Posted on 02/15/2007 3:20:42 PM PST by MittFan08
Rudy started out being against Roe vs Wade.
Several weeks before the Nov. 1989 Mayoral election Rudy changed his tune claiming various things such as woman have the "right" while at the same time saying abortion was morally wrong.
Nowadays, Rudy wishing to get the Republican nomination, wants to appoint "strict constructionists" similar to Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito.
I believe we need a clear concise anti-abortion voice and would support such a candidate in the primaries.
However, come general election time, if it's Hillary vs. Rudy, I will support Rudy and hope that he keeps his promise to appoint judges like the above mentioned.
I would never support a third party late comer who skips the Republican primaries.
Newt says that if he enters the race it will be in September.
I think that might be too late.
April 9, 1989? Man are you ever behind the times. Rudy announced at his coming out party on Hannity and Colmes jsut a couple weeks ago that he believes in a woman's right to choose, etc, etc, etc. Wake up!
LOL! I'm awake. That's not completely what I said.
Showinig the rest of the context, I went on to say;
Which of course has been his position up until now.
I'm identifying when Rudy went over to the dark side on this. In order to do that, one must go back to 1989.
Now about the rest of what I said;
Jim, what would you do in that situation?
Rudy: I oppose it. I don't like it. I hate it. I think abortion is something that is a personal matter I would advise something against. However, I believe in a woman's right to choose. I think you have to ultimately not put a woman in jail for that. I think ultimately you have to leave that to a disagreement of conscience and have to respect the choice that somebody makes. So what I do say to conservatives because then you want to look at well okay what can we look to that is similar to the way you think. I think the appointment of judges that I would make would be very similar to if not exactly the same as the last two judges that were appointed. Chief Justice Roberts is somebody I work with, somebody I admire. Justice Alito, someone I knew when he was US attorney, also admire. If I had been president over the last four years, I can't think of any— that I'd do anything different with that. I guess the key is and I appointed over 100 judges when I was the mayor so it's something I take very, very seriously. I would appoint judges that interpreted the constitution rather than invented it. Understood the difference of being a judge and a legislator. And having argued a case before the Supreme Court, having argued in many, many courts is something I would take very seriously.
Hannity:Is Roe bad?
Rudy:GIULIANI: I think that's up to the court to decide. There are questions about the way it was decided and some of the basis for it. At this point it's precedent. It's going be very interesting to see what Chief Justice Roberts what Justices Scalia and Alito do with it. i think they're probably going to limit it rather than overturn it. In other words, they'll accept some of the limitations that different states have placed on it or the federal government has placed on it.
His position hasn't changed since October 1989. He promises to appoint strict constructionists, yet he thinks that woman have a "right" to an abortion.
Please tell me the names of the founding fathers that wrote such a right into the constitution. And please show me the clause or amendment in the constitution that declares a woman's right to kill her unborn child. The people of the several states saw abortion as evil and had laws written to prohibit it.
"Is Roe bad? I think that's up to the court to decide."
Wrong again. It's not a constitutional right. It's not up to the court to decide. For example, murder is not a constitutional right. Murder is evil. All states have laws against murder. The people have decided against murder. Abortion is also evil. The people had laws on their state books against abortion. The court would have no business overruling the will of the people on murder and it has no business overruling the will of the people on abortion. Roe vs Wade should be overturned. It's up to the people to decide.
What?
That's Rudy's comment, it isn't mine. You make it seem like it's my comment and then you ask me about such a supposed "right". Please ask Rudy. As I said, Rudy has this wrong.
"Is Roe bad? I think that's up to the court to decide." Wrong again. It's not a constitutional right. It's not up to the court to decide. For example, murder is not a constitutional right. Murder is evil. All states have laws against murder. The people have decided against murder. Abortion is also evil. The people had laws on their state books against abortion. The court would have no business overruling the will of the people on murder and it has no business overruling the will of the people on abortion. Roe vs Wade should be overturned. It's up to the people to decide.
The courts do have the constitutional power to determine if Roe v. Wade is constitutional. The courrts can decide correctly or the courts can decide incorrectly. I think that is what Rudy meant and it's not "incorrect".
What Rudy doesn't make clear is that laws against abortion like murder is up "to the states or to the people" which of course makes Roe V. Wade -- bad.
Jim, what would you do in that situation?
I take that as a "no comment". :)
I will do all in my limited ability to make sure we are not presented with such a decision. I dread the chaos that will follow if we fail.
Yes, we need a great communicator who is a good conservative or else conservatives will scatter and Hillary will win. FreeRepublic has the exposure to get the conservative talk show hosts talking.
All we need is that candidate who can unify this board and the conservative talk show hosts will start talking.
The ability of your board isn't "limited".
Regards.
its a center/right nation. the conservative base cannot elect a president on its own, it can either be part of a coalition that elects a president, it can stay home and let Hillary win, or it can push for a litmus test pure candidate who doesn't have the "reach" and political skills to be able to get enough votes from the middle to win.
If Bush had won 45 state victories in 2000 and 2004, we wouldn't be having this debate here. None of the top 3 current candidates would even be in this race.
In 2004, Rove maximized the turnout and margin of the white evangelical social conservative base - running 80/20 for GWB. And we won by one state, where a 65K vote swing would have given the election to a northeast liberal. Demographics trends don't look great for the republicans coming out of 2006 going into 2008. Hispanics 69/31 Dem, Generation Y 58/42 Dem. where do we go to get votes? where are these vast untapped pools of white social conservatives? I'm willing to listen, let's go analytical, tell me where they are. Tell me Richardson as Hillary's VP isn't going to increase Dem appeal amongst Hispanics. Tell me there aren't untapped pools of single young women who are going to come out and vote for Hillary because its "chic" to help elect the first woman president.
As I've often said we must be pragmatic. Bush pragmatically promised PDB in the 2000 campaign. Bush then won the election by several hundred votes in a pro-PDB state, Florida.
However, being pragmatic about the "right" to choose and 2A won't work. It will keep too many conservatives home.
I think that might be too late.
I tend to agree. But a case can be made for letting Giuliani, McCain and Romney fight it out in the early rounds.
What worries me is that 64% "will never vote for under any circumstances" number. Granted, except for the two million regular FNC viewers, most Americans haven't even seen Gingrich since his days as Speaker... but that's a big number. If he's going to cut into it and make himself a viable candidate, he needs to get to work on it ASAP.
if Gingrich gets the nomination - the only way he wins the general is with some HUGE turnout of the republican base (those 20% of evangelicals who voted for Kerry, we'll need to eat into that), and a negative campaign agaist Hillary to reduce the turnout for her to just the Dem base.
Agreed, on both points.
what can I say - anyone in PA who voted for Casey Jr over the abortion issue - doesn't understand how the Democratic party works. they expected Casey Jr to lead the Dems into putting the 5th anti-Roe vote on the Court, are they nuts?
Abortion Issues (Back to top) Date Bill Title Vote 01/11/2007 Stem Cell Research Act of 2007 N 12/06/2006 Abortion Pain Bill Y 05/25/2005 Overseas Military Facilities Abortion Amendment N 04/27/2005 Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act Y 10/02/2003 Prohibit Partial-Birth Abortion bill Y 06/04/2003 Prohibit Partial-Birth Abortion bill Y 07/20/2000 Abortion Funding Amendment N 07/13/2000 Family Planning Assistance Funding amendment N 06/22/2000 Prison Abortion Funding Amendment N 05/18/2000 Oversea Military Abortions Amendment N 04/05/2000 Partial Birth Abortion Act Y 07/29/1999 Abortion Funding Amendment N 06/30/1999 Child Custody Protection Act Y 06/09/1999 Overseas Military Abortion Amendment N 06/08/1999 Prohibition of Chemically Induced Abortion Amendment Y 10/08/1998 Contraceptive Amendment Y 08/06/1998 Abortion Funding Amendment N 07/23/1998 Partial-Birth Abortion bill Y 07/15/1998 Child Custody Protection Act Y 06/24/1998 Chemical Inducement of Abortion Amendment Y 05/20/1998 Abortion Private Funding Restoration Amendment N 10/08/1997 Partial-Birth Abortion bill Y 09/04/1997 International Family Planning amendment NV 03/20/1997 Partial-Birth Abortion bill Y 02/13/1997 Population Planning bill Y
Thank you for posting that.
I actually worked for Sessions, and his endorsing Rudy says volumes.
I have worked with Sessions as well. He is a decent man. That anyone on this supposed "conservative" site would be allowed to disrespect him while claiming to carry the pro-life torch is telling indeed, in more ways than one.
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.