Posted on 06/11/2007 7:49:21 AM PDT by Kuksool
“The next president will probably be picking at least 2 Supreme Court Justices.”
The fact that in debate #1 Rudy basically said he thought a pro-Constitutional Justice could uphold Roe v Wade, and the fact that Rudy has touted the horrible Justice Ginsberg as an example of an acceptable Justice tells us all we need to know.
The sorry spectacle of Republicans putting judicial activist liberal Justices on the USSC will repeat itself, if we let Rudy become President.
” Rudy believes abortion is a Constitutional right. Therefore, to Rudy, overturning Roe v. Wade amounts to judicial activism. When he says he’ll nominate strict constitutionalists, it means he’ll nominate pro-abortion judges.
President Giuliani guarantees 8 years of pro-abortion SCOTUS nominations. President Obama or President Clinton gives us a chance to elect a pro-life President in 2012. Plus, as GWB showed us, it is very hard politically to oppose a President from your own party. It will be very difficult to block the appointment of a pro-abortion judge nominated by Rudy. It won’t be as difficult to do the same if the pro-abortion judge is nominated by a Democrat.”
Well said.
I think it pretty much is.
.
This is the most widely disseminated and silliest non-sequiturs in recent memory - a line spouted continually by the Rudy advocates.
Those who believe this need to explain why Webb, Tester, and Casey all felt they had to run as pro-life (and pro-2A) Democrats to win. The small difference the pro-life position made (with 10% single-issue pro-life voters vs. 8% single-issue pro-choice/pro-abortion) could very easily have made the difference in at least two of these races by taking abortion off the table.
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.