Running for office, especially these days and especially for President, is like an obstacle course that never ends, so it’s no surprise that the candidates will have many ups and downs. Rudy Giuliani, who was once riding high, has been in a trough of late because of some waffling on the abortion issue. Rich Miniter mentioned this on today’s Corn & Miniter Show, pointing out that Rudy fared better when he was forthright about his pro-choice position.
I doubt that Rudy was listening, because this link predates C & M, but I am pleased to report that Giuliani is returning to form, stating (not parsing) his position.
We all know it anyway, so what’s the purpose of hiding behind a wall of words. What the Mayor has always had going for him is his having the courage of his convictions. That’s why he wants us to trust him to lead us through the war against Islamism. He should stick with that,.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
29 Comments
1. ricpic:“…the courage of his convictions.”
A slight problem. They’re not Republican convictions.
May 11, 2007 - 4:57 pm 2. Roger:Frankly, ricpic, I don’t care. I’m worried about America and the world, not what some people think one political party is or should be. Everything changes anyway.
Also, the Republicans were giving Giuliani high marks and high polling when he was just honest about who is. And I can promise you everyone knows he is pro-choice.
You may have to suck it up and deal with it. (I’ll wager many of the politicians you think are not pro-choice, really are in their private lives. In fact, the vast majority may be.)
May 11, 2007 - 6:27 pm 3. jane m:I’m a Republican and pro-life. I admire and would vote for Guliani inspite of our differences on this issue. I am almost resigned to abortion as a fact of life and more looking toward placing some sensible restrictions on its availibility such as the recent SCOTUS decision regarding the so-called partial birth abortion. Other issues seem to me as or even more compelling to address at this point in history such as GWoT and beefing up our military.
May 11, 2007 - 6:41 pm 4. Luther McLeod:Call me shallow, but “to lead us through the war against Islamism.” is it for me. All else falls short. Actually, all else is naught, without winning that particular war. But, I am as yet, undecided as to who has that sharpened focus to follow through.
May 11, 2007 - 8:17 pm 5. Tom Paine:Rudy should simply state that he knows abortion is always a lousy choice; but that sometimes it’s the least lousy choice of those actually available; and that outside of some very broad parameters, like late-term abortion, the government should never be the one to decide.
May 12, 2007 - 7:28 am 6. ricpic:If the Republicans do go with Rudy as their candidate they should at least have the decency – truth in advertising and all that – to rename themselves the RINO Party.
May 12, 2007 - 8:18 am 7. Terrye:ricpic:
Who died and made you boss?
May 12, 2007 - 9:32 am 8. Terrye:If social conservatives do not completely screw it up for them, I think the Republicans have a good chance of winning in 08. The Democrats have come up with people like Hillary Clinton and Obama and Edwards and they should not even be serious contenders. I know I have voted Republican the last several elections in spite of the fact that I feel a lot the same way Gulliani feels about this issue, but if people like ricpic want me and my kind to get lost…I guess they can just get used to being a minority.
May 12, 2007 - 9:34 am 9. mikem:So the message from pro abortionists is that “social conservatives” (historically, that would include anti-slavery and pro-Civil Rights Republicans) should choose to shut up about abortion and vote the big ticket candidate rather than their conscience. Ever so practical and ethically rudderless. Appropriate, isn’t it!
As Terrye could have said, who died and made pro-abortionists boss.
May 12, 2007 - 12:05 pm 10. Terrye:mikem:
I never said I was boss. I never said that all Republicans who do not believe in abortion should cease to be in the party. I never said I would not vote for someone who held a different position. In fact I voted for Bush and he is prolife. For all the good it did him with the socalled base.
May 12, 2007 - 12:08 pm 11. Terrye:And you know what? I can not imagine ever getting an abortion myself. I just think that when it comes to how much control the federal government should have over people’s lives, there are some things Presidents do not need to be running. And one of them is women’s clinics.
May 12, 2007 - 12:11 pm 12. ricpic:My my, such anger just because some people don’t choose to jettison their conscience in the interest of expediency.
May 12, 2007 - 12:31 pm 13. mikem:Terrye, you sound so reasonable. A month or so ago and you were equating men’s rights in child support with “the right to rape”.
May 12, 2007 - 12:35 pm 14. Terrye:Today abortion is just a Big Government issue for you??
C’mon.
mikem:
I never did anything of the kind, that is a lie.
The truth is I respect the fact that some people really feel that abortion is something they can not condone. I understand that. I am just saying that there are other people with a different opinion and some of them vote Republican.
I voted a straight Republican ticket the last two elections and you and ricpic are climbing all over for me because I don’t agree with you on something. That does not bode well for a Republican majority.
May 12, 2007 - 1:52 pm 15. Terrye:the right to rape, that is soooo stupid.
May 12, 2007 - 1:55 pm 16. Terrye:If I remember correctly mikem hates women.
May 12, 2007 - 1:58 pm 17. Terrye:Now if you guys would prefer that people like me vote for Hillary, I guess we can do that.
May 12, 2007 - 2:01 pm 18. Terrye:But then again, I am just amoral enough and ruthless enough that I think the war on Terror is more important than this insoluble issue that I have been listening to people argue about all my life. So my number one concern in a president is his ability to handle the role of Commander in Chief. Not in whether or not he shares my opinion on something like abortion.
May 12, 2007 - 2:05 pm 19. Terrye:ricpic:
Did it ever occur to you that if Gulliani was ready to jettison his principles in the name of expediency, he would just tell you and mikem here what you wanted to hear and leave it that?
May 12, 2007 - 2:07 pm 20. mikem:“mikem:
I never did anything of the kind, that is a lie.”
Let’s see:
[ Men's right my ass.
Posted by: Terrye at April 12, 2007 3:06 AM
-----------
So, is rape a man's right too? How about slapping the little lady around? If you are going to assume that it is all about a man's right to force his will on a bad baby killing woman, just how far does that right go?
Posted by: Terrye at April 12, 2007 3:10 AM ]
May 12, 2007 - 2:35 pm 21. mikem:Lot of respect, indeed, for those who disagree with you including the “anti-abortionists just hate women” slur.
By your logic, you just hate infants.
It takes two seconds for pro-abortionists to launch these bombs and three seconds to accuse anti-abortionists of being haters. What a life!
May 12, 2007 - 2:41 pm 22. Pierre Legrand:You know it will be interesting to see how the election goes down. But being old enough to remember the debacle of the Rockefeller republicans let me just say that perhaps the worst politician in the world is a Republican trying to please Democrats. Some of the worst laws in modern times have come about with a Republican in office trying to please Democrats.
Rockefeller republicans lost so many elections it was almost hilarious. It was only when we renewed our pledges to sensible government that we regained the majorities in the House and Senate. Reagan was no Rockefeller republican…
Abortion is a major issue…a major portion of the Republican base will simply not vote for a pro abortion candidate. That will not only lose Guiliani the primaries but would destroy him in the General Election since his running would invite a 3rd party candidate. To many folks the tragedy of abortion is nearly as serious as the Islamic Nutjobs.
Guns is a major issue…I simply will not vote for someone who believes that taking away guns is a solution to crime. I didn’t buy it in NYC and I certainly don’t buy it in Louisiana. I have used them several times to protect myself and my family and verily I say that you will have to take my guns from my cold dead fingers. Guiliani fails there as well.
Finally that the elite in both the Democrat and Republican party believe in both of these items only shows why most people simply stay home in disgust. We know they are a bunch of souless bastards who don’t believe a single word of the piety they spread around…problem for them is we do.
So yes Guiliani seems to be strong on the war but putting him into the Whitehouse would be a very dangerous thing from my perspective unless we had Republicans in control of both houses to moderate his liberal tendencies.
May 12, 2007 - 4:35 pm 23. Terrye:mikem:
Like I said you lied.
May 12, 2007 - 5:09 pm 24. Terrye:If I remember right mikem said that women got abortions to avoid being responsible and men were just innocent victims who should be able to intercede. You did not say anything about child support.
You took that remark out of context and you know it.
This is ridiculous.
May 12, 2007 - 5:14 pm 25. Terrye:When I was 18 I was gang raped and not one of the men who attacked me showed the slightest interest in what became of me.
Now I don’t think that any man who was not responsible for that should have to pay for it. By the same token I don’t think that every woman who gets an abortion for whatever reason should be treated like a slut who killed some poor man’s baby.
It seems to me that mikem has a chip on his shoulder when it comes to women and so he makes a point of attacking anyone who disagrees with his personal views on this subject.
No, I don’t hate infants, but I do dislike demagogues.
May 12, 2007 - 5:17 pm 26. Terrye:Pierre:
There is a primary season and we will see who wins it. It seems to me that a lot of Republicans do not share your views on this. Maybe you are out of step. We will see. Let the people decide.
It is not about pleasing Democrats. Gulliani is not a Democrat, neither am I.
May 12, 2007 - 5:20 pm 27. mikem:“If I remember right mikem said that women got abortions to avoid being responsible and men were just innocent victims who should be able to intercede. You did not say anything about child support.
You took that remark out of context and you know it.”
This is from earlier in the post:
Me (mikem): “Funny how that Social Authoritarian thing works. Oppose abortion and one is a misogynist, desiring Society to impose values on an individual, robbing her of Choice. But let her choose to have a child and suddenly the same people who smugly speak of Social Authoritarians have absoultely no problem imposing 18 or better years of economic servitude on the poor smuck who thought he was just hooking up for the summer weekend.
Choice for Women / No Choice for Men.”
Terrye: “Like I said you lied.”
LMAO. Your words are right there to see.
And to top it off, after denying your own words, you say they were taken out of context. No shame.
You’re just a bully, Terrye. You drop “hater” bombs on those who oppose abortion or support men’s rights (”men’s rights my ass”, that’s clear) and then absolve yourself of any responsibility for those slurs. You are not a reasonable voice. Even when you try, you outrageously caricature the pro-life view.
May 12, 2007 - 5:58 pm 28. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):As a pro-life catholic, I find this whole thing disturbing.
The Supreme Court created this mess in the first place by finding a “right” in an emanation of a penumbra (even though they can’t find a right to keep and bear arms where it is clearly stated). I would be satisfied if the SC stopped its gross over-extension of some rights at the expense of others, and simply ruled that abortion is for the *democratic* process to divide – leave it to state legislatures.
Abortion gives the right to destroy something. Many of us believe that something is a human life. from conception. Most believe that it is a human life sometime before birth. But the Supreme Court does not. Somehow, the moment of birth magically transforms a blob of tissue into a human with full rights.
There are 3 humans whose rights are involved in abortion: the infant (at whatever age you deem it human), the mother and the father.
The current system is skewed wildly towards the rights of the mother. I have a relative who is not even related (per DNA tests) to the “son” for whom he is forced to pay child support. According to the courts, men have absolutely no say in the life or death of their pre-born offspring, even as they pay the costs.
Also…
I would ask Terri – is the product of rape less human? Should one be able to abort that product at the age of full gestation? That is the law today. That a woman bears the greatest burden of procreation is unfair, but it is human biology and nature.
I do not want to impose my religious beliefs by law. They are between me and God.
But it doesn’t take a religious viewpoint to recognize the sacredness of human life. Part of the decadence destroying our society is the moral relativiswm that blurs such obvious values.
………………………………….
I could vote for Rudi on this issue, if he holds to the “strict constructionist” viewpoint. I don’t care about his personal views on the subject if he keeps them out of the issue the same way I am willing to keep them out of mine.
I do have some other problems with Rudi. His private life seems to indicate irresponsibility. This is a real issue – Bill Clinton’s private irresponsibilities foretold his feckless behavior as president – putting his narcissism above the nation’s welfare. Will Rudi do the same?
And then there’s the gun issue. I have fired a gun in self defense, right here in the US. I don’t want some control freak taking away my right to do so again – especially in defiance of the constitution.
So for me, Rudi is a problem. However, I would vote for him in a second over any of the Democrat candidates so far. Unfortunately, many of my fellow Christians may not be able to vote for the least of the worst, and that could leave us with the worst of the worst – a Democrat president who would destroy our military, leave us open to the many villains of the world (Jihadists, newly fascist Russia, China, etc), and generally screw everything up.
May 12, 2007 - 8:15 pm 29. Steven Mitchell:“If the Republicans do go with Rudy as their candidate they should at least have the decency – truth in advertising and all that – to rename themselves the RINO Party.”
That’s just stupid. The number of voters more conservative than me is miniscule. Suffice it to say that I’m no RINO. Yet, I’m willing to support Guiliani–or if it comes down to it in the general, bite my tongue and support McCain. Maybe it has something to do with fiscal positions or defense positions or judicial positions–that promise to be something a conservative, patriotic American can support.
The perfect should not be the enemy of the good. It’s not only good practical politics, but a conservative notion, in a world where perfection cannot be achieved.
May 14, 2007 - 9:59 am