Posted on 04/04/2007 12:52:50 PM PDT by KantianBurke
TALLAHASSEE, Florida (CNN) -- Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani told CNN Wednesday he supports public funding for some abortions, a position he advocated as mayor and one that will likely put the GOP presidential candidate at odds with social conservatives in his party.
"Ultimately, it's a constitutional right, and therefore if it's a constitutional right, ultimately, even if you do it on a state by state basis, you have to make sure people are protected," Giuliani said in an interview with CNN's Dana Bash in Florida's capital city.
A video clip of the then-mayoral candidate issuing a similar declaration in 1989 in a speech to the "Women's Coalition" appeared recently on the Internet.
"There must be public funding for abortions for poor women," Giuliani says in the speech that is posted on the video sharing site YouTube. "We cannot deny any woman the right to make her own decisions about abortion."
When asked directly Wednesday if he still supported the use of public funding for abortions, Giuliani said "Yes."
"If it would deprive someone of a constitutional right," he explained, "If that's the status of the law, yes."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
No, but he does use tax money and govm't power to violate that right.
If he was pandering, why is he not pandering here on the same abortion issue.
If everyone believes that partial birth abortion is barbaric and immoral then why not accept that as he thought about the issue he changed his mind.
Partial birth abortion frequently may involve a matter of the mother’s health and it is possible one goes back and forth on the issue depending on particular circumstances.
Rudy’s worse than a panderer. He’s a liar.
“The Supreme Court decides- not you or anyone else- what sort of behavior is contrary to the 2nd and every other Amendment.”
Really- not one single person in the US can decide what is unconstitutional other than 9 people on the supreme court? That kind of goes against everything the founding fathers intended. But whatever you have to do to defend rudy, right?
So let me understand - if tomorrow congress outlawed all free speech - you can’t run a tv station, newspaper, type a blog, put up a website - the only people who could say “Gee, that goes against the first amendment” are the 9 people on t he supreme court, right?
Not one of us here could say “that’s not constitutional”. Because we’re all not qualified to say that. Or allowed to. Or - gee, what is your rationalization for that position again?
“Did Giuliani act in any way that was ruled unconstitutional?”
On guns? No case that I know of went to court. On the first amendment? He lost numerous cases on first amendment grounds.
You have to remember what site you’re on - this isn’t a republican cheering section site. It’s a site dedicated to conservatism and the constitution - and the original intent of the constitution. On that, the original intent of the 2nd amendment is known. And everything rudy proposed is in direct opposition to their intent of the second amendment.
But I guess none of us here can say that. Are you going to say next we need to dig up thomas jefferson before we can get his real opinion on the 2nd amendment.
One question, Spiff. Do we still have Abortion as the law of the land, or not?
I rest my case.
One question, Spiff. Do we still have Abortion as the law of the land, or not?
I rest my case.
“There comes a time when you have to agree to disagree with someone. No need for us to exchange views - I agree to disagree.”
Nice way to get out of answering tough questions.
Should tell you something when the candidate you’re supporting is indefensible on many issues.
Except for the public funding going towards it, of course. That is something Bush, for example, could be counted on to veto.
Hey, Giuliani, while you're advocating OPM for constitutional rights, wanna buy me the Para Ordnance S14-45 I've been drooling over for a year? That's a right that's actually in the Constitution. What? What's that you say?...
Medicaid will be with us for a long long long time.
Totally irrelevant! The clown just said he was going to force folks that find the killing morally reprehensible to pay the bills for the hit. He's a slime ball. If he wants to fund the contract killings, he can do it with his own money.
He’s not a HYPOCRITE like the other candidates who were at one time pro-choice but switched, or changed their minds.
“One question, Spiff. Do we still have Abortion as the law of the land, or not?”
You mean roe v wade as law of the land on abortion? Yes, we do.
Until the next big abortion case to come before the supreme court.
Since rudy believes roe v wade is good constitutional law, and ‘pro choice’ is in the constitution, what kind of judges do you think he would appoint to decide the next big abortion case to come before the supreme court?
If you want to answer with the “he promised to appoint strict constructionist” defense, remember, according to rudy, roe v wade is a strict constructionist stance.
None of our opinions about the law, have the force of law. The opinion of SCOTUS does. Do you think a politician holding executive office should defy the law, by taking the position that the doctrine of judicial supremacy as to having the final say as to what words mean written into the law, enunciated in Madison v. Marbury, is a nullity, and his opinion about what the law means is the opinion that should count?
“Wondering what part of the Constitution Commandant Rudy is referring to? The tortured reasoning regarding ‘rights to privacy’ that was used, in part, to justify Roe v. Wade?”
Using Rudy’s logic, the government should have to buy GUNS for poor people who CHOOSE to want one.
Let me think really hard. Do we include lessor Courts?
The answer is YES.
You can have an opinion. But only the Court decides.
Although I can be persuaded that I get to decide. Which I will try on a next cop who stops me for a moving violation.
It is the same general issue, but PBA has a far more visceral place in the public consciousness. He flip-flopped on PBA because he would have been DOA as a Republican candidate if he didn't.
“He’s not a HYPOCRITE like the other candidates who were at one time pro-choice but switched, or changed their minds.”
No, he just tries to have it both ways like the democrats. The ones who will say “I’m personally against abortion” then speak in front of the abortion rights action league praising margaret (eugenics) sanger and fighting for public funding of abortion.
Notice a pattern with rudy? Claim he’s personally against abortion but acts like a pro-choice dem? Then says he’s pro 2nd amendment and has a record like he belongs to the brady bunch.
“......By the same argument Stalin is due applause for remaining true to his demonic tendencies to the bitter end.
Sick. Sick. Sick.....”
No, what is SICK is you trying to equate Rudy Giuliani to one of the worlds worst dictator’s. That is VERY SICK!
Maybe you’re right.
Which is why in the case of PBA, Giuliani has been persuaded to change his mind.
Are you faulting him for that?
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.