Posted on 02/06/2007 4:03:31 PM PST by wagglebee
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A leading pro-life advocate says he thinks Rudy Giuliani is too pro-abortion to deserve support form the overwhelming majority of Republican voters who are pro-life. Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, says he doesn't think the former New York mayor will be able to capture the party's nod.
Giuliani moved another step closer to a full-fledged candidacy on Monday by filing a statement of candidacy and removing the words "testing the waters" from his exploratory committee papers.
He has a high standing the polls both nationally and in early primary states such as Iowa and New Hampshire but Perkins says that's simply because of his high name identification.
"At this point most people have no idea where candidates stand on the issues, the polls simply reflect name ID," Perkins told CBN.
"Giuliani is known for his impressive leadership in the wake of 9/11, but most pro-family Americans do not yet realize how far outside of the mainstream of conservative thought that Mayor Giuliani social views really are," Perkins added. "Once people focus on this election and the candidates Giuliani's lead will diminish."
Should Giuliani get the party's nod for president, Perkins said it would likely hand the White House over to the Democratic candidate because pro-life voters would have no one to support.
The last several elections have been between pro-life Republican and pro-life Democratic candidates and a Giuliani nomination would change that dynamic.
"If by some chance Giuliani were to gain the Republican nomination it would set up a very similar scenario that we had last November," Perkins told CBN. "A unenthusiastic Republican base which will suppress turnout and set up a Democratic victory."
Republican voters have previously turned away pro-abortion candidates from capturing the primary nod, including former California Gov. Pete Wilson and Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter. Republicans haven't had a pro-abortion nominee since Gerald Ford in 1976.
When asked to respond to social issues on CNN's Inside Politics in a 1999 interview, Giuliani replied, "I'm pro-choice."
In the same CNN interview he also indicated he does not support even a modest ban on the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure saying, "No, I have not supported that, and I don't see my position on that changing."
Giuliani also indicated he would have upheld President Clinton's veto of the partial-birth abortion ban.
"Yes. I said I then that I support him, so I have no reason to change my mind about it," he told the New York Times in November 1999.
The former mayor also backs embryonic stem cell research, which pro-life groups oppose because it requires the destruction of human life to obtain the stem cells.
Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney are the top two candidates in the polls apart from Giuliani.
Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee are also running and drawing significant support from the pro-life community.
Other potential Republican candidates include pro-life former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, pro-life Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, pro-life Reps. Duncan Hunter of California and Tom Tancredo of Colorado, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, and former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson.
he'd put Cuomo on the SCOTUS you say.
here's a transcript of Ed Koch speaking about Rudy, note the section I pulled out about a dispute in NY over a judge's ruling.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/forum/Koch.html
"NEW YORK SUPREME COURT JUDGE HELEN FREEDMAN WAS RECENTLY THE SUBJECT OF GIULIANI'S DEMEANING LANGUAGE IN HIS EFFORT TO TERRORIZE HER AFTER SHE RULED IN FAVOR OF THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY'S HOMELESS FAMILY RIGHTS PROJECT, LED BY COORDINATING ATTORNEY STEVEN BANKS, IN THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY'S ONGOING CASE AGAINST THE CITY.
GIULIANI, ACCORDING TO THE POST, SAID FREEDMAN HAS BEEN ISSUING "IRRATIONAL ORDERS" TO MAYORS FOR 13 YEARS. "IT'S ABOUT TIME SHE STEP ASIDE," HE SAID. CONTINUING, "ANY JUDGE THAT HOLDS A CASE FOR A DECADE OR MORE SHOULD GET OFF THE CASE BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS THEY BECOME THE PURVEYORS OF POLICY RATHER THAN DECIDERS OF CASES THAT COME BEFORE THEM." HE VICIOUSLY AND PERSONALLY ATTACKED FREEDMAN -- AND SAID, "SHE ISN'T RULING ON THE LAW, SHE'S RULING ON HER OWN PERSONAL IDEOLOGY." IF THAT WERE S0, SHE WILL BE REVERSED ON APPEAL"
does that sounds like a person who supports liberal judicial activism on the bench?
Well then, I guess we can agree to disagree. The primaries will decide who we will be voting for in the end. Right now, we're trying to debate out each potential candidate's strengths & weaknesses - naturally - we, as a party want to put forth the strongest candidate who represents our party in terms of basic core principles.
Abortion isn't the only issue I look at when I vote, but it is something I feel passionately about. I get the impression that moderates don't feel passionately about much of anything. The Cindy Sheehans of the left feel passionately anti-war - that's why they hate Hillary and won't be voting for her. It's the people that feel passionately about issues that will get out & vote, put signs in their yards, make phone calls & put bumper stickers on their vehicles.
One thing that comes to my mind is that a lot of Rudy supporters are counting on conservative or moderate democrat voters coming over to vote for Rudy instead of Hillary - but these dems won't be voting for our candidate in the primaries - they can't.
I think too many people are putting their money on the race being between Hillary & Rudy - I think they might be proven to be wrong on this.
Gotcha. I'm on board with that.
Can I ask a favor of you? Don't stoop to calling them names. Let them be the only ones resorting to personal attacks. There are already some so consumed with hatred for Rudy and those of who support him, that they're calling for those of us who do support him to be banned. Let's not give them any ammunition they don't need.
"I guess Rudy's determination to place more strict constructionists on the courts isn't good enough for the Family Life Council. Whatever."
His track record undermines those hollow words. From another poster, but you are more than welcome to provide sources and dispute this:
'While he was the "Republican Mayor" of New York City he appointed more than 60 men and women to the Civil, Criminal, and Family Court benchs. In all of those judicial appointment not one of them was a Republican. All of his judical appointments were either registered Liberals or registered Democrats. As the "Republican Mayor" he had appointment power over more than 70 full commissioners in more than 50 City agencies, yet at no time during his administration did REPUBLICANS account for more than 10% of those appointments. Hell, he even appointed Chuck Schumers wife as the City's Department of Transportation Commissioner. '
Oh, no abortion clinics in any "township?" No hospitals that commit abortion owned by some city-townships? (Betta believe they're are!) No Planned Parenthood "chop shops" funded at the township level in any way?
True. But more pre-borns could potentially "sleep better" in the womb w/an actual pro-life prez. (And by "sleeping better," I don't mean these little guys & gals actually have the ability to worry...I mean simply leaving their eyes intact so that sleep is possible...and some actual pro-life Supreme Court justices could overturn Roe or parts thereof).
Back during the 2003 California recall, you supported RINO-Arnold. I told you back then, if Arnold wins, the next big opening for a liberal Republican would be RINO-Rudy come 2008. And here we are! I'm glad to see you posting again. Be prepared, however. This ain't 2003 and its not Arnold running for Governor. This is for the whole enchilada. Rudy maybe ahead in most polls with 30%-35% now, but without a solid majority of the GOP`s activist conservative voters choosing Rudy in the primaries, Rudy`s candidacy will come to a standstill.
Bookmark
I know how it works, evidently you don't. The Mayor appoints the Committee that makes the recommendations. Does that fact change your opinion at all?
does Arlen Spector think Roe is settled law?
He certainly does.
why was he working so hard to get Roberts and Alito onto the SCOTUS?
Dunno, what does that have to do with Rudy's positionthat abortion should be taxpayer funded, Roe is settled law and his idea of a good Justice is Justice Ginsberg as well as Justice Scalia?
Rudy says he supports Roe and taxpayer funded abortions. Should that tell us something? Or should I dismiss all of that after his laughable announcement last night that he opposes PBA if their is an exception for the life of the Mother?
Must I also overlook his support of amnesty because McCain and President Bush have the same view?
Should I embrace his view of second amendment "rights" where city folks don't have the same right as country folks?
Must I also fall in line and support the MArio Cuomos of the world when Rudy does?
Name one, just onemind you, conservative republican that Rudy put on the bench. And forget the Committee gambit, it doesn't work. Go read the Mayors executive order on how Committee members.
LOL -- guess I was tired.
EXCELLENT point. Thank you for making it. It's a keeper.
EXCELLENT point. Thank you for making it. It's a keeper.
Yes it is!
More wiggle room and weasel words. It's become a real habit of his lately. Must be his million dollar political consultants giving him focus group-tested, pre-packaged soundbites that are technically not an outright lie, but Clintonesque in their deceit.
For those who support Rudy I say all well and good. Hell, if his positions were slightly less radical socially, I would support him. I understand he has appeal.
But don't try to tell me that a man that supported Mario Cuomo for Governor is a conservative. Rudy is a Rockefeller Republican with a law and order streak that served New York City well.
So simply come out and say that you support Rudy as a socially liberal, fiscal conservative (if you believe he is one) who has supported extreme leftists for Chief Executive positions.
I can live with that kind of honesty, it's the horse manure about Rudy being a strict constructionist and conservative Republican that frosts my derrierre.
RINO-Rudy is left with few options. He made decisions that promoted liberal causes. He offered rhetoric expressing his liberal opinion, that are now part of the public record. And he governed NYCity employing what was a liberal policy agenda. Rudy can't run away from his lifelong liberal record. He's stuck with it and he will have to defend it the best he can. Last nights Hannity interview consisted of softball questions and no followup. Pathetic. I think Rudy lost at least 5 million conservative primary voters with his "double talk" answers last night. All I can say is, keep up the good work Rudy. You're your own worst enemy.
As obvious as your post is, I feel compelled to applaud you anyways. Some people don't get it.
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.