in millions of independent and Democrat voters. This idea that we must move left to win national elections is not new; it's what the country clubbers and RINOs told us for years and years. Reagan proved all that was a lie.
Blah, blah, blah. Rudy Giuliani's positions on the issues are indistinguishable from those of Joe Lieberman. If that's your idea of a conservative Republican, you need a new dictionary.
Rudy Giuliani is pro-abortion, pro-gun-control, and pro-special rights for gays. He does not appear to be very strong on reducing the size of government or cutting taxes. True, he's great on law-and-order issues (except when it comes to abortionists, who may continue to murder with impunity), but he's not running for police commissioner.
If Rudy Giuliani is the GOP presidential nominee he will not do well with socially conservative rural voters and thus be unable to carry Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky or Ohio. It would be very difficult for a GOP presidential candidate to get to 270 electoral votes without winning all 6 of those states; in fact, those six states have voted for the winning presidential candidate in each of the past 9 presidential elections (Nixon in 72, Carter in 76, Reagan in 80 and 84, Bush in 88, Clinton in 92 and 96 and Bush in 00 and 04), so to call them "must-win" would be an understatement. Nominating a pro-gay, pro-abortion, anti-gun "Republican" for President makes absolutely no sense, since those socially conservative rural voters would probably vote for the Democrat (with whom they tend to agree on economic and trade issues) or else stay home. Rudy Giuliani is not a viable national candidate.
Republicans Can't Win Without Christian Conservatives (this means you, Rudy)
SOURCE: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:QS6fK2c8AP0J:pewforum.org/events/index.php%3FEventID%3D115
Americans who regularly attend worship services and hold traditional Christian religious views increasingly vote Republican, while those who are less connected to religious institutions and more secular in their outlook tend to vote Democratic, according to a major study by the Pew Forum.
Some of the conclusions of this report were already evident in 2004 exit polling data. For example, voters who attend church more than once a week (16 percent of all voters) chose Bush over Kerry by a margin of 64 – 35 percent.
Likewise, those who attend Christian denominational Churches on a weekly basis (26 percent of voters) supported the President by a 58 – 41 percent margin. Also very telling, those who never attend Church (15 percent of voters) overwhelmingly supported Kerry 62 – 36 percent.
The study further found that traditionalist elements within each religion tended to vote Republican, while modernist groups within the religions trended towards the Democrats. A multiple regression analysis of exit poll and public opinion survey data from 2000 and 2004 enabled the Pew Research Center to assign a relative weight to various demographic markers.
Interestingly, church attendance was tied with race as the most significant factor. But even that number is deceiving; in that race is only an important factor due to the high level of support the Democrats receive from black voters.
These trends represent a major shift over the past forty-five years. White Christian Evangelicals in 1960 favored Democrats by a two-to-one margin; now they are Republican by a 56 – 27 percent margin. Seventy-eight percent of them voted for President Bush in 2004.
In 1960, 71 percent of Catholics were Democrats and now Democrats have only a slight edge among Catholics (44 – 41 percent) and Catholics voted for President Bush (52 – 47 percent) in 2004. These trends have also brought an increased acceptance of religion in the public square.
While Americans do tend to favor the separation of church and state, 70 percent of voters want their President to have strong Christian religious beliefs. Likewise, the study reveals that 52 percent of Americans believe that Christian churches should express political views. Surprisingly, support for political involvement of churches is strongest among younger voters age 18 to 29 (59 percent).
If it's Rudy or McCain I'm voting Constitution Party. Please don't tell me I'm throwing away my vote; I know that.
I have to be able to put my head on the pillow at night.
Four years of Hillary will be very bad, but we WILL survive.
His chart is bu!!$#!t, and I've debunked it on other threads, but he just kept spinning and spinning.
Rudy's got enough problems, you think they'd stick to actually telling the truth. You wouldn't think they'd need to lie to make the point.
>>Rudy can win. He can and might actually bring some other down ticket candidates in
>>the House and Senate with him. No other Pub candidate will do that. Surely not
>>St.John or Mitt or Newt(sadly because he is brilliant), nor the rest of the wannabes.
After watching Rudy on H&C last night, I started thinking a Rudy, Newt ticket might just be something I could get excited about.
What do you think?
I hope this wasn't meant for me. I have been against Rudy since there was a hint he was going to run.
I tell you what - why don't all of us here who more conservative than William Pitt each go out on election day and vote for ourselves! That way we would each be assured that we had voted for someone exactly to our liking. That would fix the democrat party. Let's do that!!
Instead of throwing a tantrum because the chart upsets you, why don't you RESEARCH those issues and make your own chart. You'll get the same results, and maybe then it will sink in.
Rudy's got enough problems, you think they'd stick to actually telling the truth. You wouldn't think they'd need to lie to make the point.
Like Rudy lies?
---Rudy: "Marriage should be between a man and a woman. here is exactly the position I've always had."---
LIAR!
New York Daily News,
March 8, 2004
Rudy opposes gay nups ban:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/soin/liveIssues/newyorkmarriage.html
""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...
...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.
Even Rudy says Rudy isn't a Conservative. And even Rudy says Rudy thinks there should be gay marriage. So take Rudy's word for it: he's NO Conservative (calls himself a moderate), and he supports gay marriage (unless he's lying for votes).
rudy will not only win the nomination, he will win the national election
more power to you, rudy
what you care about most is what i care about most
lower taxes, strong national defense, strong border, lower taxes, smaller government, and great judges like roberts and alito
any conservative that can't accept the above in a candidate, particularly given the alternative if you sit on your hands, is playing games, and may just be a poser
Excellent post!.... thanks AuH2ORepublican.
Yes, it was meant for you because I am agreeing with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.