Posted on 03/06/2007 10:53:23 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Edited on 03/06/2007 11:02:15 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
LOL. I was sort of wondering the same thing. Gosh - we'll have to alert the media. Rudy is now an abortionist. Who knew?
The Rudy campaign already has FR retreads. That alone should tell them they are going in the wrong direction.
If he gets the nomination:
310 First Street, SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
As you post on one. I guess irony is lost on the Rudy boosters.
As has been pointed out previously, it is preposterous to imagine that a president would appoint supreme court justices who would protect the people from his own views.
Exactly. And either liberal will appoint more liberals to the SC if given the opportunity.
I don't understand why everybody thinks it's a wonderful idea if Giuliani commits to appointments like Bush's. Scalia and Thomas have not wavered and I can see wanting more like them, but until a lot more time has passed, we won't know much more than we knew about Bush's appointments prior to confirmation, although I remain hopeful.
You are correct about the kind of judges Rudy would appoint, if history has anything to do with it....
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0207/2957.html
Giuliani Judges Lean Left
By: Ben Smith
March 3, 2007 12:23 AM EST
When Rudy Giuliani faces Republicans concerned about his support of gay rights and legal abortion, he reassures them that he is a conservative on the decisions that matter most.
"I would want judges who are strict constructionists because I am," he told South Carolina Republicans last month. "Those are the kinds of justices I would appoint -- Scalia, Alito and Roberts."
But most of Giuliani's judicial appointments during his eight years as mayor of New York were hardly in the model of Chief Justice John Roberts or Samuel Alito -- much less aggressive conservatives in the mold of Antonin Scalia.
A Politico review of the 75 judges Giuliani appointed to three of New York state's lower courts found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans by more than 8 to 1. One of his appointments was an officer of the International Association of Lesbian and Gay Judges. Another ruled that the state law banning liquor sales on Sundays was unconstitutional because it was insufficiently secular.
A third, an abortion-rights supporter, later made it to the federal bench in part because New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a liberal Democrat, said he liked her ideology.
Cumulatively, Giuilani's record was enough to win applause from people like Kelli Conlin, the head of NARAL Pro-Choice New York, the state's leading abortion-rights group. "They were decent, moderate people," she said.
"I don't think he was looking for someone who was particularly conservative," added Barry Kamins, a Democrat who chaired the panel of the Bar Association of the City of New York, which reviewed Giuliani's appointments. "He picked a variety from both sides of the spectrum. They were qualified, even-tempered, academically strong."
That is the kind of praise that will amount to damnation (not necessarily faint) among some of the people Giuliani will be trying to impress in Washington on Friday, when he addresses the Conservative Political Action Conference. The group is filled with social conservatives, for whom the effort to recast the ideological orientation of the federal judiciary has been a generation-long project. Giuliani already faced a high threshold of skepticism from many of these activists because of his comparatively liberal record on such hot-button issues as abortion rights, tolerance of gays and gun control.
Giuliani's judicial appointments continue to win good reviews in New York legal circles for being what conservatives sometimes say they want: competent lawyers selected with no regard to "litmus tests" on hot-button social issues. Many of these people were in the mode of Giuliani himself: tough-on-crime former prosecutors with reformist streaks and muted ideologies.
"He took it very seriously -- he spent a lot of time with these candidates," recalled Paul Curran, a Republican and former U.S. attorney who chaired Giuliani's Commission on Judicial Nominations. "He was looking for judges who were willing to enforce the laws."
The mayor of New York appoints judges to three of the state's lowest courts, the Criminal Court and Family Court, which deal with lower-grade crimes than the state's Supreme Court, the main trial court and the Civil Court, which deals in relatively small financial disputes.
For More Info Visit Our Candidates Page
When Giuliani took office in 1994, he inherited a system of judicial appointments created by one of his predecessors, Ed Koch, and designed to insulate the courts from political influence. Under the system, the mayor appoints members of an independent panel. Aspiring judges apply to the panel, which recommends three candidates for each vacancy. The mayor chooses among the three.
Giuliani, a former U.S. attorney, and top aides who remain close to him, Dennison Young and Michael Hess, reviewed the applications.
Giuliani cast himself in New York not as a conservative (he had actually run on the Liberal Party line) but as a reformer. Though at least 50 of his 75 appointees were registered Democrats (only six were registered Republicans), Giuliani also won praise for, some say, appointing fewer judges with ties to local Democratic politics than his predecessors.
"It was not people coming out of the clubhouses, which is what I'd seen earlier," said Charles Moerdler, a member of the Commission on Judicial Nominations who had served other mayors in the same capacity. "I did not support Rudy (the first time he ran) because he was too conservative for me, so I was very alert to that, but I didn't see any litmus tests on his part," he said.
Giuliani's judges serve across New York's courts, where they're more likely to encounter misdemeanant celebrities -- Boy George and Naomi Campbell have appeared recently in front of his appointees -- than they are to tangle with the Establishment Clause. Some, like a Family Court judge who ruled that an unmarried couple couldn't adopt, would please national conservatives. But many of their occasional forays into jurisprudence would likely make Scalia wince.
Charles Posner, a Brooklyn judge appointed by Giuliani, made the kind of decision that keeps conservatives up nights when he was asked to levy a fine against a shopkeeper, Abdulsam Yafee, who had illegally sold beer at 3:30 a.m. on a Sunday. In an unusual, lengthy 2004 ruling, Posner found that "there is no secular reason why beer cannot be sold on Sunday morning as opposed to any other morning."
Noting that Sunday is only the Christian Sabbath, Posner continued, "Other than this entanglement with religion, there is no rational basis for mandating Sunday as a day of rest as opposed to any other day."
Giuliani was out of office at the time of the decision and, in any case, had no say over his appointees' rulings. His spokeswoman, Maria Comella, declined to comment on the difference between the judges he appointed and those he promises to appoint.
Another Giuliani appointee reached a socially conservative verdict by a means that might not please strict constructionists. Judge Michael Sonberg denied a motion by two Bronx strip-club owners to dismiss prostitution charges against them that were based on dancers' offering "lap dances" to an undercover officer.
Sonberg ruled that the changing "cultural and sexual practices" of the previous two decades permitted him to alter the definition of prostitution.
"Statutory construction cannot remain static while entrepreneurial creativity brings forth heretofore unimagined sexual 'diversions,' " he wrote in a ruling that would have pleased social conservatives while, perhaps, alarming strict constructionists and strippers alike.
More troubling to some of the social conservatives Giuliani is courting, however, would have been Sonberg's other affiliation: When he was appointed in 1995, he was already an officer of the International Association of Lesbian and Gay Judges, a professional group. After his appointment, he became the group's president.
Laboring in the state's lower courts, few of Giuliani's other appointees show signs of ideological leanings. Two, however, were appointed to federal district courts -- one of them, Richard Berman, by President Bill Clinton. The other, Dora Irizarry, was a Bush nominee considered so liberal that Schumer pushed her nomination through.
Irizarry, appointed by Giuliani to the Bronx Criminal Court in 1996, had disclosed that she considers herself "pro-choice" during her 2002 campaign for New York state attorney general. Her appointment to the federal bench was almost derailed when the American Bar Association ruled her "not qualified" on the grounds that as a state judge, she had been "gratuitously rude and abrasive" and "flew off the handle in a rage."
But to Schumer, who led the fight against Bush's appellate judges, Irizarry was a Republican he could live with.
"Temperament is not at the top of my list," Schumer explained at the time, when asked why he supported the former Giuliani appointee. "Ideology is key."
You Rudy hater! Don't you know that Rudy is the only one who can win?
More like strict abortionist...
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping lists.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
It should be obvious that were Rudy to be elected president that all we should expect from him is to appoint judges who share his leftist views on homosexuality, abortion, embryonic stem cell research, gun grabbing, etc.
*************
I think you've missed the point. If we don't want judges who are likely to be pro-abortion, anti-second amendment, pro-homosexual marriage, and pro-open borders, we don't want Giuliani as the Republican nominee.
As much as you people want to waste time attempting to make this an issue about Reagan, this is not about Reagan. This is ALL about the liberal NewYawker, Rudy Giuliani and his efforts to hoodwink people into thinking he's something that he is not. Rudy is NO conservative. While not perfect, Reagan was a great leader who advanced the conservative agenda more then anyone since Calvin Coolidge. Most folks on the rightwing thought Reagan gave them 75%-85% of what they expected from a conservative Republican President. With Giuliani, conservatives see Rudy`s mostly liberal policy agenda equating to 20%-25% maximum acceptability.
Did someone just figure this out?
If that's the case, I fear for our country.
You mean *Good-bye newbie*.
Bump!
..and it would certainly shift the GOP much further left.. and real conservatives can't go there..
Conservatives DO NOT support big government.
Conservatives support limited government.
Rudy supports big government liberalism.
Conservatives DO NOT support gun control.
Rudy supports gun control.
Conservatives DO NOT support an assault weapons ban.
Rudy supports an assault weapons ban.
Conservatives DO NOT support abortion on demand.
Rudy supports abortion on demand.
Conservatives DO NOT oppose a ban on partial birth abortion.
Rudy opposes a ban on partial birth abortion.
Conservatives DO NOT support special rights for homos.
Rudy supports special rights for homos.
Conservatives DO NOT support amnesty for illegals.
Rudy supports amnesty for illegals.
Conservatives DO NOT support the notion that humans are a significant cause of global warming.
Rudy supports the notion that humans are a significant cause of global warming.
Conservatives DO NOT support Campaign Finance Reform, AKA. McCain-Feingold.
Rudy supports Campaign Finance Reform, AKA. McCain-Feingold.
Thanks, another keeper!
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.