Posted on 05/07/2007 9:59:44 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Rudy Giuliani is supposed to be the candidate of authenticity, the tough-talking former New York City mayor who sticks to his beliefs no matter what. But he is repeating a line that is so flagrantly insincere, it makes any of Hillary Clinton's canned talking points seem free and natural by comparison.
Giuliani claims he "hates abortion." Oddly, this hatred didn't manifest itself until Giuliani realized he had to have something to say to pro-lifers besides that he supported abortion on demand in any circumstance.
Giuliani has been pounded by pundits for his answers on abortion at the first GOP debate. But he didn't commit a gaffe. He only suffered from the contradictions of a position that appears to be the product of poorly thought-out political calculation.
The Giuliani camp figured he couldn't abandon his pro-choice position when running for president. His political appeal is based on his strength, so he can't be seen as wavering on so fundamental an issue. Besides, he already had changed his position once before -- when first running for New York City mayor in 1989 -- from pro-life to pro-choice.
A funny thing happened, however, to Giuliani's strength of conviction on the way to the Republican primaries. He has moved right on the Second Amendment, on civil unions for gays and on partial-birth abortion. It seems that he is willing to bend on everything, except that which is most important to social conservatives -- the right to abortion itself.
Instead, he has crafted an exquisite muddle. He reaches out to anti-abortion Republicans by saying that he would appoint "strict constructionist" judges, widely construed as code for judges who would oppose Roe v. Wade. At the same time, Giuliani casts doubt on his own constitutional judgment by refusing to say that Roe is wrongly decided. Even liberal legal eminences like Lawrence Tribe and Cass Sunstein say Roe is constitutionally dubious, but Giuliani, the strict constructionist, won't go there.
He likes to say that the constitutionality of Roe is up to judges to decide. This is a transparent dodge. It also plays into one of the profoundest defects of our political culture, which is overly deferential office-holders allowing judges to occupy an outsized place in our public life.
Giuliani should abhor Roe since it tramples the constitutional virtue that he has been trumpeting lately, federalism. He explains his new tune on gun control by saying it should be up to states to decide their gun laws. But Roe prevents states from passing any meaningful restrictions on abortion.
Giuliani apparently thinks that saying he hates abortion is enough. But pro-lifers will want to know why he hates abortion. Because it's taken the lives of 48 million unborn babies since Roe? Giuliani's "hate" line rings so false because temperamentally he is not one to hate something without outlawing or attempting to discourage it.
So far what Rudy has most effectively communicated is his distaste for people who actually hate abortion. He says pro-lifers want to throw women in jail, the canard that pro-choicers always throw at them, and he has implied that pro-lifers hurt the GOP.
Giuliani can upgrade his position by pronouncing Roe a constitutional monstrosity. Is opposing Roe and being pro-choice too confusing? Giuliani can give everyone a basic lesson in self-government -- you can hold a position without insisting that the Supreme Court mandate it. He should vow to veto any expanded funding of abortion. And in keeping with his (supposed) hatred of abortion, he should make it clear that he values the work of anti-abortion activists and understands why they would vote to prohibit abortion in a post-Roe world, even if he would vote the other way.
This would make Giuliani as acceptable as a pro-choicer is going to get to social conservatives. His position would still be a contrivance, but at least it would be a coherent and shrewd one. The alternative might be watching his campaign founder on an issue about which he cares very little.
Whuzzis? Rich Lowry Under Giuliani’s hood trying to fix the motor? No way...If it’s broke, it’s broke. Giuliani is down and out.
NO RUDY.
...The alternative might be watching his campaign founder on an issue about which he cares very little.
As Rudy says “That would be OK”.
To the liberal baby-killers Rudy panders to? Yes.
:)
Rudy is a vile man!
I don’t like the idea of abotion either and I would discourage any woman from having one, however, I am also of the opinion that women should have the choice.
Now Rich Lowry wants to offer advice to Rooty on how to fix his position on abortion. As though there is something wrong with taking both sides of the issue.
I’ve got some advice for Rooty. Instead of covering your butt by talking oput both sides of your mouth, Rooty, save yourself a whole lotta pain. Drop out now you liberal twit!
All I knew about Rudy six months ago, was that he only obeys laws he agrees with, and was power hungry. Now I know he is a real SOB!
No, he rips Rooty to shreds.
The irony is that he has an alternative to supporting Roe. Ruth Ginsburg is one who is on record that “privacy” is a poor basis for the abortion right, that some other constitutional basis needs to be found. She contends that the Court is working on that. I am sure that only a little sophistry is needed to take the court’s ruling in subsequent cases to allow some limted ability to obtain an abortion, something on the order of the growing “right” to kill the old and infirm.
Right. Lowry roughs Rooty up pretty good.
My sarcasm was weak. LOL
Unfortunately, he's the one candidate that would most cause the Islamists to crap their puffy pants.
Maybe you should change your login name to COjones, ‘cause you got some...
I like your tagline! I have been saying the same thing for a long time.
“I don’t like the idea of abotion either and I would discourage any woman from having one, however, I am also of the opinion that women should have the choice.”
Selfish women choose to have abortions. Selfish men believe it should be a woman’s choice thereby absolving them of any responsibility. I know men who believe this. I consider them cowards.
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.