Rudy Giuliani: 'A Woman Has the Right to Choose' Abortion

NewsMax ^ | Feb 22, 2007 | NewsMax.com Staff

[Reagan Man]

Giuliani has a tough road ahead in South Carolina, which is to host the first Southern primaries in 2008. His moderate positions on gun control and support for abortion rights do not sit well with the state's Christian conservatives, who accounted for a third of the 2000 GOP primary vote. Those voters swung heavily to President Bush that year, giving him a 2-1 ratio margin over Arizona Sen. John McCain, who was viewed as soft on abortion.

On Wednesday, Giuliani reiterated his own position.

"I'd advise my daughter or anyone else not to have an abortion," Giuliani said. "I'd like to see it ended, but ultimately I believe that a woman has the right to choose.

"I believe that you've got to run based on who you are, what you really are and then people actually get a right to disagree with you," he said. "And I find if you do it that way, even people who disagree with you sometimes respect you."

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>I really do think that signing abortion bills to authorize more abortions makes you a pro-choice person.

Being pro-choice has always meant that one supports abortion rights 100% of the time. That means someone pro-choice supports abortion on demand. The 1967 bill that Reagan signed into law was for the exceptions of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother. That accounts for 4%-7% of ALL abortions performed. Reagan never supported abortion on demand. Therefore Reagan was never pro-choice. Why you can't comprehend this simple fact, is most baffling.

Btw, who are you supporting for 2008?

>>>>Look, my view of Reagan's greatness isn't predicated around wishful thinking.

I resent that implication. This isn't about wishful thinking. Its about willing to accept a reasonable conclusion based on a set of minimal facts available. And I never said Reagan was "'always pro-life'" either. Frankly, comparing this situation by arguing some silly Hitler analogy, or implying that any defense of Reagan is akin to the Clintonista`s defending BillyBoy, are just two more cheap pot shots at the Reagan legacy.

Everything taken in context, I'm willing to give Reagan the benefit of the doubt on exactly when he began his personal conversion to pro-life status. It was after 1967, but before Roe v Wade was made law. And since Roe v Wade was the pivatol point in time on the abortion issue, I think Reagan made a sound moral decision. He didn't flip flop like Romney has or obfuscate his abortion stance like Giuliani is attempting. Reagan's own words from 1975 make that abundantly clear. Yet, they don't have any impact on you. Okay. You are not willing to give Reagan the benefit of the doubt. Gotcha! For a conservative, that is very sad.

[jla]

Why is it so important to you to pretend that he was an ardent pro-lifer even when he signed one of the earliest pro-abortion bills in a major state?

Why is it important to you in misrepresenting, and lying about, Reagan in a futile attempt to rationalize the actions of Giuliani? Can't your boy stand on his own merits?

[jla]

Isn't it pathetic how the pro-Rudys drag Ronald Reagan's good name thru the mud in a vain attempt to prop up their feet-of-clay candidate?

[jla]

The primaries won't come too soon. It'll be a pleasure in sending the mountebank back to Gotham City.

[Old_Mil]

In addition to simply favoring abortion, Rudy is on record as supporting both partial birth abortion and federal funding for abortion.

He isn't kidding when he says, "Most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine."

[Reagan Man]

Before GW Bush got himself in hotwater with the American people, Reagan bashing on FR was limited to a few kooky FReeper who couldn't stand Reagan and/or conservatism. You know who they are.

This anti-Reagan crapola is pathetic.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>Why is it important to you in misrepresenting, and lying about, Reagan in a futile attempt to rationalize the actions of Giuliani?

Okay, I see, he supports Rudy the liberal. I thought it was Romney the waffler. My mistake. LOL

>>>>Can't your boy stand on his own merits?

The answer to that question is, NO!

[George W. Bush]

Why is it important to you in misrepresenting, and lying about, Reagan in a futile attempt to rationalize the actions of Giuliani? Can't your boy stand on his own merits?

jla, we've been on threads together. You just didn't notice (in my longwinded posts) that I absolutely oppose Giuliani, both in the primary and the general. He is the one candidate I absolutely refuse to support. He is the enemy of the party of Reagan, as I've said many times. He will destroy the conservative GOP Reagan coalition utterly.

I could vote for McStain in the general if I had to, well, if he doesn't stab us in the more than he already has. I am looking hard at Romney, seeing some disturbing stuff but some signs also that he has had a change of heart in a pretty compelling way. Currently, I'm for Ron Paul or Duncan Hunter but not sure if in my late primary I'll get a chance to cast a vote for either. I'm thinking that if the primaries are moved up in NJ and CA, the only meaningful choice I might get is to cast a primary ballot for either McStain or Romney to stop the Evil Rudy.

And I am not misrepresenting Reagan. You are making claims that Reagan never made for himself personally. He became a pro-lifer in 1975 when he took his stand. At some point prior to that, he had already had a change of heart about abortion. But that was at some point after he signed the pivotal 1968 CA abortion bill.

[George W. Bush]

Look, if you want to believe some little fairy tale based on a few tidbits that his biographer dropped in a book, go ahead. But it doesn't meet any evidenciary test.

Somehow, it is important for you to believe that Reagan was always pro-life even while signing a pro-infanticide abortion bill in 1968, one that was key to the Roe decision. And you believe that somehow he was utterly opposed to abortion from 1969 on but just didn't bother to tell anyone until 1975, two years after Roe. Nor did he attempt to correct his 1968 error while in office.

I'm not dishonoring his legacy at all just because I refuse to believe your little fairy tale version of his life. You probably believe that cherry tree tale about George Washington too.

[jla]

My mistake about your opinion of Giuliani. Sorry.
But you are absolutely wrong in stating that Reagan was not a pro-lifer prior to 1975. I've read too much by, and of, the man to think it would be even remotely feasible that he would think abortion anything but a despicable, evil act.

[Reagan Man]

Now I see what you're all about. You just don't like Reagan, and you definitely don't like people who defend his legacy and his honor.

This was no fairy tale explanation I offered. There is more legitimate evidence to support my side of this debate, then there is to support your exasperated efforts to undermine the Reagan's pro-life record.

FReeper jla told me you support Rudy the liberal to be the GOP nominee for 2008. No wonder your twisting and spinning your rhetroic in a futile attempt to make Giuliani look like something he is not.

Rudy Giuliani is NO Ronald Reagan. Never will be!

[George W. Bush]

I've read too much by, and of, the man to think it would be even remotely feasible that he would think abortion anything but a despicable, evil act.

Then you're saying that at the moment he signed a pro-abortion bill to legalize abortion in CA, he was a pro-lifer.

Sorry, I don't buy it. A real pro-lifer with conviction would veto that bill and try to rally the public to sustain that veto. And that is why Reagan himself acknowledged it to have been a mistake.

[George W. Bush]

FReeper jla told me you support Rudy the liberal to be the GOP nominee for 2008. No wonder your twisting and spinning your rhetroic in a futile attempt to make Giuliani look like something he is not. Rudy Giuliani is NO Ronald Reagan. Never will be!

Once again, I am not supporting Giuliani. I oppose his nomination. I will refuse to vote for him in the general, no matter who he is up against.

McStain or Romney, maybe. Giuliani, never.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>Once again, I am not supporting Giuliani. I oppose his nomination. I will refuse to vote for him in the general, no matter who he is up against. McStain or Romney, maybe. Giuliani, never.

What is this "once again" crap? I asked you who you supported in 2008. You didn't answer me, jla did. Its good to see you NOT supporting Rudy Giuliani. That is key to defeating him in the primaries.

However, why lose your cool and get all bent out of shape with me over exactly when Reagan became a pro-lifer. BFD!

It shows what kind of person Reagan really was. First, he signed that liberalized abortion bill into law in 1967, and then he turned around one year later, not only regretting his decision, but denouncing it too. Reagan took his original decision very personally. I'm not backing down. Lou Cannon and others knew Reagan. They have no reason to lie about what he might have said to them in private. A lot of things are said in private between famous people, that are revealed years and even decades later. That 1975 radio broadcast was a key point too. Again. Why would Reagan lie about his abortion opinion in 1967-1968? Absolutely NO reason for Reagan to have lied!

Calling this exercise on my part, a fairy tale, comparing my defense of Reagan to Clinton's defenders, and throwing in Hitler for good measure, is an outrage. LOL It would have been easier for you to just say, 'it was no big deal, we can agree to disagree'. 1968, 1970, 1973... whatever. Not you though.

[Antoninus]

Hate this photo of Hunter. Looks like he is contemplating suicide.

I love it, personally. Peace through strength, baby.

[TAdams8591]

A lot of us were/are right about Guiliani.

[JSDude1]

Fact: there is no "right to abortion" mentioned anywhere in the US Constitution..\
Query: Do you support an overturning of Roe v. Wade, Doe v. Bolton, et all (even if you are "pro-choice")?

[toddlintown]

You're right, but wait, where's Bunny Slippers, Rudy's #1 bot?

[JSDude1]

Even if true, (which I doubt) it still DOESN'T negate that A "Right to Abortion" is found nowhere in the US Const. (and most legal scholars), even people who are pro-abortion, admit "Roe v. Wade" and such are bad case law, and have no real legal grounds so to speak..So let me ask you a question: Do you support the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and this issue to be "sent back to the states"?

[toddlintown]

Who is the REAL Rudy?

A sleaze bag who dropped a 14-year marriage with a BS annullment (second cousin), divorced a second while chasing another woman, and lived with 2 homos while the marital dust of number 2 settled...and then married again.

The funny thing, 2nd wife Donna Hanover thought she was getting the heave-ho because of Rudy's well-known relationship with yet another woman, Cristyne Lategano, the mayor's former communications director.

This guy makes BJ Clinton look like an amateur horn dog.