Posted on 03/04/2007 7:07:39 AM PST by DKNY
If Giuliani can get through primaries, he stacks up well For a guy commonly regarded as a hero after 9/11, Mayor Giuliani is too quickly dismissed by presidential handicappers. Here's why he deserves a second look.
(Excerpt) Read more at sptimes.com ...
No,that is sickness of humor. One example involved Rudi dressing in drag making his own decisian to look like an idiot. The other example is a dead woman who had no choice. There is no humor in that post.
( First, he's not "pro-abortion". )
Have you been living in a cave?
( Second, there is nothing that he can do as President to directly affect abortion laws. )
You do not actually believe that, do you?
( Third, he has said he will appoint strict constructionist judges. )
That's what he has said, his past actions speak more loudly than his words.
( Do you see "abortion" as an enumerated right in the Constitution? )
Is this just something you added or can you provide a source for this comment you have attributed to him?
Are you pro choice/abortion? Just wondering where you are coming from.
" I also do not believe there is only one position on those who are "pro-life."
I've had many discussions about abortion with friends, family and co workers.
I would say the majority would technically be considered pro life- abortion is not something they would consider, they don't know know anyone who has had an abortion, life begins at conception,etc, etc.
But, when I say-you're " pro life " then. They say No.
If asked by a pollster, they would say they were pro choice.
The reasons vary from thinking the official movement is comprised of radicals who burn down clinics
to the feeling that while they personally would not have an abortion -
they are not comfortable telling others what they should or should not do with their bodies-
to the " what if " situation where a 10 year old is raped
and their body is not mature enough physically and emotionally to carry a baby.
Like you said, just because someone says they are pro choice, does not automatically make them pro abortion.
BTW-The few I know who are truly die hard, pro abortion are liberal Democrats.
Despite what the sonograms show-they describe anything short of birth, as nothing more than a blob of protoplasm.
They are completely unreachable.
"...people who believe killing a sickly baby after birth...
How about that professor at Princeton who still believes, and teaches, that parents have the right to kill their baby after birth? Fortunately I have forgotten his name.
"Anyone who likes Rudy is a liberal whether they realize it or not. Rudy IS A LIBERAL, he is the same as a Democrat, he epitomizes the word RINO but you Rudybots can't see that. Somehow you think electing a liberal that has an R after his name is better than electing one with a D after his/her name.
The truth is we need a REAL conservative in the WH, and yes they are electable, if they weren't, RR would never have been elected. Whine all you want, but this idiotic obsession with Rudy will split the party and let Hitlery, or whom ever wins the Dem nomination, walk into the WH."
Ok, I support Rudy. Because he'll kick terrorist ass, and ask questions later. That's my priority. Apparently, though, because I am able to overlook Rudy's socially liberal side in order to achieve the victory over terrorism, I myself am a Liberal. Imagine my surprise.
Of course, I am a Liberal who will vote for strict Conservative Duncan Hunter if he is nominated, and I am a Liberal who would love to see Tom Tancredo in the White House. I am a strange Liberal.
I am a Liberal who will who will support the Republican candidate no matter who it is, because I believe that in the cultural War against Islamic extremists our country's very existence is at stake.
You are a Conservative - or at least you claim to be. If you do not get the candidate of YOUR personal choosing, you will pick up your marbles and go home. Nice guy. Leave us with Hillary or Obama, watch the illegals get the right to vote, the felons get the right to vote, the SCOTUS swing hard left, the Electoral College get banished, the second amendment get trampled, the Fairness Doctrine resurrected, and the Republicans become a rump party until, finally, we have sharia.
But at least you're a good conservative, while I, sadly, must shoulder the burden of my new-found liberalism.
"No, it was "No New Taxes Bush" and "It's my turn Bob Dole" that gave us 8 years of the Clintons."
So, what you are saying is that in `92 when Clinton got 43%, Bush the Elder got 39% and Perot took 17% (with 1% amongst the oddballs) that Perot actually took 7 percent from Clinton? I seriously doubt that (especially when you remember how Bush caught Clinton in the polls in the 2 month interim when Perot dropped out).
Spin it how you want. A third party splintering of the vote in `08 repeats `92 - a Clinton in the White House.
The war on abortion is of the utmost importance, but it is a war that has to be waged on the state and local levels and that is done from the pulpits and at the dinner tables all across this country. Roe if reversed will come back to the states and that is where the battle will be won or lost. President Reagan with all the good will he had in the country couldn't change enough hearts and minds from the bully pulpit to rally the country against abortion. The president of the United States is charged first and foremost with protecting this country from threats inside and out.
I bet you're afraid of your own shadow and expect the government to save you but yet you defend the murder of unborn children. I see now why you would support the baby-killer. If this is what the Republican party has become they desire to get they ass handed to them in the next election.
When the Republican party offers up crap as a candidate people WILL go elsewhere. Unfortunately the Republican Party, much like the Democrat party, will never acknowledge their mistakes.
That's like 20th on my list of issues with Gulliani.
It is a battle that NEEDS to be fought on the federal level first and foremost. In 1000's of vote cast all the way up and down ballots in Tx since 1988 I have only ever vote for two pro abortion candidates, one a protest against a corrupt republican for a candidate who could not win, two a case were both sides were pro abortion. I hope never to be the position to have to make a third. I will not with Rino Rudy.
Assuming the media doesn't turn on him and destroy him once he's nominated, he probably can win the election -- after all, he appeals to a large part of the democrat party.
My point is that the Dems hold their ranks in presidential elections. They always have. Republicans run-off in all directions over lack of purity (it goes all the way back before Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose temper tantrum saddled America with Woodrow Wilson).
It looks like it is going to happen again in `08. Rather than getting 60%, 70% or 80% of what they want, the purists want 100% or they'll split-off enough of the vote to elect the Dem, thereby assuring they get 0% but will have "taught the party a lesson!"
You can be pro-choice and anti-abortion, if you are illogical.
Why would you be against abortion, if you don't think it's killing a baby? What possible argument could you have to be against a woman doing what she wanted to with parts of her own body?
But if you think abortion is the killing of a baby, and therefore oppose it, how could you possibly be for allowing women to kill babies? It's one thing to be pro-choice on something like cigarettes, where you are just letting people kill themselves if they want.
But nowhere else does personal liberty allow someone to hurt someone else, much less kill them.
Being pro-choice and pro-abortion at least is consistant, but calls into question one's ability to understand what life is. I would not trust a person who was pro-abortion NOT to end up being for euthanasia or even killing babies right after they were born, or terminating brain-damaged people.
I don't know enough about Thompson's views to know if he'd be a reasonable choice. He may have the same problem Hunter has regarding leadership as well -- I don't know how much Thompson has done in his life that shows real leadership, but I would hope if he gets in someone would give us that information.
I don't think that's the case. I'm pretty sure Tancredo could not win the nomination. IN addition, if we pick a candidate who has no executive or leadership experience, and the democrats get smart and pick someone like Al Gore who has years of executive experience, we'll be hard-pressed to win that battle with the middle of the electorate, even if we've picked a strong conservative.
I was going to say that, if it wasn't for Global Warming, Al Gore might be more conservative than Gulliani -- except I'm not sure what Gulliani's position is on Global Warming :-)
It's farther left than Gore's
That's not pro-abortion, that's making a difficult choice as to which of two patients to save -- or maybe not even a choice, as the unborn child may have no chance without the mother anyway.
If you have two dying patients who need a heart, and there's one heart available, you make a choice and one lives and the other dies. That doesn't mean we are pro-killing people with heart trouble.
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.