Pro-choice Giuliani called acceptable (by Boehner, Tancredo, Brownback)

Washington Times ^ | 5/7/07 | Eric Pfeiffer

[NormsRevenge]

Two leading Republican lawmakers said yesterday that former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani's pro-choice stance on abortion should not disqualify him from becoming their party's presidential nominee or from receiving the support of conservative voters.

Making the comments were House Majority Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio and Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, one of Mr. Giuliani's rivals for the nomination. Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, a social conservative also running for the party's nomination, said during the Republican presidential debate last week that he could accept a candidate with differing views on abortion.

"I think it's an uphill fight on that issue," Mr. Boehner said during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday." "But I think a lot of Republican voters see Rudy Giuliani as competent and able to do the job."

Mr. Boehner has not endorsed the Giuliani campaign. He noted the large delegation of House Republicans who met with former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee two weeks ago and said voters are open to a range of primary candidates.

Mr. Giuliani said during the debate that it would be "OK" if Roe v. Wade were either overturned or upheld, giving no clear approval to reversing the 1973 decision that established abortion as a constitutional right. His nine rivals on the stage strongly approved of overturning Roe.

"It would be OK to repeal it," Mr. Giuliani said. "It would be OK also if a strict constructionist viewed it as precedent."

[AlaskaErik]

Well, his anti Second Amendment stance rules him out as far as I’m concerned.

[tkathy]

My family has voted Republican since the 1850s, before the takeover.

[XR7]

CNN:

Giuliani reiterates his support for public funding of abortions.

VIDEO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZe1j4csMq8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fblog%2Ethevanguard%2Eorg%2Fcategory%2Fchristianity%2F

[B Knotts]

I’m not making excuses for him; I’m just saying that it’s slightly misleading.

[B Knotts]

I agree...I think it would destroy the GOP, and have been saying so for a while. My only complaint was with the characterization of Tancredo supporting Giuliani, when that’s not quite what he said.

[Valin]

Tancredo knows he has no chance of getting the nomination, so he’s running for VP.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Rudy would bring in the independents, the moderates, and the disaffected democrats

... while simultaneously losing the conservative base.

[little jeremiah]

What takeover, pardon my ignorance?

I was born in raised in the most ultra of ultra liberal/leftist of families. Once I started thinking for myself, I saw the light.

Maybe you should re-read something about what conservatism is, since Giuliani has nothing conservative about his viewpoints.

[mkjessup]

My family has voted Republican since the 1850s, before the takeover.

I remember that takeover, country club Republicans like Nelson Rockefeller and his buddies, only slightly less liberal than Democrats, spending money like water, good thing Ronald Reagan stepped up in 1964 and began laying the groundwork when he did, and instilled true conservative values and principles into what was becoming nothing more than 'Democrat Lite'.

It was a long journey from '64 to '80, but Reagan saw us to the promised land, God rest his soul.

Of course those RINOs are still at it even today, trying to water down conservative philosophy, ram liberals like Rudy down the throat of mainstream America, but guess what?

It ain't gonna work.

So don't worry about another takeover by liberal RINOs, conservatives aren't going to let that happen.

Happy to help.

[tkathy]

The REAL RINOs (RRs) are the ones threatening to not vote, and driving any out of the republican party who are not perfect purists.

[little jeremiah]

Why vote for a liberal who happens to have (R) next to his name? Giuliani is pro-gun control, pro-”gay” agenda, pro-abortion, pro-open borders, and I haven’t read anything about his views sounding remotely fiscally conservative.

I have no interest in “team” politics for the sake of winning a pennant or something. I always hated professional sports for the same reason. Substance is important to me, not appearance. And Giuliani’s substance is all liberal, all the way.

If you haven’t lately, you ought to read the Republican platform. Does Giuliani support the platform? No, you say? Then why should I vote for him? I won’t vote for him for the exact same reasons I won’t vote for any other liberal, no matter what political party s/he belongs to.

[airborne]

Yet another reason to never, ever send the GOP another penny.

[little jeremiah]

Thanks for the explanation.

I’ve voted Republican since I gathered a few wits together. But if Giuliani (God forbid) should win the primaries (and it’s really hard to imagine how that would happen unless the RNC throws money at him; funny how they often support the most liberal of candidates...), I won’t be able to force myself to vote for him. I would not be able to live with my conscence.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

The REAL RINOs (RRs) are the ones threatening to not vote, and driving any out of the republican party who are not perfect purists.

Oh gimme a break. This reasoning is so convoluted that it deserved a "Comment removed by Moderator" post.

[airborne]

Don’t know why this is not immediately obvious to all.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

[airborne]

It wasn't Regan's idea, and he didn't always follow that advice, now did he?

"Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican" - was established during Ronald Reagan's 1966 campaign for governor of California.

State Republican Chairman Gaylord Parkinson proposed it to help prevent a repeat of the liberal Republican assault on Barry Goldwater that laid the foundation for Goldwater's trouncing in the 1964 presidential election.

And it was to keep liberals from attacking conservatives!

[Spiff]

This would make a tiny amount of sense if Giuliani’s position was actually “pro-choice”. However, his record as Mayor and his statements have demonstrated that he is as pro-abortion as the most liberal Democrat in the race. Boehner, Tancredo, and Brownback are either wrong or horribly misquoted.

[little jeremiah]

tkathy - I checked your “in forum” comments and you seem to be repeating this comment on various threads.

You really love Giuliani, don’t you?

[Spiff]

Rudy would bring in the independents, the moderates, and the disaffected democrats. That is the only way the reps are going to win a very tough election in 2008.

Rudy would split the Republican party and lose horribly. The few indies, liberals, and disaffected Dems that he would pull would far outnumber the core Republican voters that he would lose. His views are in opposition to the majority of the Republican platform and he can only rely upon keeping Republican ignorant about his views and record, hoping that Republicans believe his lies about his liberal views and record, or upon the fear of electing a Democrat instead. Fear, deception, and ignorance are terrible things to base your campaign on, but that is all the Giuliani's got. That won't go far enough and he'll lose BAD in the General election and destroy the Republican Party while he's at it.

[trisham]

The REAL RINOs (RRs) are the ones threatening to not vote, and driving any out of the republican party who are not perfect purists.

*************

On the contrary, it is those who are demanding we accept the liberal Giuliani as our nominee who are the RINOs.