[Spyder]

Obviously, it's pointless to argue with you. You're severely affected with RDS (Rudy derangement syndrome) and cannot be reasoned with. You didn't even read your supposed source. Where in the paragraph you below is anything you can point to as a source (bold and italic my additions)? By all means do all that you can to promote whatever candidate you choose AT THE PRIMARY LEVEL, but once the majority of your party has chosen someone different, don't just take your ball and go home, claiming your party has deserted you. Instead try to figure out WHY.

Here's the part you like: "However, Murdock's implicit effort to credit Giuliani with the declining number of abortions during his tenure as mayor goes too far. As Murdock acknowledges, the number of abortions was declining nationwide during this period -- obviously for demographic reasons -- and New York City merely reflected that trend. Here's the rub, though.

"Unless Murdock can show that there was something special about Giuliani's public policies that reduced the number of abortions in New York City, which I doubt, I THINK he has over-reached in his efforts to prop up Giuliani's "social conservative" credentials.

Sounds like the author is posting his opinion, , not facts.

[Mojave]

However, Murdock's implicit effort to credit Giuliani with the declining number of abortions during his tenure as mayor goes too far. As Murdock acknowledges, the number of abortions was declining nationwide during this period -- obviously for demographic reasons -- and New York City merely reflected that trend. Here's the rub, though. Unless Murdock can show that there was something special about Giuliani's public policies that reduced the number of abortions in New York City, which I doubt, I THINK he has over-reached in his efforts to prop up Giuliani's "social conservative" credentials.

And?

You have not begun to show that anything in Rudy pro-abortion policies reduced abortion and you have not shown that abortion rates in New York differed from the national trends. You're no closer to evidence for your original sourceless claims than you were before.

Predictably.