This is quite an . . . analysis . . . in fact, it sounds very much like something that might have been penned by Harriet Miers herself.
Rudy has been doing more tap dancing then Michael Flatley. His history shows liberalism thru and thru. Sean "I need a bib" Hannity gave him a softball on the 2nd amendment, and he whiffed badly, yammering on how "hunter's rights" would be protected.
No thanks, but nice try.
NO.
The Gallup Organization polled registered Republicans with this question: "If it was proven without a doubt that Rudy Guiliani was not Hillary Clinton, would you vote for him?" Results: 99.2% said yes.
What are you smoking? Of course Giuliani would. He says he's a strict constitutionalist, but he also says that a woman has a right to an abortion. Therefore, he would not knowingly nominate anyone who would overturn this so-called right.
let's see:
Pro roe v wade, including government funding of abortions
Anti - gun, proposed "assault weapons" ban and handgun licensing on a federal level
Pro campaign Finance Reform
Pro illegal immigrant (fought to keep NY a sanctuary city against the feds)
Forget "is he conservative enough". The question is "Is he conservative at all"??
Link or is this a vanity?
I considered piling on and making some snarky comment, but what's the point.
We aren't going to waver and neither are they.
Stalemate.
He's liberal through and through.
From another Thread:
If you want to know what kind of judges Guiliani will appoint, just look at... Rudy Guiliani. Rudy Guiliani is a lawyer himself, and he undoubtedly thinks that Rudy Guiliani is a "strict constructionist" in his interpretation of the Constitution, whatever that means to him.
Rudy Guiliani will appoint judges who mirror Rudy Guiliani's Legal Philosophy, because -- get this -- Rudy imagines that his own Legal Philosophy is Correct. Stunning, isn't it?
How anyone could think otherwise for one instant... how anyone could be wantonly sold such a blatant bill of goods... is utterly beyond me.
With "Pro-Lifers" like these, I need to start printing up Deeds to the Brooklyn Bridge for sale. My ill-gotten fortune awaits!
If Rudy will submit to an examination of his record, and personal questioning by James Bopp, Jr., the prominent attorney and leading figure in the pro-life movement, to ascertain the degree of Rudy's commitment to the sanctity of life, I will accept the findings of Jim Bopp without question.
I have accepted Jim Bopp's informed judgment regarding the sincerity of Mitt Romney's conversion to pro-life, and I feel I owe the same consideration to Rudy.
Will Rudy take me up on my offer?
NO.
Next question?
Sorry we aint buying. Duncan Hunter 08
Who cares?
I know he's a flip-flopping poll-watching liar and he advocates gun control.
That's enough for me.
He might be a fine mayor (maybe Podunk, Iowa needs one) but he ain't POTUS material.
He's a RINO.
Period.
Another thread where the Rudybots couldn't make a dent. It must be frustrating for them.
"Selecting a liberal judicial activist would go directly opposite Giuliani's core issues. It's inconceivable that he would nominate a Harriet Meirs or a David Souter. And his selection of judicial strict-constructionists would accomplish the first and foremost goal of the pro-life movement."
I don't think it's so inconceivable.
For a man who thinks that abortion is "a woman's constitutional right," Ruth Bader Ginsburg may look like a "strict constructionist."
sitetest
This idea of there being a strict constructionist, kind of opens the door to a broad interpretation of the Constitution. IOW, a liberal interpretation. What America needs are originalists on the SCOTUS.
If you look at Rudy`s track liberal record as Mayor of NYCity, instead of accepting his recent rhetoric at face value, everyone will better understand his politics. Mayor Rudy appointed mostly liberal judges to the NYCity courts. Few Republicans and no conservatives that I know of. Same goes for other positions in the city government, Rudy appointed liberals.
Using Rudy`s governing record as a guide, its a good bet as Prez he would nominate jurists more in the mold of a Lawrence Tribe, George Mitchell and Alan Dershowitz, then he would nominate originalists like Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist.
No.