Posted on 04/06/2007 10:20:13 AM PDT by Kuksool
When Rudolph Giuliani announced his entry into the race for president, we noted that there were reasons to find his candidacy both compelling and problematic. In the latter category fell, above all, his denial that unborn children have a right to life. Even on that issue, however, we held out hope that Giuliani would try to meet pro-life conservatives halfway. He had already come around on partial-birth abortion, even if he had not come up with a good explanation for his shift. He had said that he favors “strict constructionist” judges, who attempt to determine what the law is rather than to make it what they think it should be. We hoped that he would go further: for example, by joining President Bush in declaring Roe v. Wade a bad decision as a matter of constitutional law, or even by joining Sen. John McCain in calling for its overturning.
Instead, we are sorry to say, he has mostly gone into reverse. Since his announcement, he has said that, in his mind, a strict constructionist judge could as easily rule to keep Roe as to scrap it. He has continued to misrepresent pro-lifers as seeking to throw pregnant women “in jail.” He has refused to rule out signing federal legislation codifying Roe should it be presented to him as president. And, most troublingly, has reiterated his longstanding support for taxpayer funding for abortion.
This is not a moderate position. We are already almost alone in the developed world in having such liberal abortion laws: Thanks to some of the little-known implications of Roe, abortion is legal at any stage of pregnancy for essentially any reason. Giuliani favors, in principle, making that regime more liberal still. Economist Michael New has studied the effect of various policies on abortion rates and concluded that nothing has reduced them more than cutoffs in public funding. We can therefore assume that an America with Giuliani’s favored policies would be a country with more abortion—probably reversing the 15-year trend of decline, including the decline in New York City for which he takes dubious credit.
The last Republican president to favor legal abortion was the late Gerald Ford, and even he did not support taxpayer funding. Every Republican president and presidential nominee since then has favored legal protection for unborn life. Neither morality nor opinion polls suggest any reason to do a 180-degree turn now. Support for taxpayer funding of abortion is a minority position. Seventeen states provide taxpayer funding for abortion, all but four of them under judicial compulsion.
The mayor’s rationale for abortion funding is bizarre. Putting his statements together and reading them as charitably as possible, his argument is that so long as the Supreme Court says abortion is a constitutional right state governments have an obligation to help poor women afford it.
Note that governments have no such legal obligation: The Supreme Court, in a series of cases from 1977, ruled that they do not. So Giuliani must (we again assume charitably) be positing some kind of moral obligation to carry out the Supreme Court’s work beyond its writ. Combine this view with Giuliani’s other constitutional musings, and the results get stranger still. Giuliani has said in the past that people should have to show good character and get federal licenses before buying guns. Now he says, without repudiating those past statements, that the courts should read the Second Amendment to protect an individual right to own guns. So should states spend money to let poor people pack heat? Or will women need to show good character and get federal licenses before they have abortions?
Mayor Giuliani has tied himself in knots. His position makes neither logical, moral, nor political sense. Many conservatives are disappointed, and hope that their disappointment is not going to grow as the campaign wears on.
would be a good tagline.
For your rudy ping list!
I wonder why the folks at National Review have taken such a strong position on this right now.
The most level headed of ALL conservatives knew from the beginning that Rudy was the wrong man to become the next GOP nominee. His support has fallen in the last month and for good reason. In the coming months conservatives will get a clearer picture of Giuliani's liberalism, and his support will continue to drop off.
My position on abortion is exactly the same as it has always been, I don’t see my position on that changing.
Rudy Giuliani
New York Times, November 30, 1999
* * *
“As a Republican, it made more sense for me to be pro-choice. I think Republicans more often want people to make choices about their own lives,” and he advocated government intrusion “only to the extent necessary.”
The former mayor told the student audience: “I think some people will come to the moral choice about abortion that it is sinful or wrong. But ultimately I think it is the woman’s right and the choice she has to make.”
And: “Seven out of 10 Americans are pro-life and pro-choice. They would prefer that somebody didn’t have an abortion. They might even prefer that somebody didn’t have an abortion. They might even prefer themselves not to have an abortion. They say as far as government is concerned, it shouldn’t interfere with abortion or shouldn’t criminalize it.”
In other words, not as originally described. Mr. Giuliani’s remarks were basically what he’s been saying for years.
New York Times, November 14, 2005
(Emphasis Added)
* * *
After clarifying his clarifications, Rudy Giuliani has finally decided he’s in favor of legal abortion, a decision that will be viewed as either sensible, sad, cynical or opportunistic…. Is no one concerned about parental consent, allowing 13-year-old girls to have abortions without even telling their parents? Is no one concerned about millions of taxpayer dollars being used to fund abortions?
Is no voter concerned that the American birth rate has fallen, that we are not even reproducing ourselves because 25 million Americans have been destroyed in the womb since 1973, when abortion was made legal?
For these voters, Rudy Giuliani once seemed to offer an alternative to the full-speed-ahead Democrats, but now that hope has vanished. Rudy has joined the crowd, so there’s no debate on the greatest issue of the day, and that makes all of us losers. It may yet make Rudy a loser, too. Why change for more of the same?
Ray Kerrison, Columnist
New York Post, August 9, 1987
* * *
He is a bright and talented manager. But he’s also a skillful compromiser and some principles simply cannot be negotiated away….he parts company on an issue about which there can be no compromise, no negotiation. Rudolph Giuliani not only supports the right to choose an abortion, he also supports the right to perform partial birth abortion. He would defend the right to slaughter a fully-formed and healthy nine month old pre-born on the day it’s being born.
“Rudy’s Smoke Screen,” Msgr. James Lisante
The Long Island Catholic, November 24, 1999
Just look at Giuliani's recent muddled, disingenuous statements on this issue, and compare them to the forceful and assertive -- but radical, hard-core, pro-abortion -- statements he's made in the past.
Does anyone here really doubt where Giuliani stands on this issue?
Perhaps because of all the statements Rudy has made this week, especially the one about tax payer funded abortion....
Maybe. But NR never really struck me as having a solid pro-life slant in the past.
But they may have a moral one, as abortion IS legal at this point.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
A few are still putting up a fight. Most seem to have retreated to Wideawakes where everything is Perfectville (read the threads only if you have a fully-functioning pancreas).
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Looks like they got together on their little forum and decided to put up a fight on this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1813211/posts
As usual, they ain’t very good at debating and defending. Just spinning.
I cannot remember being briefed on my mobster friend Bernie....
Mr. Giuliani’s recent comments have shaken things up here at Free Republic, that is certain. He indeed has shaken me up.
But, I am waiting to hear how this plays out in the real world of national Republican politics.
Of course this brings a question to mind. When the polls turn south on Mr. Giuliani...will all of you who put NO stock in the polls that showed Mr. Giuliani in the lead, will you then concede that the polls had been an accurate reflection of Republican opinion?
Rudeo is getting LOTS of help from his nauseating wife. Ever since Rudeo brought Judi into the campaign spotlight, whenever she opens her mouth, Rudy's poll numbers go into freefall.
Judi's trail of deceit never ends: public adultery, serial marriages, "forgetting" her first husband, puppy stapling, and the 20/20 debacle (intended to elevate Judi into the Cabinet).
Here's the tally to date:
USA Today/Gallup March 23-25 poll shows Rudy Giuliani with 31% of the vote, down from 44% March 2-4. Similar results come from April 4 Rasmussen poll. Giuliani still leads with 26%, down from 35% percent from March 27 poll. Thompson has replaced Giuliani in first place in the 10th week of the Pajamas Media online straw poll. (SOURCE FR Thread--Barone: The Changing Republican Race.)
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that Giuliani’s lead over Hillary has disappeared. Last month, Giuliani had an eight point lead over Clinton. The month before, it was nine points. Giuliani had been ahead of Clinton in five straight monthly polls dating back to December.
Two other polls released this week show the same slippage for Giuliani. He lost his lead over Sen Barack Obama and also lost nine percentage points of support in the race for the GOP Nomination. This latest survey finds that Giuliani’s favorability ratings have also slipped.
At this point polls are an indication of name recognition. They always are when starting anew. As polls move forward in time, they tend to reflect people starting to know what the candidates stand for.
Do you have links to that poll data? areafiftyone might want to look.
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.