Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
HOUSTON (AP) - Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani on Friday urged conservatives to look past his support for abortion rights, arguing that his divergence on the issue should not disqualify him from being the party's GOP nominee.
The former New York City mayor has struggled in the last week to explain his personal opposition to terminating pregnancies with his long record of favoring a woman's right to choose. He has defended his positions—and some say contradictory comments—on late-term abortion, public funding for abortions and the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion
I wouldn't vote for Giuliani. But it's not because he's pro-choice (that's probably the only thing he has going for him in my book). Republicans, you're propping up the wrong NYC mayor. You need Bloomberg!
NO, i would NOT vote for Rudy, even if he was Jesus Christ (which he is not and is not claiming to be) or regardless of what he claims his views on abortion are this week.
Rudy is a liberal... a RINO (Republican In Name Only). He is nothing more than a McCain with better name recognition due to his role in 9/11 recovery. Other than that, Rudy sucks!
Rudy has a bad past, a lot of disturbing moves in his political career.
I think Rudy would only be my choice if he was running against Hillary Clinton or "Comrade" Obama. I'd rather a Rudy than either one of the Socialists that are frontrunners in the Democratic party.
Last edited by Marka; 12-10-2007 at 05:08 AM..
Reason: edited quote
I wouldn't vote for Giuliani. But it's not because he's pro-choice (that's probably the only thing he has going for him in my book).
I agree! Giuliani's pro-choice stance is one of the only things I find appealing about him. I would never vote for him (regardless of his stance on abortion), but I think his stance is admirable...he wouldn't personally choose to do it (if he were a woman, and had that option), but he doesn't think he should impose his belief or choice upon others, and he feels women should be able to decide for themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa_from_Debary
I wouldn't vote for him no matter what group he was running with and no matter his stance on abortion...
It seems his performance during 911 made alot of people forget his actions prior to that date...too bad Americans have such a short memory...
I completely agree, but I personally feel it has more to do with selective memory, or just plain ignorance of the facts, than "short memory." He was in the national spotlight the days immediately following 9/11, and he was portrayed by the media (during that time) as "leading" New Yorkers and the country through its crisis. Because of that, many Americans, who unfortunately are ignorant of his TRUE history as a politician and "leader" (I use that term very lightly) prior to 9/11, merely associate him with being New York's and the nation's "savior" during it's time of crisis immediately following 9/11, and thusly consider him to be a great leader, capable of serving as President. Very unfortunate...
I think Rudy would only be my choice if he was running against Hillary Clinton or "Comrade" Obama. I'd rather a Rudy than either one of the Socialists that are frontrunners in the Democratic party.
What is your definition of a socialist? I'd imagine most of the far left people who actually consider themselves "socialists" would feel insulted (or just laugh) to have relative centrists like Obama and Clinton included in that definition. Calling progressives "socialists" is like calling conservatives "fascists" or libertarians "anarchists..." it degrades the terms and renders them almost meaningless.
American Heritage Dictionary:
"Socialism: Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy."
There are no socialists running for President. The only one in Congress I know of who even approaches socialism might be Bernie Sanders, and he's still a far cry from a true socialist.
If you examine the history of the neo-conservative movement (now the leaders of the Republican party), their views are a lot closer to socialism than anything in the Democratic party.
the NeoCons many where student activists in the left in the 60s, just like the ones in the democratic party. They dont lead the Republican party but they do have a lot of influence in our party today and I cant stand their politics, except for Iraq, the Middle East policy. other than that, I am a PaleoCon, old values--far Right.
Rudy is a liberal as NY is liberal, but his other than his pro abortion stance is what sickens me, but I dont think his Democratic opponents(Hillary or Obama) are no different. Rudy was alot better for turning around NYC and that is a positive for me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
