AmericanPapist Comments
I don't think Giuliani is an electable candidate. He contradicts himself on pro-life issues, because he's trying to maintain his liberal positions while winning the conservative Republican vote.
Amen.
Would you believe that I personally opposed drug use if I had been busted 6 times for purchasing cocaine.
Probably not.
He won't get my vote either.
Agreed. What got my attention on the interview was that LI let RG get away with not answering the question.
Rudy lost any chance with me (and it wasn't much, given his anti-life, anti-family, anti-Second Amendment record) the moment he said that he supports Federal money going to pay for abortions and would lift the ban because abortion is a Constitutional right.
Not to mention that no one can be personally opposed to something and then give public support for it. If you are really personally opposed to something, then you are opposed to it, period. How anyone gets away with that ridiculous line is beyond me. Can you imagine someone saying that they are personally opposed to drunk driving and would never participate in it, but that they would never stand in the way of someone who wanted to do it?
Here's what I find really frustrating about these politicians who are "Personally Opposed to Abortion, But . . . " (I call them POTABs).
When will someone ask them WHY they are "personally opposed?"
I'm really curious about that . . . do they think it is wrong to kill a pre-born infant . . . is that why they're opposed? And if they DO think that it's wrong, then why would they think it was OK if someone else did it?
Some day . . . some POTAB will be asked that question . . .
Here's what bothers me about these politicians who are "Personally Opposed To Abortion, But . . ." (I call them POTABs).
When will someone ask them WHY they are Personally Opposed?
Is it because they think it is wrong to kill a pre-born infant? If so, why do they think it's okay for someone else to do it?
sorry about the multiple posts . ..
TD: Today, Laura asked RG that EXACT question, and then stood by while skipped right around it. You are right, of course, in saying that the answer to that single question is crucial for POTABS (great acronym, btw)
As I said on my blog, Rudy's posotion on abortion is the main reason I am NOT joining "Team Rudy".
I saw him squirm last Fall here in DBQ when a friend of mine cornered him on his abortion stand.
In fact a pro-life friend of mine has threatened to walk away from the party if Rudy does get the nomination.
Al, if the GOP pulls its Pro Life plank, I will be out of there immediately. Nevermind that I agree with the party on other issues, too. Without the Right to Life, lowering the tax burden on people and securing a defense for our country will mean nothing.
EP, are you really surprised that LI threw softballs to a *Republican* candidate? I'm not.
Although I am not a Rudy apologist, if the election comes down between voting for him (who might just appoint strict constructionist judges that would dispatch Roe v Wade to the ashbin of history) and Hitlery (who would definitely appoint more pro-abortion judges), I'm with Rudy. Get it? Tom
Vote Ron Paul, baby!
A vote for Ron Paul (unfortunately) is a vote for Hitlery! Tom
In addition to his abortion position, his very flagrant marital infidelity (is he not on wife #3 now?) would tend to substantiate the claim that he is not an honest man - or a particularly selfless one. I would make a similar point with McCain.
I'm personally opposed to parents beating the heck out of their children, but I don't want to impose my views on them and violate their privacy.
I guess it takes having lived in NY during the "reign" of Rudy, but LONG before this news of his views on abortion became national news, I had decided that it was a no-brainer that he was totally unsuitable for the presidency. This is a man who announced his divorce from his second wife on TV -- before telling her in person -- and who appeared in public for months with a woman who the NY Times variously described as his "companion," "friend," and other delicate descriptions. The term I gave her was "slut" or "whore" and he was no better...and lo and behold, nothing was spoken from the archbishop's office about this very public adultery (unlike when Democrat Bill Clinton did the same). He is a disgrace to everything we Catholics hold dear, and sadly, so is the Catholic hierarchy in NY that looked the other way when he was such a disgusting public Catholic figure...
19 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
