It's not a choice, it's a child.
Isn’t that like saying “I’m opposed to murder but if others choose it who am I to try to stop it?”
“but the Feds should pay for it”
- Rudy
that is a far cry from his previous “it’s a constitutional right” stance. Saying it is up to the states means Roe v. Wade being overturned. Is that what he really means?
It’s a civil rights issue. Therefore, it is a federal matter
If RINO Rudy believes the issue is up to the states, why did he just state to CNN two days ago that he didn’t feel obligated to nominate judges to the Supreme Court willing to overturn Roe?
Giuliani "hates" abortion so much that he has been quoted as saying that he would pay to have his own grandchild aborted.
He's using Clintonesque parsing of language to try to appeal to the pro-life Republican Party (see the platform) while not revealing his true pro-abortion position. It is clearly deception and lies.
The Artful Dodger.
It’s too late for me, Rudy.
The most shocking sound byte I’ve heard these past few days has been Rudy’s rather firm assertion that welfare types DESERVE free abortions...that it is their constitutional right.
Now perhaps he didn’t mean it quite as outrageous as it sounded to my ears or hey, sure, we understand Rudy that you’d rather NOT have abortion at all.
Besides the abortion clinics, I daresay most of us feel as if NO unwanted pregnancy was preferable to abortion.
But the way he said that...”Let me make it clear that those of limited means are entitled to a “choice” as well as those with more means....” I paraphrase but I’m close.
HOW ABOUT WE GIVE THEM FREE BIRTH CONTROL AND LET THEM FUND THEIR OWN ABORTIONS, RUDY?
You gonna make taxpayers pay for a procedure that kills unborn babies? But of course! An abortion is every American female’s constitutional right!
What he said, how he said it, how revolted I was by the whole concept.....go with me....Rudy’s OFF my list.
Maybe the loss of my vote and others thinking like me will be offset by all the votes he gets from welfare moms looking for free state paid abortions. It has to be why he said it....surely Rudy had to know he would turn off conservatives of even a mild pursuasion with those words.
Turn it over, Rudy....yer done.
The president doesn't have the power to change the Hyde amendment.
Here's the real question Giuliani should be asked:
"If you were president and a Democratic Congress passed a bill overturning the Hyde Amendment, would you veto it?"
This is the question that needs to be asked because Giuliani has never -- in all of his years in politics -- been able to muster up the strength to say these simple words: "I support the Hype Amendment."
He’s lying. He supports NARAL and Planned Paretnhood. NARAL and Planned Parenthood most certainly DO NOT want it left up to the states.
In addition, it was left up to the states prior to RvW. Rudy supports RvW as “constitutional” and “good law”.
Rudy will lie at anytime to support his incoherent leftists positions, while trying to paint himself as a conservative.
If abortion is a states right issue to him, then how is it really a constitutional guarantee worthy of federal funding that he only supports because it’s (abortion) a constitutional right? Seems like circular reasoning. Unless he means it’s a constitutional right now.
As Delivered
Thank you very much for inviting me to say a few words of welcome. This event shows that people of different political parties and different political thinking can unite in support of choice. In doing so, we are upholding a distinguished tradition that began in our city starting with the work of Margaret Sanger and the movement for reproductive freedom that began in the early decades of the 20th century.
As a Republican who supports a woman's right to choose, it is particularly an honor to be here. And I would like to explain, just for one moment, why I believe being in favor of choice is consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party. In fact, it might be more consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party. Because the Republican Party stands for the idea that you have to restore more freedom of choice, more opportunity, more opportunity for people to make their own choices rather than the government dictating those choices. Republicans stand for lower taxation because we believe that people can make better choices with their money than the government will make for them, and that ultimately frees the economy and produces more political freedom. We believe that, yes, government is important, but that the private sector is actually more important in solving our problems.
So it is consistent with that philosophy to believe that in the most personal and difficult choices that a woman has to make with regard to a pregnancy, those choices should be made based on that person's conscience and that person's way of thinking and feeling. The government shouldn't dictate that choice by making it a crime or making it illegal.
I think that's actually a much more consistent position. Many Republicans support that position, but you don't hear that as often. For example, in a recent poll by American Viewpoint, 65 percent of Republicans supported changing the plank in the Republican platform that calls for a constitutional ban on abortion. That's 6.5 out of every 10 Republicans. And over 80 percent of Republicans believe that the decision with regard to an abortion should be made by a woman, her doctor, and her family rather than dictated by the government.
[Applause]
In any case, I just wanted you to know that many of my fellow Republicans stand with you on this issue. So I thank you, I thank NARAL for taking the lead in establishing freedom of choice for all of us, and as the Mayor of New York City, I thank you for being here in New York City.
# # #
http://www.nyc.gov/html/rwg/html/2001b/champlunch.html
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
This article sounds an awful lot like damage control in that he’s trying to obscure the statements he made in his CNN interview.
I also sympathize with all the posters' strong feelings on this issue, however, for me, the main issues in the upcoming election are fiscal responsibility, lower taxes and the war on terror. Having just rendered unto Caesar, it makes me sick to know that the Democrats are trying to raise my taxes in every little way they can.
Latest data from my home city, Pittsburgh PA, shows we lost another 50,000 people since 2002. High taxes, entrenched Democratic administrations, all have contributed to this malaise. We'll all face higher taxes across the board if a Democrat takes the White House, therefore I will not do anything to contribute to the destruction of Rudy's campaign. He's the best crossover hope we have.
Now we find out what, according to St. Rudy, the meaning of 'strict constructionism' is:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/04/giuliani.interview/
Giuliani told Bash that "a strict constructionist judge can come to either conclusion about Roe against Wade. They can look at it and say, 'Wrongly decided. ... We will overturn it.' They can look at it and say, 'It has been the law for this period of time, therefore we are going to respect the precedent.'
In other words, just as "is" meant to Bill Clinton whatever it needed to mean, so does 'strict constructionism' mean to Rudy whatever he needs to to mean.
I'm sure the Rudy boosters will be falling over themselves to apologize to the skeptics.
Not.