Hillary Clinton vs. Rudy Giuliani

The recent articles regarding Hillary Clinton have been quite popular. I am following up with a series of interviews with friend, colleague and presidential historian Paul Kengor regarding the role of faith and social policy in the upcoming election. This interview presents Paul’s take on the religious views of front-runners Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, specifically with regard to abortion policy. Would Rudy be denied communion? Does Hillary think of abortion as a kind of sacred right? Read on…

THROCKMORTON: Just a basic question for foundation: Why do you believe that the religious views of politicians are relevant to their campaign for the presidency?

KENGOR: To quote FDR, the presidency is preeminently a place of moral leadership, and religion is the foundation of morality. George Washington noted that religion and morality are the “indispensable supports” of a successful democratic republic. There is no such thing as a legislator or policy-maker who leaves morality out of his or her decision making. All of our figures impose some kind of personal morality, whether flawed or not. Religion is usually the basis for that morality, and, in American history, typically the Christian religion.

Presidential candidates often point to their faith as justification for the policies they promote during their campaigns.

I believe, the scandal is when you have a liberal Democrat like John Kerry who stated in the final 2004 presidential debate, “My faith affects everything I do, really,” and then cites how his faith influences his desire to end poverty, to clean up the environment, to hike the minimum wage, but then, suddenly, completely separates his Roman Catholic faith from life-death issues like abortion and embryonic research. In my view, that’s outrageous. Kerry does it, Mario Cuomo does it, Ted Kennedy does it, and, most recently, from the Republican side of the aisle, Rudy Giuliani is doing it.

THROCKMORTON: Your new book examines the religious views of the current democratic front runner, Hillary Clinton. How about the Republican leader, Rudy Giuliani? What is his religious background?

KENGOR: He says that he studied theology for four years in college, after completing 12 years at a Catholic private school. By studying theology, I think he means that he was probably required to take some religious education courses at Manhattan College, which was the Catholic college that he attended, where I believe he studied politics and philosophy. He says that at one point he considered becoming a priest.

THROCKMORTON: What are his current religious leanings and how will these impact his policy making?

KENGOR: He has been quite private about that, knowing that any mention of his faith will get him in hot water as the first major pro-choice Republican with a legitimate crack at winning the party’s presidential nomination. The Republican Party has become the Party of Life, and nominating Rudy might well change that image. There are numerous pro-life Christians, Protestant and Catholic, who are going to fight that possible shift, from the likes of James Dobson at Focus on the Family to the pages of the National Catholic Register. They are not pleased that after all of these pro-life gains that have come only because of Republican presidents fighting abortion extermists in the Democratic Party, there is a sudden chance of a course reversal under a Republican president named Rudy Giuliani, no matter what his guarantees about appointing “strict constructionist” judges. They understand that in the real world there will be an untold number of pro-abortion executive orders and initiatives and decisions that would come across a President Giuliani’s desk, and that concerns them. As president, he might at best get to appoint two Supreme Court justices, but he will constantly be dealing with a flurry of pro-life and anti-life legislation.

THROCKMORTON: I have heard Mr. Giuliani say, I hate abortion. How does he reconcile this statement and his Catholic affiliation with his abortion public policy?

KENGOR: Hopefully, everyone hates abortion. The burning question in response would be to ask him why he hates abortion. Naturally, one would presume, he would say that he hates abortion because it terminates a human life. That being the case, how can one support the termination of human life? Once he concedes that point, he knows he’s in trouble. His church is very clear on this, from encyclicals like Humanae Vitae to Evangelium Vitae to Veritatis Splendor to the Catechism to the very recent eloquent remarks from Pope Benedict XVI.

Imagine this striking scenario: a Catholic president of the United States who is denied Holy Communion in certain dioceses because of his stance on abortion. That would be truly remarkable.

Non-Catholics have trouble understanding this, so let me try to explain Catholic thinking: Catholics believe that at Holy Communion they receive the literal body and blood of Christ. The recent Vatican document Redemptionis Sacramentum affirms Church teaching that “anyone who is conscious of grave sin should not celebrate or receive the Body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession.” The document restated the church’s position that anyone knowingly in “grave sin” must go to confession before ingesting the consecrated bread and wine that Catholics consider the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ. Cardinal Francis Arinze said that “unambiguously pro-abortion” Catholic politicians are “not fit” to receive the sacred elements.The Vatican has spoken on this. It is up to American bishops to decide whether to carry out the policy.

In 2004, a number of Catholic archbishops suggested or flatly stated that if a President John Kerry presented himself for communion in their diocese he would be turned away. Among others, these included Archbishop Raymond L. Burke of St. Louis, Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes of New Orleans, and even Archbishop Sean O’Malley of Boston—Kerry’s home diocese. Most recently, in Giuliani’s case, Archbishop Burke has spoken up.

THROCKMORTON: Compared to Hillary Clinton, who would be most pro-choice, if such a comparison can be made?

KENGOR: That’s a no-brainer: Hillary Clinton. If you’re a pro-lifer, and if no issue is more important to you than the right of an unborn child to have life, then nothing could be more calamitous than a President Hillary Clinton. I don’t know of any politician who is more uncompromising and extreme on abortion rights than Hillary Clinton. I know this well and don’t state it with anger or hyperbole. Her extremism on abortion rights was the single most shocking, inexplicable find in my research on her faith and politics. I couldn’t understand it. No question. It is truly extraordinary. Nothing, no political issue, impassions her like abortion rights. For Mrs. Clinton, abortion-rights is sacred ground.

By the way, speaking of Catholics, Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II saw this abortion extremism in Hillary, and both confronted her on it repeatedly, especially Mother Teresa, right up until the day she died. I have a chapter on this in the book. It’s a gripping story.

THROCKMORTON: Of Hillary and Rudy, who would most likely make abortion rights a litmus test for Supreme Court appointments?

Amen. We cannot beat the democrats by emulating them, and I hope we will not sell our principles (indeed our soul) for the hollow victory of putting a RINO in the white house. I will not.
If the choice is between Rudi an Hilary I will vote 3rd party or leave that part of the ballot blank. I will not vote for an abortionist under any circumstances. If the RINOs take over the Republican party, I will gladly support a prolife conservative alternative.

I can't really find a whole lot to support Giuliani on -- except I would trust him to prosecute the War on Terror and to keep taxes from going back up.

Yet more misguided notions on your part. The WOT is not just in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is a global problem including our border with Mexico. It is a fact terrorists have been and are entering this country posing as illegal aliens. Despite this fact Giuliani supports amnesty for illegal aliens. The terrorists would be very happy if he became President and it would be the death knell for the U.S.

Giuliani will support tax increases if his record is any indication.

---"Over the objections of a furious Mayor Giuliani and city legislators from both parties, the New York state legislature has abolished the New York City commuter tax. The action, done to apparently affect a local legislative race in suburban Rockland County, could cost New York City $360 million. NPR's Margot Adler reports."--- NPR Report

---"Let's face it: Rudy Giuliani argued for the reinstatement of the tax,..."--- NY Sun report [Giuliani] says ruling out a tax increase is "political pandering." Newsday, August 31, 1989

When I ran for Mayor both times, I was asked very, very often to do the following: Pledge that you will never raise taxes. I refused to do that. Pledge that you will lower taxes. I refused to do that." -- Rudy Giuliani, New York Times, October 25, 1994

Mr. Giuliani criticized Mr. Pataki’s proposal to cut taxes as “a shell game” that would hurt everyone in the state… -- New York Times, October 30, 1994

You should really try to back up your statements with facts instead of very vague and incorrect assumptions.

Jim,

I have an idea. How about an open letter to the GOP in the vain of PRO-LIFE WARNING TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1279039/posts and also forward it to Dr. James Dobson of Focus.

I know its still early but not too early to let the GOP leadership know that they are risking permanent minority status with Rooty.

I’m nearly convinced that Rooty will cause many to stay home or vote 3rd Party giving it to Hildabeast. We DO NOT want that and that’s why he cannot win the nomination.

I completely agree with you.

But, if he does win the nomination...perish the thought...we've got to do what we've got to do.

It does us no good to spend these months attacking candidates we don't favor when we should be spending our energy supporting candidates we do favor. We've discarded Reagan's 11th Amendment.

There are plenty of good reasons to vote for Romney...Thompson...Hunter...Huckabee...even McCain...before it becomes necessary to launch attacks on Giuliani (or anybody else).

When I ran for Mayor both times, I was asked very, very often to do the following: Pledge that you will never raise taxes. I refused to do that. Pledge that you will lower taxes. I refused to do that." -- Rudy Giuliani, New York Times, October 25, 1994

Context for the lurkers...

Q. Mr. Mayor, you were elected at the same time Governor Whitman . . . (give me your thinking) on the role of the promises of tax cuts. . .

A. First of all, you can't compare two states and it does not make any sense to compare two states. States have very different tax structures, they have different economies. . . . When I ran for Mayor both times, I was asked very, very often to do the following:

Pledge that you will never raise taxes. I refused to do that.

Pledge that you will lower taxes. I refused to do that.

I did it because I'm aware of the burdens that exist in the city and the state, the fact that there is a law that requires a balanced budget and that I believe not only the most honest approach but the one that would give you the most flexibility to govern is one where you talk about the things that you want to cut, the things you want to readjust, the ways in which you're going to try to save money and then talk about your intention to lower taxes. But don't lock yourself into a very, very ambitious specific plans to do it because here's what believe happens if you do that:

If you do that, at some point over the next two to three years given the vagaries of the economy, it's likely you may not be able to do what you promised. And then you make people even more disillusioned about government than they already are.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A01E7D8143FF936A15753C1A962958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=4

We need to understand that. The fun and games will be over. There will be a National Health Care system. The "Fairness Doctrine" will be back. It will extend to the internet -- and FreeRepublic will be regulated. We'll be out of the loop when it comes to politics.

You need to understand by looking past the R and D after a candidate's name and see the political ideologies of Hitlery and Clinton are both Socialism.

If they are re-elected, they will have the support of a Democrat Congress -- who, this time, will share their primary goal of never losing power again.

They already have the support of a GOP President who, like the socialist Democrats supports amnesty for illegal aliens, supports the Law Of the Sea Treaty that will cede our sovereignty to internationalists and is trampling on states rights by taking his home state of Texas to the Supreme Court to over turn the death sentence of an illegal alien who brutally murdered two U.S. teenagers in support of a ruling by the so called World Court to grant the illegal a retrial! Giuliani in the White House will bring more of the same!

If we lose this next election, there will never be an another opportunity to re-gain power...or to reverse Roe vs Wade ever again!

It won't be reversed with a pro abortionist like Giuliani!

And the Republicans you expect so much of will be cowering in a corner. Again.
They have already been doing that for decades because they are so busy appeasing the Socialist Democrats instead of standing by their Conservative principles that once made them stand apart from the Socialist Democrats.

Our elected officials are not the backbone of the Republican Party. We are.

Then why haven't you done anything over the past forty years to preserve Conservative ideals and stop GOP leadership from accepting socialist principles!

"No dilemma for me, I will not vote for either of them."
Thereby helping to elect the worse of them.

Some solution...

OK, let's say Hitler and Stalin were running. What's your solution?

My point here is that your vote is an endorsement. There is a limit to which one's conscience will allow participation, even if it means some good might come form it. There's a point beyond where even the lesser of two evils is too evil to associate with.

If great harm will inevitably come to America by its choice of presidents, it is far better that that harm come from a Democrat. That leaves the possibility for the Republican Party to regroup and try again.

With all due respect, may I suggest that you spend your time and energy supporting your candidate for the nomination rather than tearing down Giuliani.

I have presented you with facts about Giuliani. If you consider that "tearing him down" then so be it. I suggest the Republican party spend more time supporting the conservative base it once held so dear instead of tearing down conservatives.

A true Republican or conservative would not willingly hand power over to liberal Democrats, who are guaranteed to work against our values. Political suicide is not in our nature, nor condoned in our religious teachings, nor consistent with our Constitution. Leave the futile political statements to those not fortified with a higher purpose.

Great posts. I'm getting sick and tired of the Rudy apologists calling HIGHLIGHTING Giuliani's liberal past,,,,,,'tearing down Guiliani'!!! That's pathetic.

Since when is debating facts about Giuliani 'tearing him down'?? Since when is discussing his strong liberal bent, 'tearing him down'? Since when is focusing on his many liberal social positions (while comparing them to the same positions of democrats) 'tearing him down'?

If that's the case, then it's Rudy's own LIBERAL positions that are doing that,,,,NOT the base which it trying to HIGHLIGHT and WARN conservatives of those very leftie positions!

I, too, would never, EVER vote for a liberal like Guliani.

A true Republican or conservative would not willingly hand power over to liberal Democrats, who are guaranteed to work against our values.

A true Republican conservative would never even CONSIDER supporting a liberal (who will work against our values--to use your words) who is guaranteed to SPLIT and DIVIDE the Party WIDE OPEN,,,while demoralizing the bases......thereby electing a democrat.

The important thing is to vote Pro-life in the primaries.
Worry about tough choices later.

IF it is between Hillary and Rudy, here’s all you need to know.
Because the Presidential authority vested in Article 2 is so very important to Rudy, this would drive his judicial appointments.
All Judges who support this Article 2 power are also pro-life.
Look for Hugh Hewitt writings on this subject.

You do know that if the suicidal single issue guys succeed in pulling away (or convincing to stay home) even a moderate fraction of voters from the Republican presidential candidate (and down-ballot Republican candidates that benefit from straight ticket votes), they likely will had the Democrats the win, since recently the margin of victory in many elections is within a few percent.

It amazes me how people always make this assumption while ignoring the fact many socialists in the Democrat party are very unhappy with Hitlery for taking a so called centrist position regarding the war in Iraq.

A true Republican or conservative would not willingly hand power over to liberal Democrats, who are guaranteed to work against our values.

A true Republican or Conservative? Are you implying some members of the GOP are not conservatives? If not then what are they? A true Republican Conservative maintains those principles once espoused by the party instead of ceding those principles for the sake of attempting to compromise with socialist Democrats.

Political suicide is not in our nature, nor condoned in our religious teachings, nor consistent with our Constitution.

And yet the GOP has been violating those very tenets by spending more time appeasing the socialist Democrats instead of focusing on conservative values.

Leave the futile political statements to those not fortified with a higher purpose.

Leave socialism with the Democrats and fortify the GOP party with the more important conservative purpose.

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.