Sunday, October 28, 2007

NARAL: Giuliani Victory 'Would Help' Pro-Choice

NewsMax published the below bulletin, today. NARAL isn’t about to publish an actual endorsement of Giuliani. We “wicked anti-choice” types could only dream of that.

The pro-Giuliani Republicans are either tragically deluded or secretly pulling for Hillary (incidentally, you do recall that Mayor Giuliani endorsed Democrat Mario Cuomo over Republican George Pataki, don’t you? Check it out! YouTube - Rudy Giuliani -- Fiscal Conservative?) And Pataki didn’t even differ with Giuliani on abortion. Pataki was “pro-choice," too. So OK, if you’re pro-life, you differ with Giuliani on abortion (for me, this is not just a difference, but an incapacity to understand American principle – and he wants to be a Republican president!?).

But plainly, there is more going on than just social liberalism with Giuliani’s endorsement of the liberal icon, Cuomo. The trumpeted justification for backing Giuliani is that “he can win.” But, the opposite is true: Giuliani can’t win. Social conservatives put a lot of the phone-bank-envelope-stuffing-pushcard-passing into Republican campaigns, in addition to getting out and voting. With all of that gone, Republicans can kiss the election goodbye.

To me, Rudy Giuliani is a fun guy. But, he’s bad for the Republican Party and bad for American principle. And even if he could make it, he would be a bad American President. In one of the debates, Giuliani was asked about the similarity of today’s defiance of the respect of life to the defiance of liberty 150 years ago, with slavery. I don’t know how many listeners accepted Giuliani’s response: “I can’t imagine anyone defending slavery…” But, that was a perfectly horrible response to the question from the perspective of debating a proposition. At the time, there was a very live and bitter debate about slavery. We should overcome this American atrocity, just as we overcame that one. I’ll never vote for an American president who can’t even understand the problem, much less engage the question.

1. NARAL: Giuliani Victory ‘Would Help’ Pro-Choice

The pro-choice political action organization NARAL believes a win by Republican Rudy Giuliani in the 2008 presidential race would be a boon to pro-choice forces.

Giuliani’s stance on abortion rights has alienated many social conservatives and evangelical Republicans. But NARAL’s political director Elizabeth Shipp told the Huffington Post that a Giuliani victory “would help” the pro-choice movement by showing it is possible to win the presidency while still supporting abortion rights.

“The Republican Party used to be about the conservative principles of limited government intervention in private life,” she said.

“It seems to me if they went back to that and stood out from the wicked mainstream, anti-choice agenda, I think yeah, it would be good for the movement.”

But Shipp stopped short of saying that NARAL would support Giuliani’s candidacy, although she acknowledged that he is the only GOP candidate in the field who could conceivably win the group’s backing.

NARAL — formed in 1968 as the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws — has endorsed only one Republican presidential candidate in the history of its political action committee, the Huffington Post notes.

In 1980, the group made a donation to Rep. John Anderson around the time he was leaving the GOP to launch an independent White House bid against Ronald Reagan.

Giuliani had a pro-choice record as mayor of New York City. He said in Republican debates in May that “it would be okay” to repeal Roe v. Wade, but added that he “would respect a woman’s right to make a different choice.”

Some Christian conservative leaders have threatened to bolt the GOP and support a third-party candidate if Giuliani wins the Republican nomination, and a number are urging Republicans to support Mitt Romney’s candidacy as a way of heading off a Giuliani win.

No comments: