Giuliani Blog Tracking the likely Presidential candidacy of Rudy Giuliani

Saturday, September 09, 2006

Rebutting David Frum

Rudy caught some heat from David Frum in a blog post on Rudy vs. Romney and what it would mean for the GOP to nominate a candidate who has been pro-choice:

I'd be delighted to see either man win the Republican nomination; I'd sleep well at night having either in the White House. But how in the coming primary season to decide for one over the other? To my mind, it comes down to this: The Republican party is a pro-life party. That's just an empirical fact about the party. Giuliani is not merely not pro-life (I think he (but nobody else!) could get away with that, if he had chosen to address), but adamantly unwilling to reach any compromises with those who are. ...

At this point, with not a single concession to the prolife camp, a Giuliani nomination would split the Republican party in very damaging ways. It would very possible trigger an independent candidacy by a prolife Perot. 2008 will be a tough enough year without that ...

Unwilling to reach any compromises with those who are?

Is this why, in an answer to a question posed by our very own Kavon Nikrad, Rudy voiced strong support for originalists on the Bench, stating, "I don't understand how you cannot be for strict constructionist judges?"

In a WSJ op-ed two years ago, Frum himself suggested judges as an issue Rudy could use to reconcile with conservatives. Well, the record shows that he has, or at least is heading very decidedly in that direction.

I don't think there's any doubt that there is a tacit understanding amongst Rudy and his team that checking his past views at the door is the price of admission to the Republican nomination and the presidency. This doesn't mean changing his position and undermining his straight-shooting authenticity (and unlike Romney or George Allen, he doesn't need to flip-flop to survive), but simply agreeing not to stand in the way of a pro-life agenda.

There is a very relevant template for this on the other side. Democrats have gladly accepted leaders like Harry Reid and Bobby Casey, Jr. who are nominally pro-life, but advance a pro-choice agenda within the Democratic Party. Reid led the charge against both Roberts and Alito, while Casey comes out for "Plan B" and advertises that he'd be part of a Democratic majority that would uphold abortion rights.

Today's Washington Post also highlights non-governmental solutions to the problem -- including pro-life centers that are dissuading women from abortion simply by showing them ultrasounds. Rudy's past positions shouldn't stop him from releasing a policy paper calling for more funding for ultrasound machines for such centers, as a practical step to reducing the number of abortions now?

Frum is a smart analyst, but anyone who believes that Rudy would run or would govern as a pro-choice activist needs to be paying closer attention.

Find this post interesting? Get posts
from this blog in your inbox once a day:


At 11:24 AM, Blogger PHS1 said...

Nice take, RB.

As much as I like David Frum, I agree with you that it is way too early to write off the Giuliani position on abortion as untenable in a Republican primary for president. As a matter of conscience, there are plenty of GOPers who are personally opposed to abortion but believe the decision is a personal one. Such a view would not be incompatible with Giuliani's background as a Catholic.

The demarcation line for Giuliani, however, may well be coming out against partial birth abortion, which even pro-choice Senator Pat Moynihan characterized as infanticide.

The reality is that overturning Roe and Casey would simply and merely return the issue to the states, where some would outlaw abortion and others would legalize it. The consensus ground to be had on the issue is that abortion is not a good thing and that all should work to minimize it. If Giuliani takes such a position he can neutralize the issue and take it off the table.

At 12:39 PM, Blogger nilesmoney said...

When is it going to become obvious that Frum and most US elected officials are complicit in the murder of millions of innocent populations over the last several decades. This includes Mr. Giuliani who supported and continues to support an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, an act defined by international law as the ultimate war crime, including within it all the crime and terror that follows. People need to wake up and understand that a large number of terrorist campaign are run out of Washington DC. The iron(only here in the US) is that the rest of the worls already knows this, and considers the US and its clients the largest threat to peace on the planet. Don't take my word for it. Do the research yourself. One of the great things about this country is the acces to information we have gained through popular struggle. All the info you need to draw a rational conclusion is available in declassified state dept. documents. Their is a paper trail of our policies and their implementation, it is up to you to do the work and quit listening to power and it's complicit agents. But don't believe me, find out for yourself


Post a Comment

<< Home