In the event that Roe is overturned, are you in favor of a national amendment prohibiting abortion, or an individual state-state process? Which candidate(s) for the 2008 GOP nomination supports either of these prohibition alternatives? How does your favored candidate stand?
If they don't support prohibition, they are implicitly supporting choice (the existing de facto position absent criminalization), regardless of which organization chooses to attempt to frame the issue.
As to picking away at Rudy regarding the WoT, go for it. I'm not one opposed to revealing the truth about anyone on any matter. I'm just skeptical that anyone is going to care.
Personal anecdote: I've had a chance to be within 30 yards of both RR & Arnie during their respective political moments. The crowd reaction was the same - the same animal instincts of being emotionally attracted to a 'winner'.
For good or bad, Rudy has the same appeal. It's something going for him that can't be quantified, but for some reason, people tend to drawn to his dynamism. Now, you are free to deny that he has any or that it exists, but that doesn't make it so.
State by state process, as it was before Roe.
However, that cannot happen until Roe is overturned. And Rudy has spoken out in favor of Roe and in favor of abortion "rights". No other pubbie candidate has. It's that simple.
The Republican Party platform makes this clear enough for anyone who bothers to read what the party actually stands for. It says that a Human Life Amendment should be passed to recognize unborn children, from the point of conception, as human beings deserving the protection of the law. It further says that legislation should be passed to ensure that unborn children are fully protected in their rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. All Republican candidates should stand for this or they have no business calling themselves Republicans.
Arnie has made a fortune during his lifetime as a movie actor, so it should come as no surprise that he'd have an "aura" like that. I don't see how Giuliani -- a short, bald guy from New York who wears glasses and talks with a lisp -- could possible have that kind of stage presence.
I'd point out, however, that conservatives in California were the biggest losers in that recall campaign -- because when all was said and done, the state of California had a Democrat-controlled legislature and a leftist Republican governor who would sign anything that legislature passed. If this strikes you as a "winning" formula for the United States, then we're on completely different planets.
You are woefully unaware of Constitutionalism, thus one wonders what brings you here.