Video: Rudy stands by support for public funding of abortions; Update: McCain looks “tired and … cranky,” says Rudy

posted at 3:25 pm on April 4, 2007 by Allahpundit

He took that position in 1989 and by god he’s sticking to it. I’ve already written about his strategy in this vein before. Suffice it to say, it’s too late for him to flip-flop convincingly, and so, with his two rivals looking squishy in their own commitment to social issues, he figures he might as well position himself as a man of his word who’ll stand on principle. Because if he’s willing to do that for principles conservatives don’t like, he’s probably also willing to do it for principles that they do.

More interesting than the abortion comments is what he says at the end in response to the question about Peter Pace’s opinion of gays. Is he suggesting that it’s inappropriate, at least for Christians, to make personal moral judgments? Or just inappropriate for Christian politicians?

Needless to say, this isn’t going to hurt him in California. Click the image to watch.

rudy.jpg

Update: Captain Ed says it’s game over for Rudy.

Update: John Dickerson of Slate was in New Hampshire on Monday for a Rudy house party:

After the house party, the mayor met with his hosts and a few influential Republicans in the bar at the hotel where he was staying and where a few reporters had also decamped. In a voice loud enough to be overheard on the other side of the room, he outlined his view that the other candidates would divide up the “right-wing,” voters, as he called them, leaving him to consolidate the moderates and the economic and military conservatives who aren’t fixated on social issues. One participant asked about John McCain: “Has his time passed?” “I think so,” responded Giuliani. McCain, he went on, “looked like he was tired and he’s cranky.”

Per the quote, according to Dickerson, Rudy’s given to referring privately to social cons, in contrast to himself, as “right-wingers.”

Update: Looks like Rudy’s people are already doing damage control for the abortion stuff. No public funding for any abortions beyond what the law now provides for, they insist — namely, cases of rape, incest, or where the life of the mother is threatened. Except that isn’t what Rudy said in the clip. The touchstone for him is whether there’s a constitutional right, and the constitutional right when it comes to abortion certainly isn’t limited to exceptional cases. He’s spinning.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Update: Captain Ed says it’s game over for Rudy.

I don’t know about that. I was in the car with three coworkers today (all in their 20s) and they were all for Giuliani. One of them used to work on the Hill, and he said that McCain truly is cranky and nasty in person.

januarius on April 4, 2007 at 9:19 PM

amerpundit,

You’re right about not building a democracy and you’re right about the Democrats being fixated on social issues.

The Founders wisely saw the Republic as giving some safeguards against the self-implosion tendencies of democracies. They also saw the necessity of religion and morality to the well-being of our Republic:

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

– John Adams

Nothing is more certain than that a general profligacy and corruption of manners make a people ripe for destruction. A good form of government may hold the rotten materials together for some time, but beyond a certain pitch, even the best constitution will be ineffectual, and slavery must ensue.

– John Witherspoon

(Both quotes are from The Patriot Post).

INC on April 4, 2007 at 9:20 PM

Ameripundit, you’ve made some fine points. Sorry I haven’t responded. I still like Rudy quite a bit, but he committed a gaffe and it may hurt him.

As for McCain – I’ve met him. Cranky about describes it.

Slublog on April 4, 2007 at 9:37 PM

Thompson needs to announce soon and he’s going to have to answer the same questions as everyone else because voters demand to know where he stands on this and a whole lot of other issues.

Romney is looking better every day from where I sit and Rudy just made himself unelectable by the conservative base. I voted for the last big government, big deficit, socially liberal NeoCon President twice and it ain’t gonna happen again.

Buzzy on April 4, 2007 at 9:45 PM

INC, Slublog, Thank You for responding humanely. You know I tried to argue with posters over at Daily Kos one time–didn’t turn out so well. I’m glad I can still argue here, and be treated like before.

Like I said, I’m not exactly campaigning for Rudy, and I haven’t ruled out voting for Fred!. My whole point, is to simply ask people to keep an open mind, and not let one issue shut the door. That’s all. I mean, what happens if we find out tomorrow that Fred! was pro-abortion? Extremely unlikely, but let’s just say for a moment. Would everything we like about him, be for naught?

BTW, on the McCain thing. McCain’s got a place on his site where you can email his staff with questions about his positions. I emailed with a question, his site didn’t address. That was 2 weeks ago, and not even an acknowledgment. Their fundraising tanked, so if I were them, I’d be trying to get every donor/voter I could.

amerpundit on April 4, 2007 at 9:57 PM

amerpundit, glad to do my part to try to be humane :-)!

INC on April 4, 2007 at 10:13 PM

And the fact that the one thing you answered, was how I referred to our government, says a lot.

amerpundit on April 4, 2007 at 9:02 PM

Actually, the only thing it says is that that was the point at which I stopped reading your comment. It may have been chock full of wisdom and truth for all I know, but that mistake particularly annoys me so I stopped reading.

Laura on April 4, 2007 at 10:13 PM

INC, Slublog, Thank You for responding humanely. You know I tried to argue with posters over at Daily Kos one time–didn’t turn out so well. I’m glad I can still argue here, and be treated like before.

Heh. Kos’ site is a lost cause. I’ve tried arguing at liberal sites and have been…um…disappointed with the level of discourse.

Of all of the Republicans running, I like Rudy and Fred. Either of them would make a good president. I’m actually more interested in competence than I am in ideology, and both of these men seems competent. I’m not a one-issue voter, but I am against public funding for abortion becuase I do not believe taxpayers should be held accountable for the bad decisions of others.

McCain is done. He just doesn’t know it yet.

Slublog on April 4, 2007 at 10:13 PM

Eh, doesn’t bother me any,.

Ian on April 4, 2007 at 10:16 PM

Giuliani is a clown, albeit a clown who’s unusually capable of coordinating the civil response to an emergency. In preference to Giuliani’s proposal, it seems healthier for the Americans to take any public funds for abortion and redirect them to euthanizing old geezers who come out in favor of public funding of abortions. The reproductive value of old men seems to be their capacity to lead members of the younger generations and their capacity to communicate their experience in the forms of histories, arts, and sciences. When instead they actively help to extinguish the young people, they become a threat to a polity’s future security. Of course, if Giuliani meant to say he wants to establish publicly funded abortion throughout the Dar al-Islam, he should be given the Caliphate.

Kralizec on April 4, 2007 at 10:53 PM

I think that Republicans are going to elect Hillary/obama in 2008 at this point. I’m getting more and more convinced there will be alot of 3rd party votes or stay home votes that will give the presidency to Hillary.

you have the Christian Right, fed up with Republicans

the Buchanan right, fed up with Free Trade and Border, plus the overall anti-republican mood

scary times, would pragmatic campaign ads that appeal to Reason on the subject do any good?

jp on April 4, 2007 at 11:15 PM

You can all go and wait for Fred. Maybe you’ll vote for Fred…maybe the majority of people who comment on these boards will vote for Fred. But barring some scandal that none of us yet knows about, Rudy will beat him handily.

Don’t really care what “Captain Ed” says about Rudy.

Listen, it’s still FAR too early to “know” who’s going to get the nomination…wasn’t Howard Dean a lock to win the Democratic nomination right up until the Iowa caucuses?

But right now, ya gotta go with Rudy.

asc85 on April 4, 2007 at 11:15 PM

But right now, ya gotta go with Rudy.

asc85 on April 4, 2007 at 11:15 PM

I don’t feel any compulsion. Irrespective of any other consideration, one can publicly advocate whomever one wishes, right up to the moment of pulling a lever to vote for someone, and certainly months before the polls open.

Kralizec on April 5, 2007 at 12:47 AM

Someone please explain how it’s conservative to force a woman who isn’t prepared for parenthood to have a child …

This is a red herring for two reasons. First, whether or not abortion is wrongful killing has nothing to do with being a conservative or liberal. If being opposed to abortion is somehow at odds with conservatism, then so be it.

Second, to say that abortion is wrongful killing is merely to make the claim that the act of killing a fetus falls under the rubric of wrongful killing, just as killing a newborn falls under the rubric of wrongful killing. If abortion is wrong, then we are obligated not to kill a fetus in the same way that we are obligated not kill newborns, infants, teenagers, and so on. Now here’s the point: the obligation not to kill may indeed entail an obligation to care, at least minimally, for a life; but that does not mean that we’re being externally forced into caring for said life. Rather it’s just a fact of moral life that if we’re obligated to do X and doing X entails Y, then we’re obligated to do Y (assuming that Y isn’t something immoral). So yes, if a woman is obligated not to kill a fetus, then she is obligated to carry a fetus to term. This is not “force”; she is not being forced by evil right-wing fundies into becoming a baby-machine a la the various paranoid fantasies that some leftists espouse. She is instead carrying out an obligation that is entailed by another obligation, i.e., the obligation not to kill.

Lest one think this obligation only falls to women, it does not. Suppose someone leaves a baby on my doorstep. I’m obligated not to kill it, but I’m also obligated to care for it at least minimally by calling the authorities. In other words, the obligation not to kill entails a further obligation not to allow the baby to die.

To wrap up then, this notion about women being “forced” to have babies puts the cart before the horse. It is sometimes the case that a burdensome obligation to do Y is entailed by an obligation to do X; but the burdensome nature of doing Y does not justify not doing X. The burdensome nature of carrying a fetus to term does not justify killing that fetus; rather, the obligation not to kill a fetus–if such killing is wrong–entails the burdensome obligation.

(Note well: I am not saying that women are obligated to keep and raise a child for 18 years, any more than I’m obligated to do the same for the newborn left on my doorstep. I am saying that we both have an obligation to provide minimal care for the life in question.)

Bill Ramey on April 5, 2007 at 1:10 AM

Rudy is a “New Yorker” *rick. Him and Mormon Mitt are all for abortions. Wait Mitt changed his mind and joined the NRA over night, both are dunzo. Than there is “sunshine up your Bum McCain”. Next president will be a Dem, sorry.

I heard Hannity on Fox making interview love to Mitt. I was surprised Mitt is a very partisan weenier. He had nothing but praise for Bush. I’d heard enough to not vote for him. Besides Mormons wear magic underwear, think they can become on equal par with God and woman can’t go to heaven unless they are married. So single woman who never married get a dead man to marry them, called a “spirit” husband. No thanks. Mormons are militant. Go live in Salt Lake and not be a Mormon. They’ll be nice, but if you don’t join you are shunned. Most prejudiced bunch of cult members you will meet.

Rudy – wears dress, lives with gays, married 6 times between him and wife number 3, serial adulterer, kids hate him, NY police and fireman hate him, recommend former police commissioner Bernie Kerik to Bush for head of home land security. Problem Rudy knew of Kerik’s mod ties (bribes) and using a post 9/11 government apartment to have sex with his mistress. NICE FAMILY VALUES! Oh yea for abortions and gun control. DONE

McCain walks around a market that was swept, sealed with body armor and 100 US soldiers around him with snipers and blackhawks in position. Yea just like main street USA. Where ARE the Iraq troops and police??????????? Another Liar! Straight talk my a$$.

Republicans are looking like the minority party for a long, long time, and frankly deservedly so. Hey there is hope for real dirty political GOP tricks and voter fraud to win in 2008. No one cheats, steals, lies and is as crooked as a republican. Don’t get me wrong Dems do it to, but republicans are just better crooks and dirty tricks.

gmcjetpilot on April 5, 2007 at 1:14 AM

gmcjetpilot on April 5, 2007 at 1:14 AM

Sounds like you are pre-occupied with magic underwear and dresses. Perhaps critiquing a Ross or TJ Max store would play to your strengths? Because frankly, your “insights” have very little to do with their qualifications as POTUS.

csdeven on April 5, 2007 at 1:50 AM

RUDY NEEDS SOME REMEDIAL READING., but Ed’s right. Game over.

seejanemom on April 5, 2007 at 9:01 AM

Rudy lost my vote with this (unless he’s the GOP candidate, then I’ll hold my nose).
He committed himself to a double no-no: he supports the hideous practice of abortion as a “right” and he wants to pay for it with our tax dollars.
No. No. No.
How can he live with himself as a Catholic and a human being who supposedly has a soul?
(Also, how can the man profess to back “strict constructionist” judges but he pointedly calls abortion a “right”, even though it was a “right” created out of whole legal cloth by summoning another imaginary “right” (to privacy) by the SCOTUS?)

Jen the Neocon on April 5, 2007 at 10:20 AM

I heard Hannity on Fox making interview love to Mitt. I was surprised Mitt is a very partisan weenier. He had nothing but praise for Bush. I’d heard enough to not vote for him. Besides Mormons wear magic underwear, think they can become on equal par with God and woman can’t go to heaven unless they are married. So single woman who never married get a dead man to marry them, called a “spirit” husband. No thanks. Mormons are militant. Go live in Salt Lake and not be a Mormon. They’ll be nice, but if you don’t join you are shunned. Most prejudiced bunch of cult members you will meet.

gmcjetpilot on April 5, 2007 at 1:14 AM

Did you see the Romney ad that talks about vetoes? “I love vetoes, can’t wait to get to Washington to veto spending etc.” Seems to me a pretty direct shot at W.

Also, I don’t know what magic underwear is exactly, but it sounds great!!!

honora on April 5, 2007 at 10:45 AM

Yeah, sorry, Rudy just killed his campaign, and wasn’t content just to shoot his own foot, but emptied the gun into it.

Bad Candy on April 5, 2007 at 11:58 AM

Also, I don’t know what magic underwear is exactly, but it sounds great!!!

honora on April 5, 2007 at 10:45 AM

The ‘magic underwear’ thing is some sort of undergarment that Mormons wear. It has some religious meaning, which I forget, but I do know its an obnoxious thing to make jokes about, and I think it pisses em off.

Bad Candy on April 5, 2007 at 12:02 PM

Fred!

Evilwhiteguy on April 5, 2007 at 12:09 PM

Bad Candy on April 5, 2007 at 12:02 PM

It’s akin to making fun of a persons humility towards God.

csdeven on April 5, 2007 at 12:10 PM

Yeah, I’ll admit my knowledge on Mormons is pretty weak, just that they pick the coldest/snowiest/iciest/rainiest/hottest days to go out and knock doors. Seriously guys, do yourselves a favor and spread your faith on a nice day.

Bad Candy on April 5, 2007 at 12:37 PM

Rudy is just dancin’ with who brung him.

He is always crowing about how he reduced crime in NYC. But he was just mayor at the time that the first aborted generation would have matured into crime. What do you think happens to unwanted babies forced to live. They turn into criminals at a higher rate than those babies who are wanted and loved. You legalize abortion in ’73 and crime goes down across the nation in the 90′s — when the aborted generation would have been 17. Coincidence? I think not.

That being said, he still gets my vote and my $$$.

tommylotto on April 5, 2007 at 2:04 PM

Hey tommy, put down the Freakonomics book…

Bad Candy on April 5, 2007 at 2:41 PM

The abortion thing has been hammered to death. Each side has their side, and the nation is still standing. It is not like he has vowed to fight anyone who wants to stop abortion, that is what fires people up. I am anti-abortion, but that is not my litmus test, I just want someone who does not fight me tooth and nail if my side starts to get traction. It would be best if most politions stepped aside, and let society figure this out.
Here is a dilemma…Pro-abortion, closed borders…or…Anti-abortion, open borders…or…ambivalent abortion, closed borders.

right2bright on April 5, 2007 at 3:27 PM

I was truly supportive of a strong war candidate like Rudy and was willing to forgo the usual abortion barrage because the reality is it is up to the courts, so it was important the type of judges he said he would seat, however to use my tax dollars to kill unborn babies well that is just one step to far. I have notified via email to his campaign that I no longer want their emails and I will no longer send money to the campaign.

Rightmom on April 5, 2007 at 3:59 PM

I remember Arlen Specter saying once that abortion is probably the most divisive issue in this country since slavery. At first, I thought that was hyperbole, but then when I thought more about, I think that he is right.

In many ways, I think it is unfortunate that Abortion has that kind of effect on the electorate. And I don’t say that as someone who is “above” this issue or “above” the fray. It has definitely been a significant factor for me in New Jersey gubernatorial (sp?) races.

asc85 on April 5, 2007 at 7:23 PM

I was truly supportive of a strong war candidate like Rudy and was willing to forgo the usual abortion barrage because the reality is it is up to the courts

In reality, it’s up to the states.

nico on April 5, 2007 at 7:47 PM

In reality, it’s up to the states.

nico on April 5, 2007 at 7:47 PM

Nah, it’s up to the courts until the SCOTUS walks back from RvW. The states have no ability under current precedent to regulate abortion. You may be talking in principle, but that principle only has meaning under a federalist interpretation of the Constitution on the issue. That will only happen with a different court.

spmat on April 5, 2007 at 8:25 PM

That will only happen with a different court.

Which Rudy has promise to appoint.

tommylotto on April 5, 2007 at 11:59 PM

I’m not trying to convince you that Giuliani is the best man for the job. I’m not even trying to convince you to vote Giuliani. I’m not thrilled about any of the candidates. I’m just saying not to rule someone out, because of that one issue.

amerpundit on April 4, 2007 at 6:36 PM

I wouldn’t necessarily rule him out because he is pro-choice, as long as I’m convinced he’ll appoint constructionist justices.

But his REASONING has, for me, ruled him out. As I’ve said, abortion is – or should not be – a necessarily moral or religious debate, but a logical one. I loathe abortion because of perfect logic: our society abhors murder, the taking of life without cause or due process – thus, UNLESS a fetus is NOT alive, it is murder. Inescapable logic.

I believe a fetus is alive. Whatever life is (a soul? a biological spark?), science says it arrives long, long before 24 weeks. I err on the side of life and choose conception. It is the logically defensible position. If we don’t condone murder – and I don’t know for a FACT that a fetus is not alive – then I can’t support abortion.

If our society decides killing children is okay, then I’d have no problem with abortion. That’s logical consistency. But today, we live in a society that will send a teenager to prison for killing her newborn … while simultaneously insisting killing it the day before was a constitutional right.

The logic doesn’t work.

SOME pro-choicers are at least logical. Their position is simple: a fetus is not alive. They’re wrong … but if you accept their premise, than abortion makes sense. I’m a libertarian at heart, and I loathe invasions of privacy … so if the fetus is just tissue, of course I’d support abortion. (BTW, if there is even a possibility the fetus is alive, the pro-life position IS the libertarian position.)

I could live with Giuliani if he claimed the fetus was not alive. Fair enough. But he lost me with his reasoning. If it is NOT alive, there is no reason to hate abortion. None. It’s like having a tooth removed.

But if you hate abortion, there can be only one reason: because you suspect the fetus is indeed alive. Thus Rudy has concluded that he may not like killing, but other people can do it (and make me pay for it!).

Sorry. I think he just lost my vote, and I was a big fan. His position is dishonest and unsupportable, and makes me wonder about the rest of his positions.

For the record, whoever compared abortion to slavery up there had the right idea. It was legal, constitutional, and people were willing to defend that right – and insisted that slaves were not “alive.” (As in human). They were wrong. We are wrong on abortion today, and our descendants will view our generation exactly the same way we view slave owners.

Rudy’s logic is what has been used by decent people throughout history to support or condone all kinds of atrocities. I won’t violate Godwin’s law … but use your imagination.

Give me an honest pro-choicer who thinks a fetus isn’t alive over Rudy’s tortured logic any day.

Professor Blather on April 6, 2007 at 2:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2