If you really believe that, you're incredibly naive. If you really do know how ridiculous that claim is, you're a deceiver.
He is uniquely suited to prosecute the war on terror.
Hardly. He opened NY up to illegal invaders (not at all unlike the terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC) and thumbed his nose at the law to do so. He's just another liberal. And no liberal is good for national security. In fact, no one is better at getting Americans killed than a liberal.
Who better to protect our babies?
Anyone off the street would be better, as long as they didn't agree 100% with the NARAL ghouls like Giuliani does, even to the extent of sticking a knife into the back of the head of babies in the birth canal and sucking their brains out.
He is against partial birth abortion as long as the exception for the life of the mother is included, which is the morally correct position, IMO. (If you disagree, which I suspect you do, I can direct you to my post arguing the point (not that i think it will change your mind).)
it is obvious you will never accept Rudy. Of course, that is your right.
So my question to you is this: It's 2008, Rudy vs hillary. What do you do?