[aligncare]

We seem to have a difference of opinion here.

Giuliani’s accomplishments in shrinking the size of New York City’s government is well documented, just see George Will’s comments praising Giuliani.

He has gotten endorsements from noted fiscal conservatives, including Steve Forbes. His record on fighting crime, cutting taxes, cutting welfare and reducing bureaucracy is unmatched by any of the other candidates.

We simply disagree that a president’s primary role is to end abortion. That, unfortunately, is in the hands of the federal judiciary and not the people - at least, not yet.

[rintense]

it's not just about abortion. I fundamentally disagree with him on RKBA, gay rights, and illegal immigration. I know its unrealistic to expect a candidate to match my views 100%. But Rudy is so far out of the ballpark, he's scalping tickets on the corner. There ARE better candidates. Why are conservatives giving up on them for Rudy? Simple answer: fear.

And when Rudy himself is quoted as saying he's not a Republican, yeah, I have a problem with that. If Rudy had a D behind his name, every single one of us would be slamming this guy to the ground.

[Aquinasfan]

We simply disagree that a president’s primary role is to end abortion. That, unfortunately, is in the hands of the federal judiciary and not the people - at least, not yet.

FWIW, the president selects SC nominees.

[Colofornian]

His record on fighting crime, cutting taxes, cutting welfare and reducing bureaucracy is unmatched by any of the other candidates...We simply disagree that a president’s primary role is to end abortion.

Well, if your family members were the murder victims--and the perpetrators were free to have acted at will against them--I don't think you'd praise the local "powers that be" for their marvelous crime-fighting record. You seem to have this elitist viewpoint that now that you're already born, it's no "crime" to kill the pre-born off. Besides, I thought it was more of the attorney general's job, and not the POTUS, to be our crime-fighter. (I'm not looking for a super-hero in the White House, are you?)

As for cutting taxes, well, you know, if you have more actually alive taxpayers (since 1973) who would be paying into social security, maybe it wouldn't be on the brink of folding? When you broaden the base legal taxpayers, we all bear the burden more equitably. When you kill off dozens of millions future taxpayers, you wind up needing more laborers to fill the labor pool (hence, non-taxpayer illegal immigrants).

Giuliani’s accomplishments in shrinking the size of New York City’s government is well documented...

So, we're left with cutting welfare and bureaucracy as the rousing rallying cry for the conservative movement to amass behind a candidate?

We simply disagree that a president’s primary role is to end abortion. That, unfortunately, is in the hands of the federal judiciary and not the people - at least, not yet.

Wow. What a pathetic straw man argument! Tell me, if you will, what judiciary ever or what pre-Roe POTUS ever "ended" murder? Lincoln? (Uh, no). Woodrow Wilson? (Uh, no). [Need I go on with such a pathetic conclusion?]

Go, ahead, keep framing that you think pro-lifers of conviction want to "end" all murders this side of heaven, as if that was possible. (I mean, we're not the idealic "no-war-ever-again, peace-on-earth" leftists...at least, not til Jesus comes).

As for the POTUS' role with abortion, I mean, even at a minimum a POTUS can...

(a) use his bully pulpit to slow down the fetus brain drain...just like a POTUS could attempt to slow down the labor brain drain of a country;

(b) slow down the taxpayer flow of funds into the abortion industry both in this country and abroad.

I mean, that hardly sounds like the Cavalry leader against abortion (your "primary role" bit). Yet Rudy can't even do (b) above!