Skip to comments.'Complicated' statements from Romney, Giuliani on abortion rights are 'welcome,' opinion piece says
Posted on 02/28/2007 7:21:21 AM PST by pissant
Although it is "easy to hoot with derision" at the "awfully complicated positions" on abortion rights taken by former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (R) and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R), the two possible Republican presidential candidates "make sense" when listened to "with a decent sympathy," Ann Althouse, a law professor at the University of Wisconsin, writes in a New York Times opinion piece (Althouse, New York Times, 2/24). Giuliani, who supports abortion rights, in recent talks with conservative media outlets and voters in South Carolina said he would appoint "strict constructionist" judges to the Supreme Court.
He in a recent interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News also said that a law (S 3) being reviewed by the Supreme Court that bans so-called "partial-birth abortion" should be upheld and that he supports parental notification requirements for minors seeking abortion with a judicial bypass provision.
Since Romney first ran for U.S. Senate in 1994, he has acknowledged that his position on abortion has changed from "proudly" supporting abortion rights to saying that he would "like to see" Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that effectively barred state abortion bans, overturned.
Romney in 2004 said that when he studied human embryonic stem cell research, he experienced an "awakening that led him to the conclusion that 'the sanctity of life had been cheapened' by the Roe decision" (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 2/13).
Romney while governor "took an admirably limited view of executive power and acknowledged the independence of the legal system," and Giuliani "respects the distinctive work of judges and the separate role of the state legislatures," according to Althouse.
"To represent what the country as a whole thinks, the president ought to take account of the deep beliefs Americans have about both reproductive freedom and the value of unborn life," Althouse writes.
She concludes that people should have "patience" in what Romney and Giuliani are saying but should not be "naive" because the next president will appoint judges who will bring "a version of humanity that will express something of the president's cast of mind" (New York Times, 2/24).
Now, if we have a judicial applicant, a judicial nominee, who can look at a sonogram of an unborn child and not see the value of human life, then from this person, if I should become President of the United States, he will not receive a judicial appointment. I tell you what you he will receive, he will get an appointment with an optometrist so he can get a pair of eye glasses.
Duncan Hunter, Jan 22, 2007.
Exhibit "A" in the case against the NYT and liberalism.
Isn't Ann a libertarian?
WTF does this mean?! There's nothing "complicated" about their positions, Rudy has no objection to a woman murdering her unborn child, as far as he is concerned it's a woman's "right" to be on a gurney on her way to deliver her baby and change her mind and get a partial birth abortion instead. Romney now claims to oppose abortion, but nothing he's ever done leads me to believe him.
Smokd and mirrors and tapdancing, my friend.
I never smoked anything that strong!
Rudy apparently inhaled too much.
Its really not that complicated.
Its only complicated if you want both pro abortion and anti abortion people to agree with you simultaneously.
Or...if you sudddenly wish to reverse your opinion, and don't want people to think that you are suddenly reversing your opinion.
I wonder if there's any other in-breeding in Rudy's family.
It seems that many folks running for President this time have adjustable opinions on most everything. Both parties candidates adjust their opinion to the most recent poll and how they are doing in the running.
I know of course that during a lifetime people's opinions DO change or are adjusted, but these folks seem to be making adjustment almost daily, and in order to increase their political appeal.
I kind of want to vote for some less adjustable. With morals and principles established and verifiable.
gee: I havent seen one yet.
This is the key, because I guarantee you that EVERY abortionist in the country will have a list of judges who are more than happy to sign an execution order any time of the day or night.
He and his first wife have kids?
I heard Hannity's interview with Rudy, Rudy made it very clear that he believes in the "right" to abortion. I don't really give a damn what any candidate says after that, they can rationalize all they want, but in the end they are pro-abortion.
It is often noted that at one time Ronald Reagan was "pro choice" what is rarely mentioned though is that this was BEFORE Roe v. Wade and that he wasn't actually pro-choice he went against his better judgement and signed a "therapeutic abortion" law as governor of California in 1967.
Nobody ever believed that Roe v. Wade would eventually result in well over ONE MILLION babies being slaughtered each year. Reagan abandoned any pretense of being even moderately pro-choice AFTER he saw what abortion did. However, there has been no event to act as a catalyst for Rudy, abortion has been a reality for his entire political career and nothing has changed his mind, not will it ever.
No, I'm wondering if this inbreeding is common in his family.
Rudy was pro life in his younger days, so he says.
Not worth going down that road.
You're probably right.
He even flip flopped the wrong way, sheesh.
Always though he should have a pancake on his head.
Though = thought
It's been said that liberalism is a mental disorder
So, BEFORE the slaughter of 50 MILLION infants began he was opposed to it, but NOW that he understands the carnage he is all in favor of it?
If that's the case, my opinion of Rudy just got LOWER!
That one defies explanation.
The only guy capable of giving a straight answer....and the RIGHT answer.
I think that it is.
It's a REVERSE conversion.
Amen, to that.
How's the weather in Wisc these days?
"version on humanity.."
Hmmmm. Where have I heard that before? Wait! Don't tell me. Right on the tip of my tongue.
Version OF humanity.
DH, the anti-obfuscation candidate.
Like a hot knife of clarity through the typical word tangles constructed by politicians and lawyers.
It's a flop flip.
Why are you pinging me to this article?
Shall I ping you to the numerous polls posted just today which show Rudy in the #1 spot among Republican candidates?
We all know Rudy is pro choice. Although I'm pro life, I really don't care what his position on this matter is and clearly neither do entire huge segments of the Republican party, otherwise Rudy wouldn't be in the #1 spot.
White evangelical Protestants now clearly favor Rudy Giuliani over Sen. John McCain, "despite his support of abortion rights and gay rights, two issues of great importance to religious conservatives."
We're preparing to get dumped on tomorrow. I hear we might get 10-inches or so. We got 14" last Saturday and Sunday. It's not too cold and the sun is out so that makes it bearable. Spring is just around the corner!
You are dreaming if you believe that crap.
I just had tea this morning with an evangelical and she's rooting for Rudy.
And now how about answering my question? If you wish to ping me to articles you find amusing, I shall ping you to articles that support Rudy. Instead, I suggest you just keep me off your ping list, but that's entirely up to you.
I was pinging you to a particular post. You know I haven't been pinging you to these things regularly, and I don't intend to start. But by all means if there is something interesting in the Rudy posts you would like me to see, do ping me. I don't mind. :o)
BTW, I'm guessing your friend knows very little about Hunter or all the liberal skeletons in Rudy's closet.
I love winter. My absolute favorite season.
Okay, that's fine then. I don't want to get snarky with you, but last night we witnessed an abuse of the Rudy ping list by someone who shall not be named and it was juvenile taunting in the extreme and I didn't think you would engage in that.
I think you know I would not do that. And I never consider you snarky, even when you are. ;o)
My friend the evangelical knew all about Rudy; she even knew about how he booted Arafat out of a concert hall. I just mentioned his name and asked how she felt about him and she literally clapped her hands and started talking about him and I would say knew as much about his positions as the average freeper.
I did think to ask her about Hunter and she said she wasn't terribly impressed although he seemed like a very nice person. She is one of the few people I've asked who at least knew who he is.
LOL. Thank you, pissant, for thinking better of me than I deserve :-)