And a Giuliani White House wouldn't?.......... http://www.blogicus.com/archives/rudy_giuliani_is_not_our_man.php
From your link:
"COLMES: Now, Roe vs. Wade -- You are pro-choice. How important is it to you as a pro-choice Republican to have a pro-choice on the court as someone..."
"GIULIANI: That is not the critical factor. And what's important to me is to have a very intelligent, very honest, very good lawyer on the court. And [Roberts] fits that category, in the same way Justice Ginsburg fit that category."
Giulliani told Colmes that Roberts was a good choice, that abortion was not a litmus test and used Ginsburg's "intelligence" as justification for nominating somebody in the mold of Roberts.
If the choice in November 2008 is Giuliani vs. Hillary, here are the options:
1. Vote for Hillary and help Hillary gain the White House and guarantee more Ruth Ginsburgs on the Supreme Court and guarantee that late term abortions will be the law of the land for decades to come.
2. Stay home and help Hillary gain the White House and guarantee more Ruth Ginsburgs on the Supreme Court and guarantee that late term abortions will be the law of the land for decades to come.
3. Vote for the 2008 version of Ross Perot and help Hillary gain the White House and guarantee more Ruth Ginsburgs on the Supreme Court and guarantee that late term abortions will be the law of the land for decades to come.
4. Vote for Giuliani and have a chance that he may very well nominate more Roberts to the Supreme Court.
If the choice in 2008 is Giuliany vs. Hillary, I choose to vote Number 4 in the general election and I urge all other conservatives to vote Number 4 too.
If he would run, I think that Fred Thompson could have the charisma to pull a lot of those sheeple votes without demoralizing the base the way Giuliani at the head of the ticket would.
That is an issue that affects the primaries and I believe that Thompson could beat Hillary in a general election. There is no problem in voting for Thompson in the primaries.
The problem, however, is that far too many conservatives are saying that if the general election candidate is not a true conservative, they will throw their vote away or stay home and that guarantees a Hillary White House with all the horrors that would bring.
I know what was said on the link. It said he has a history of appointing liberal judges. Of course he's not going to be foolish enough to come right out out and say he'd appoint Ginsburg clones when he's campaigning for the Republican nomination. But I have serious doubts about what kind of person he actually would put up if elected.
If the choice in November 2008 is Giuliani vs. Hillary, here are the options:...
How about if we work together to make sure that ISN'T the choice we have to make? If we have to have a government filled with Lincoln Chafee types because people say that real conservatives can't win, what have we gained?
In my congressional district, there was a lot of talk that we should nominate a moderate instead of Michele Bachman because she was just too conservative to win here. Michele wound up winning (at least in part) because the conservatives had somebody good enough for them to be willing to donate their time and money to help get elected.