I’ll defend it - he has made his point known for many many years.
I repeat.
CHOICE has nothing to do with the Presidency.
It is a false negative - and a litmus test with no relevance to being POTUS.
Except the president appoints judges, and that impacts constitutional decisions.
You really should find a way to harness your spin to produce energy. You probably could make a small fortune.
Quite incorrect. Actually, a President's stance on abortion would potentially impact a number of things, such as any bills coming from Congress having to do with abortion funding, providing abortions at federal institutions such as military bases, foreign aid funding, and certainly not least, choice in judicial nominees at all levels.
Then stop claiming he is a fiscal conservative! That is a lie! No fiscal conservative is for gov’t funding of this sort.
How dishonest of you! Folks have posted the many ways that the President can influence the abortion issue, but you choose to continue making this false assertion as if you’ve found some easy way to lie Rudy into office.
I tend to agree that it’s not an issue that will ever be decided by a president.
However- it is a question that nominees or candidates will always be asked about.. and I disagree that it’s a false litmus test. How this questioned is answered will tell us much about a candidate’s understanding of the law as it currently stands- and his opinion of the law.
Today Rudy was asked- he answered. I expect he will not be happy with the response.
“a litmus test with no relevance to being POTUS.”
Fine. Let’s concentrate on the other issues Real conservatives care about.
2nd Amend.
Gay marriage
illegal immigration
Shall I continue or would you and Rudy like to continue.
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?...
Wrong Jake, it has every thing to do with being potus, it goes to character, anyone who advocates killling a child is not viable conservative, or human for that matter, candidate for POTUS. This man says it is ok to kill babies and that we should pay for it! This isn't strictly about choice, he is saying tax payers should pay for every slut that wants to use abortion for birth control. He says it is a constitutional right, therefore we should pay for it. How about buying me a new .45 colt, the new minature, it is my right to keep and bear arms so how about you taxpayers coming up with the bucks for my new firearms? Rudy is dead wrong on this and if you can support it you are truly brain dead.
His knowledge (or rather lack thereof) has plenty of relevance to being President.
You did not finish your sentence. Choice with regard to what? If you are referring to abortion, you are using leftist PC language invented by the abortion industry.
It is a false negative - and a litmus test with no relevance to being POTUS.
I disagree: decisions regarding sign/veto of partial birth or other abortion restrictions, SCOTUS appointments, HHS secretary appointment, bully pulpit and POTUS’ political capital.
You are whistling past the grave yard my friend.
That statement just cost Rudy the presidency.
He will either split the ticket if he gets the nomination, (3rd party candidate) eventually losing to the demoncrats. or not get the nomination period.