To: okie01; don-o; Graybeard58; Jim Robinson
Giuliani already has quite a record of receiving verbal bouquets from the National Abortion Rights Action League (now called "NARAL Pro-Choice America") for appointing liberal judges when he was Mayor of NY.
As anyone can see. When he says he'd appoint "strict constructionists," I think we can safely assume he's lying.
Why? For FReepers sake, he's a pro-abortion New York liberal. He doesn't have a problem with killing. Why would have have a problem with lying?
53 posted on
10/14/2007 6:00:28 PM PDT by
Mrs. Don-o
(Point of information.)
To: Mrs. Don-o
The three biggest lies - for those gullible enough to believe them:
- I gave at the office.
- The check is in the mail.
- Giuliani will nominate strict constructionist judges.
54 posted on
10/14/2007 6:05:03 PM PDT by
gscc
To: Mrs. Don-o
“Why? For FReepers sake, he’s a pro-abortion New York liberal. He doesn’t have a problem with killing. Why would have have a problem with lying?”
Rudy lies like a rug!!
We have a winner!!
65 posted on
10/14/2007 6:52:08 PM PDT by
stephenjohnbanker
(Pray for, and support our troops(heroes) !! And vote out the RINO's!!)
To: Mrs. Don-o
When [Giuliani] says he'd appoint "strict constructionists," I think we can safely assume he's lying. To be blunt, so what?
You really think Hillary will appoint "strict constructionists"?
I am NOT a Giuliani supporter. I will NOT vote for him in the primary. But, should he be the nominee, I will NOT be facing a "dilemma".
I'll vote for Giuliani. I may not get what I favor on the pro-life issue, but the country won't be dragged further into socialist totalitarianism.
I simply cannot see where there is any "dilemma".
66 posted on
10/14/2007 7:04:14 PM PDT by
okie01
(The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson