Posted on 01/27/2007 2:26:06 PM PST by narses
Rudolph W. Giuliani, who developed a national reputation for decisive and reassuring leadership after 9/11, now faces the odd challenge of having to reassure some supporters that he can be decisive about a very different issue: running for president. Even as his fellow Republican John McCain and fellow New Yorker Hillary Rodham Clinton have all but formally declared their candidacies, Mr. Giuliani has proceeded more cautiously.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
What, have you had a thought independent of Rush? Oh, and I know Michigan very well, your bluster from the other side of the country hardly troubles me :)
A one-front approach will fail. The best approach is a combinatorial one - top-down, and bottom-up. Top-down begins with legislation to allow for education in the classroom - if abortion is so wonderful and liberating for women, why not show everyone what an abortion is? What are they afraid of?
Bottom-up includes areas like pregnancy centers, mentioned already.
So I believe progress is being made on the ground. It's the legislative angle that needs to catch up. And I do not believe Rudy cares enough (he is an adulterer after all) about unexpected pregnancies, their mothers, and the unborn children themselves, to want to make any sort of difference. Hence my strident opposition to a Giuliani candidacy.
Lots of conservatives are supporting Rudy. The unappeaseables are not. That's their choice. I think that they should be let go. In other words I don't think they should be counted on as reliable votes and that means that the GOP needs to reach out to other voters...specifically the 47% who identified thmselves as independents in the 2006 election.
"Consistently - incl. after the latest election - polls show 52%-54% of Americans oppose most abortion - and present policy does NOT reflect the will of the people. So while my views are quite strong on this, I believe I speak to some degree for a great many on this point."
Really?!?!? According to this poll, 65% oppose overturning Roe v Wade.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=253
FWIW I believe the social right could be a little more sophisticated in its presentation.
ROFL
LOL, Party over Country!
Why have you not made legislative progress under a GOP administration and a GOP Congress?
Where did you get party over country?
Wrong. The World Trade Center was attacked during the Clintong years....
Giuliani did not have prostrate cancer when Mrs. Clintong ran for reelection. He was perfectly happy to have her remain as his senator. Incompetence!
Giuliani is a lousy campaigner. Everyone he campaigned for lost.
Find Jesus...
Take your own advice and maybe you wouldn't be here as a shill for a pro-homo, pro-baby killing liberal. (Unless you are from the Rick Warren church of pervert cafeteria Christianity.)
I have in mind three polls, one a Zogby in 2004, another 2003, and another 2006.
Each poll broke down the issue into something along the lines: Oppose all abortion, oppose all abortions except rape/incest, or favor all abortions. There may have been other categories, but the first two combined garnered 54% in one poll, 53% in another, and 52% in the most recent.
I lived in Dearborn for 16 years Bootcamp.
Why we haven't made progress may have some teensy weensy connection to the composition of the SCOTUS, which has presided over most legal policy for this issue - esp. since it or lower courts usually strike down state-level legislation favorable to women and children.
And Rudy will be lucky to get 20% of the independents. Assuming they have no stake in the other issues in my previous posts. The primaries will narrow the field and there is a good chance Rudy will not make it.
A year can be a lifetime in politics :-)
"Giuliani did not have prostrate cancer when Mrs. Clintong ran for reelection. He was perfectly happy to have her remain as his senator. Incompetence!"
It would have been stupid for him to run for the Senate last year and then turn around and run for President. He can devote himself to campaigning full time.
"Giuliani is a lousy campaigner. Everyone he campaigned for lost."
Everyone he campaigned for in 2002 and 2004 won too!! We lost in 2006 because of the President unpopularity. If you don't understand that, you are totally ignorant and don't understand political realities.
"Take your own advice and maybe you wouldn't be here as a shill for a pro-homo, pro-baby killing liberal."
He's AGAINST gay marriage. Now as far as homos go, personally, I disagree with their life style but as long as they do what they do in the privacy of their own home I really don't care and nobody else should either, especially not the federal government. The POTUS doesn't have the power to stop people from being gay. And he surely shouldn't be interferring in people's private lives. So therefore voting on the basis of this issue doesn't make much sense.
As far as abortion goes, we have a pro-life President now but we are still having abortions. No president has the power to stop abortion. Rudy has already said he supports strict constructionist judges like John Roberts. He constantly praised the President for appointing Roberts and Alito. He said Roberts is his ideal justice. Assuming Rudy gets elected President and appoints Roberts-like justices then maybe Roe v. Wade will get overturned. But even if it does get overturned I hope you're not naive enough to think that would stop all abortions. The abortion issue would then revert back to the states and do you really think California would outlaw abortions? Being pragmatic in our thinking we all know we can't completely stop abortions. Therefore voting solely on this issue very unpragmatic. I hate abortions too but I realize that regardless of how many pro-life presidents we elect, its just not going to stop.
That's the difference between me and you. I'm pragmatic and realistic and understand political realities. I think with my head. You're ignorant and have no idea what's going on. You're also rude, vile, and hateful and I will pray for you tonight. Good night.
So you're belief is that there is not much you can do since the Supreme Court made abortion legal. Why have you (plural you) not *fixed* the Supreme Court? Rudy, btw, would be likely to appoint constructionist judges.
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.