Giuliani vs Hilary - What would you do? :: Politics

Politics: February 2, 2007
Giuliani vs Hilary - What would you do?

When I recently wrote about Rudy Giuliani, I imagined a disastrous scenario in which conservatives became convinced that he was the only "viable" candidate to take on the Democratic nominee for President, Hillary Clinton (shudder). The pressure compounded as Giuliani supporters adopted the motto "a vote for (fill in a pro-life candidate) is a vote for Hilary" and some pro-life leaders began to point out that Giuliani pledged to nominate a strict constructionist to the Supreme Court while Clinton promised a Ginsburg clone.

Yes, it was only my imagination, an unlikely scenario given the field of evolving candidates for president and not something to dwell on. But then I visited Life Training Institute's blog where Scott Klusendorf poses the question

Suppose at the executive level, it's Rudy versus Hillary in 08. Rudy consistently says that while he personally supports a woman's decision to choose abortion and would sign congressional bills supporting that decision, he's convinced the Court overstepped in Roe. In fact, he calls the decision "an exercise of raw judicial tyranny unworthy of a Court dedicated to interpreting the law rather than making it." He cites Alito, Roberts, Thomas, and Scalia as models of judicial restraint. Thus, he's fine with gutting Roe or even abolishing it. But if Congress then wants to federalize abortion rights at the legislative level, he'll support that effort even if the bill's provisions are every bit as permissive as Roe's.

Hillary, meanwhile, insists she'll only appoint judges who can be counted on to uphold Roe.

What's your pick? A) sit the election out, B) pick a write-in candidate with no hope of winning, C) limit the damage by going with Gulliani, D) vote for Hillary to teach the Republicans a lesson.

So, what would you do? And what will you do to ensure this is a decision you don't have to make?

Background reading: make sure you read Jay's posts (here and here) as well as Joe Carter's opinion (click here).

Posted by plb at February 2, 2007 9:09 PM

Subscribe with Bloglines

Get our free Daily Newsletter filled with Pro-Life News and Commentary.

Prior Articles:

Choosing Life - Choosing McCain - Mar 13, 2008
Huckabee's Problem - Jan 16, 2008
The Black Church and Obama - Jan 09, 2008
Ron Paul for Life - Nov 02, 2007
Bob Jones and Romney - Oct 22, 2007
Romney Narrowly Edges Huckabee in Values Voter Straw Poll - Oct 20, 2007
WB 2007 - Morning Session Has Ended - Oct 20, 2007
Priest Blasts 'Usual Suspects' For Votes Against Pro-Life Policy - Sep 24, 2007

Trackback

TrackBack URL for this entry (note that all trackbacks from posts without a link to this entry will be considered spam and deleted):

Comments

I'd have to choose Rudy, for the following reasons:

1. He's never come up with anything comparable to Hillary's "Throw the handicapped, especially disabled kids, under the bus" health care plan.

2. He at least has legitimate leadership skills, as demonstrated on 9/11

3. I've never heard of Rudy double-speaking the way Hillary does.

Posted by: Christina on February 4, 2007 3:29 PM

So here we have a man who believes that it shd. be legal to suck out babies' brains, who favors gay marriage, and who in general has nothing conservative about him. But we shd. vote for him because he has "leadership skills"? I don't think so. Heck, Hitler had leadership skills. Give me a break. Never mind being "single issue" voters. The question has become, are there _any_ conservative issues that matter to us, or is it now all about such nebulous qualities as "not engaging in double-speak," "having leadership abilities," and not happening to endorse some specific bad idea Hillary Clinton had?

Honestly, I begin to think conservatives just care nothing anymore about whether a candidate is conservative at all.

And what strategic gains do we win by voting Giuliani? On the contrary, we send a message loud and clear to the GOP: "You can put up any candidate for president you want, and as long as it's not Hillary Clinton, he can be as totally liberal as you like, and those pro-life conservatives will go out there and vote for him. Basically, you have their vote come what may. You can ignore them."

Posted by: Lydia

on February 4, 2007 6:11 PM

I hope that ALL Ameracans realise that our world is more in the**** that it should be. Most of all because of The ***** you have in power now. Do something logic, what I can't say at this moment. May be, realise that this Earth we Live on has Some Rights. As an Ausralian/English man, I am waiting until a United Europe, can/will have a say in the running of Our Earth.
Our Biggest war is between us Humans and making sure we all don't end up well cooked, with the global warming. I am sure as a 76 year old I could do a better job, than those in power Now.

Posted by: Coinneach on February 5, 2007 8:47 PM

Due to Giuliani's pro-abortion positions, he is not a viable candidate for conservatives. I would vote for the Constitution Party nominee or another pro-life candidate.

Posted by: Eaglet on February 10, 2007 10:05 AM


Disclaimer: The statements and articles listed here, and any opinions, are those of the writers alone, and neither are opinions of nor reflect the views of ProLifeBlogs. Aggregated content created by others is the sole responsibility of the writers and its accuracy and completeness are not endorsed or guaranteed. This goes for all those links, too: ProLifeBlogs has no control over the information you access via such links, does not endorse that information, cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information provided or any analysis based thereon, and shall not be responsible for it or for the consequences of your use of that information.