Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

More Giuliani

Concerning Rudy’s residual confusion discussed so eloquently in the thread below: He needs to be asked straight out how it’s possible to be pro-Scalia and pro-abortion rights. If abortion is a right, then states couldn’t possibly have the right to pass restrictive laws based, say, on Rudy’s personal opinion that abortion is morally wrong. Rudy’s new honesty has to culminate in a new coherence, one that will make clear that Krauthammer’s attempt to save him for the judicial restraint fans was misguided and futile.

The linked article also quotes from a speech by Romney where he acknowledges his past error and affirms his devotion to the sanctity of life. Is his confession just an exploitation of Rudy’s new honesty? Or have Rudy and Mitt both decided to stop waffling and stake their futures on the clear presentations of real convictions? We shall see.

Discussions - 6 Comments

Yes, his speech has magnified the incoherence of his position.

Maybe he's thinking some razzle-dazzle during the primary season will chill out the religious right (at least suficiently to give him the nomination), after which he can appeal to the center and center-left with his true position.

A risky strategy, and one that depends heavily on the gullibility of the GOP base (or perhaps on their fatalism in having so few solid choices). Personally, I think such a strategy is doomed to fail, if such it is.

"If abortion is a right, then states couldn’t possibly have the right to pass restrictive laws based, say, on Rudy’s personal opinion that abortion is morally wrong."



I hope this does not come off as a snarky paleo attempt to score points. This gets at the heart of a serious issue. Can you not see from the above quote why it is dangerous for conservative who are interested in preserving traditional culture not to invoke "rights" language? All it takes is for some young snot-nose lawyer or some Black Robed tyrant to determine something is a "right," and then by the logic above any resistance to that right MUST fall. (Whether abortion, gay marriage, sodomy, "equality," etc. etc. etc.)

How could an intelligent man tie himself in such knots over such an easy question. Hasn't somebody clued him in that one can be pro-choice and SIMULTANEOUSLY against Roe, and against all of the various progeny of Roe.

The way he's handled this is evocative of the Bush administration. Isn't this exactly the type of braindead move we've seen of late from the White House.

I'm literally speechless watching Rudy blow up his own campaign. Did you see him sweating and wiping his brow down there in Texas? It's one of those situations where a picture is worth a thousand words. Rudy is literally and figuratively sweating it. Whoever is his lead political advisor and whoever allowed him to get himself in such a position ought to be canned immediately. Rudy is supposed to be the SAVVY Republican in the race! Which of us would conclude as much of late, as we watch him floundering and flailing about.

Yea, he's looking more and more like he's not quite ready for prime time.

Yes. Attacks on Rudy over abortion aren't always fair and are sometimes over-the-top rhetorically. But in a sense, he's asked for this. Had he come out the starting gate with a strong standard (i.e., oft-repeated) speech on those social conservative themes he agreed with, much of the nattering about abortion could have been avoided. It's central to the campaign mainly because Rudy hasn't given us cause to look at the big picture, because he hasn't shown us one. A smarter and more focused candidate would have minimized the salience of abortion by highlighting other social conservative issues in a way that got the family-values people (among whom I marginally include myself) to not only accept but like and admire him. It may or may not be too late now.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/10411