Posted on 02/12/2007 5:24:32 PM PST by NapkinUser
I finally figured out there are two freepers with 'bunny' in their name, one very pro Rudy and one very anti.
I thought I imaginging things!
It's me with the split personality disorder.
Go rudy!
Rudy sucks!
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
Is there ANY doubt whatsoever that Giuliani is an emotional and not a rational candidate?
He can't win. Too many conservatives (including me) would sit home if he were the nominee. We will not accept a liberal nominee. End of story.
"Guiliani simply can't win. He should save himself and his party the hassle and end this now."
If Rudy can't win, then why are so many people in panic mode so early? He brings good talking points up and he is a good attack dog on Hillary. He should be allowed to spend his money on a campaign the same as any other candidate. If a better candidate comes along, then let him or her prove it by countering Rudy's platform.
If Rudy can't win, then why are so many people in panic mode so early?
You're probably going against the tide around here. It's astonishing what's happened in just a few weeks. The electorate turned to the Democrats largely because of frustration over the war in Iraq. But the Dems, many of whom had supported the war at its onset, have no real ideas about how to improve the situation there. So they have been promoting their leftist social agenda. To counteract them, the GOP is now focusing on a candidate who (a) has a social agenda as leftist as any the Dems propose and (b) supports President Bush's increasingly unpopular position on Iraq. This is the electable candidate? I don't think so.
Good advice for Mayor Linguine D---...
Note that we are not talking here about the Susan Collins wing of the Party. We're talking about FReepers. It's really eye-opening.
Rudy has peaked.
He is only going downhill after the next month or so. Wait until the NY media start on him.
"He brings good talking points up..."
Like his stance on the second amendment? Or his support for infanticide?
If you live in a safe state like I do here in Georgia, consider voting for Jim Gilchrist, the likely constitution party nominee. If I lived in Ohio or Pennsylvania, I'd most likely hold my nose and vote for Giuliani if, God forbid, he gets the nomination (proving that the republican has regressed and taken a step back from Goldwater and instead chose Rockefeller.) But I don't, so I have no problem voting for someone tough on border security if the republicans go for Giuliani or Hagel (the only two republicans I refuse to vote for in the general.) There will be a tough-on-border-security candidate in 2008, hopefully the republican party is wise enough to run one and not Rudy "most pro-(illegal)immigrant politcian in America" Giuliani.
I'd rather not have that happen. Conservatives need to find a candidate, even if it's Romney, and rally around that person to stop Giuliani from hijacking the party.
Republicans don't get my vote by default. They have to earn it.
ROFLOL!!! Wondered the same thing myself!
I wonder why the writer left out that the appointed/annointed Ford/Rockefeller regime appointed the infamous John Paul Stevens!!! Good Lord!!!
calcowgril, where's the piece you were just showing me about Rudy that I FReepmailed you about? Why don't you add that to this collection just for fun, huh?
to=too
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.