Posted on 03/27/2007 6:32:11 AM PDT by pissant
Play along with me this morning. Would you vote for the following candidate? This person supports parental notification laws and a ban on partial birth abortion; is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and believes mariage is between a man and a woman. Don't look any further. In your mind, does this candidate seem attractive? Yes or No?
Guess what. That's how Rudy Giuliani describes himself. If you go to his website, that's how he lays out his positions on three very sensitive topics. What about this bleeding heart socially liberal Republican. As you might imagine, it is nowhere to be found on his website. The Brody File has pulled the three parapgraphs from his website that lay out his position on abortion, guns and marriage.
Abortion:
"Rudy Giuliani supports reasonable restrictions on abortion such as parental notification with a judicial bypass and a ban on partial birth abortion – except when the life of the mother is at stake. He’s proud that adoptions increased 66% while abortions decreased over 16% in New York City when he was Mayor. But Rudy understands that this is a deeply personal moral dilemma, and people of good conscience can disagree respectfully. Ultimately he believes that it is a decision between a woman, her doctor, her family, and her God."
Guns:
"Rudy Giuliani is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. When he was Mayor of a city suffering an average of almost 2000 murders a year, he protected people by getting illegal handguns out of the hands of criminals. As a result, shootings fell by 72% and the murder rate was cut by two-thirds. But Rudy understands that what works in New York doesn’t necessarily work in Mississippi or Montana."
Marriage:
"Rudy Giuliani believes marriage is between a man and a woman. He does not - and has never - supported gay marriage. But he believes in equal rights under law for all Americans. That's why he supports domestic partnerships that provide stability for committed partners in important legal and personal matters, while preserving the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman."
If you were an Evangelical who just stepped onto this Earth from Planet Pluto (oh wait,sorry, Pluto is no longer a Planet. I thought scientists were "always" right?), after reading that, you may not understand why a large segment of Evangelicals may have a problem with Rudy. But the religious conservatives who live here on Earth might think those paragraphs on his website are just a tad bit disengenous. Actually, now that I think of it, I'm sure others have a much different word for it. Does the way he portrays himself on his website bother you or do you just chalk it up to political spin just like every other candidate out there? Comments?
I don't think Rudy is a fraud, I think he supporters are in the same state of mind as folks who voted for Arnold. Just get an R in their at all costs...
Ya voting Democrat then?
BTW, a non vote IS a vote for the Democrats.
His campaign is actually stupid enough to post this nonsense? Do they not realize we have full access to all his past quotes and videos? LOL! No wonder he dropped 13 percentage points this week -- the word is getting out!
Oh, we will all vote. We just won't be voting for Rudy Giuliani!
you prefer hillary?
Then why, Rudy, did you support Clinton's veto of a PBA ban that provided for exceptions when the life of the mother was at stake? Your past belies your present claims.
He’s proud that adoptions increased 66% while abortions decreased over 16% in New York City when he was Mayor.
Except that abortions nationwide dropped by roughly 28 percent. Which means under his leadership, abortion in NYC lagged well behind the national average. Rudy takes credit for reducing crime at a rate above the national decline during his tenure. He therefore should take blame for abortions in NYC lagging the national decline - but he won't.
When he was Mayor of a city suffering an average of almost 2000 murders a year, he protected people by getting illegal handguns out of the hands of criminals.
If only he stopped there. But he didn't. He also took guns away from long-time law-abiding permit holders. Supported and helped initial federal gun control laws. Gave liberal gun-grabbing efforts bipartisan legitimacy by appearing at Brady Center rallies. And sued gun manufacturers.
As a result, shootings fell by 72% and the murder rate was cut by two-thirds. But Rudy understands that what works in New York doesn’t necessarily work in Mississippi or Montana."
We don't need a president who thinks the Bill of Rights varies from state to state.
That's the same line of thinking that put the democRATs firmly behind John Kerry in 04, "electability."
The standard retort for Rudy boosters when the facts are against them.
You can't win by running against someone. You have to win by being FOR something - such as conservartive values.
Old tired argument. Your man must first win the nomination, and he just dropped 13 percentage points this week. By the time the primary election season is here, he will be out of the running, and replaced by a true conservative. Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter will get my vote.
Exactly. And they also failed to think through the impact of Kerry's past on the general election - just as the Rudy boosters are doing. Rudy's past will sink him if he wins the nomination.
I am not voting for Rudy or McCain. If the RNC wants my vote, they will put somebody in their who warrants it. As the last 6+ years have shown us, it is much easier for Republicans to oppose a Democrat president's agenda than it is to support a not-so-conservative Republican's. I won't vote for a Democrat, just leave the top spot blank. Hopefully it doesn't come to this, but if it does, and 50 million Republicans vote, but Rudy only gets 49 million votes and loses, then they might finally get the picture.
Unfortunately for the republicans, conservatives aren't sheep.
"For all you Rudy haters out there - What if he gets the nomination?
If a democrat is elected, we get a liberal who the congressional GOP will fight. If Julie-Annie is elected, we get a liberal who the congressional GOP will hold their nose and fully support. Which is worse? I see no winners.
Lets just hope he gets trounced in the primaries.
Unfortunately for conservatives, not all republicans are evangelicals.
I don't see any reason why we can't burn that bridge when we come to it. He hasn't got the nomination, and until he does, I'm going to support the most electable conservative out there. And no one believes that's Rudy.
Rudy is a liar and a scumbag. He's less honest than Clinton, although would make a slightly (by about 1/10th of a percent) president.
Rudy is NOT to be trusted in any way! His supporters are just as bad, maybe even worse, because they can crank up the rhetoric without the media watching.
You asked the wrong question. The correct question is:
Would you vote for this person or Hillary Clinton?
Check out how Ronnie Reagan's social positions evolved over time, particularly since his time as CA governor. GHWB was once pro-choice but had a serious change of heart and became pro-life. It happens.
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.