David Scull/The New York Times
Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, left, at a 1995 news
conference with Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat
of New York, and James S. Brady, who was shot in the
assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.
Posted on 03/23/2007 4:01:10 AM PDT by Pharmboy
David Scull/The New York Times
Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, left, at a 1995 news
conference with Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat
of New York, and James S. Brady, who was shot in the
assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.
As mayor of New York City, Rudolph W. Giuliani became the favorite Republican of gun control advocates.
He spoke in favor of a licensing system for gun owners that would require trigger locks and firearms training, and he lobbied Congress to outlaw most military-style assault weapons. He was the only Republican mayor to join a lawsuit by dozens of cities against the gun industry, and he complained that Southern states had lax gun laws that fed the illegal weapons trade in the Northeast.
“It was very important to have a visible Republican to make the case that this wasn’t some liberal Democratic agenda,” said Paul Helmke, a former Republican mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind., and the president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. “I was at the signing ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House when Bill Clinton signed the crime bill with the assault weapons ban, and Giuliani had the most prominent seat in the front row.”
But as a presidential candidate, Mr. Giuliani now talks very differently about guns as he tries to allay the concerns of Republican primary voters. He says he supports the right of individuals to bear arms, and that states — and generally not the federal government — should decide whether to put some limits on that right. He also spoke in favor of a federal appeals court ruling this month that struck down a District of Columbia ordinance barring people from keeping handguns in their homes.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Translation: "I know Rudy's a rabid gun-banner but I've already decided to ignore all that, and I'm glad that the wool is still pulled over the majority of the sheep's eyes".
Sorry, Peach, but if Giuliani is the best the GOP has to offer, "conservatism" is no longer practiced by the Republican party, and our nation is in deep, deep trouble.
Good find, Pharmboy.
" ...and that states — and generally not the federal government — should decide whether to put some limits on that right."
This is a key phrase here. It not only defines his stance on the second amendment, but also on Roe v. Wade.
I think all of this publicity, both positive and negative, is doing Rudy good.
Good news, like poll results, reinforce his image among those who are sitting on the fence about him.
The bad news, the skeletons, the distasteful stuff, are being gotten out of the way now. It will be old news by the time the primaries roll around. I'm for dredging it all up - and the sooner the better. Let's find out now for whom we are voting - or for whom we are NOT voting - in the primaries.
Yeah, well, that goes to my point, while Donna was playing in plays, Rudy was marching around in parades with NAMBLA. It's kind of hard to find a high moral ground for either of them, so why just call her a nut when you don't have any real proof of it? Rudy is without a doubt a social liberal, so I doubt that he cared if Donna was in the play. As far as their estrangement, maybe they both just got on each other's nerves. I don't think it really makes a difference. I don't care that Rudy has been married 3 times. The only thing I care about is the pattern of how he acts between estrangement and actual divorce.
So IF Rudy became President and he found out Judith was a nut and he escorted his mistress in public all over creation and wanted to move her into the White House before he was divorced from Judith, that would be just fine and dandy with you?
He's not getting my vote, that's for sure.
Rudy tried to make a right turn on a left-moving train. Brakes failed....snicker.
This is one of those issues that basically disqualifies this moron from ever serving in the White House.
I do not for one second believe RINO Rudy has had an epiphany regarding the second amendment. In no way will I ever cast a vote for him.
BTW, when is Sean going to change the name of his radio program to The Giuliani Show?
Maybe he should change his show to RINO Radio.
There is nothing in his track record to support the notion that this is actually what Rudy Giuliani believes.
In fact, his track record is littered with evidence that that he absolutely does NOT believe this. I would cite his incessant calls for draconian Federal gun control laws (see the freakin' photo at the top of the thread!) as Exhibit A in this regard.
"Oh please, don't let those dumb Christian conservatives notice I changed my
position....again.(That is to say I conned them into thinking I changed.....I think.)"
He talks the talk.
Does he walk the walk?
Rudy Giuliani would have to spend the next 10 years, working tirelessly and feverishly to reverse/repeal subversive, unconstitutional gun-control laws & regulations, before I could even begin to trust him.
In his spare time, he could also work to educate the ignorant media about firearms.
Your point is well taken, but the fact is that people change. He is no longer running for Mayor of New York City, with it's own unique problems. And it is a post-9/11 world - and if that event didn't change people, I don't know what did.
He ran for Mayor as a law and order candidate, gun control was to be expected. Show me a Mayor of any large city who is not in favor of gun control - and here you can embarrass me, because I haven't done any research.
Despite his personal feelings on these matters, I see no indication in any of his remarks that he would appoint judges that would deny the rights granted by the Second Amendment - quite the opposite.
This is why I can't vote for Rudy. He's either too stupid to read, or too dishonest to admit he's wrong.
I also know New York City well enough to understand that people who are "politically acceptable" here should be given as little political power as possible over the real United States of America. I would cite jack@sses like Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Charles Rangel, etc. as perfect examples of why this is the case.
He ran for Mayor as a law and order candidate, gun control was to be expected. Show me a Mayor of any large city who is not in favor of gun control - and here you can embarrass me, because I haven't done any research.
And that's EXACTLY why I would suggest that a big-city mayor -- by definition -- should never be allowed to serve in the White House.
Despite his personal feelings on these matters, I see no indication in any of his remarks that he would appoint judges that would deny the rights granted by the Second Amendment - quite the opposite.
Your problem is that you see "his remarks" as the most important indicator of where he stands. I see them as nothing more than shameless political pandering in a desperate attempt to hide the incontrovertible fact that he's been a liberal -- even a far-left radical -- on way too many issues in the past.
"His remarks" don't mean sh!t to me.
Fixed it for you Peach.
The Second Amendment doesn't grant rights, it protects rights that are God-given, according to the document itself.
As for your comment, he says he appointed such judges in NYC - just look at his appointment record to determine whether his actual appointments there were strict constructionists.
Indeed, just what rights does he think the Second Amendment protects, anyway? He said Congress has to enact "reasonable regulations" that are "consistent with the Second Amendment." But the Second Amendment enumerates a right of the people, which shall not be infringed. NO other Amendment has this language! So apparently he thinks its about duck hunting, or something. And since you can't hunt ducks in NYC, apparently he thought it was ok to deny the right completely, let alone infringe it just a little bit.
Anyhow, I would never even remotely entertain the idea of voting for him, so I hope he is not the nominee.
There is plenty to bash Rudy about without making personal attacks on his fans. I think your comment was out of line.
Sean fawns over any popular politician who will come on his show and make him look important. Even democrats.
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.