May 9, 2013 | 6 comments
January 10, 2013 | 8 comments
October 3, 2012 | 17 comments
May 9, 2012 | 13 comments
May 9, 2012 | 2 comments
Joseph Lawler references the Washington Post’s Jonathan Bernstein to argue that the Rudolph Giuliani presidential campaign is “doomed from the start. Why? Because he’s pro-choice.”
Only he’s really not, as I argue in a post, “Run, Rudy, Run” on the main site. In fact, quite the opposite. Practically and operationally speaking, Rudy is pro-life. He has pledged,
to appoint conservative judges who will interpret the law and not legislate from the bench. Given Roe v. Wade, this is the most important pro-life policy a president can effect; and Rudy clearly is on our side, the pro-life side.
Moreover, according to one of the commenters on my post, “The (not conservative) Guttmacher Institute reported that abortion under Giuliani decreased 18% (the national decrease was 13%), largely because of Giuliani’s adoption policy and general ‘culture of life.’”
Rudy’s purportedly “pro choice” for one reason and one reason only: for political reasons unique to far-left New York City, he said that he was pro-choice. He was running in an extremely liberal jurisdiction and, in order to win, had to pledge fealty to abortion on demand. But as practical public policy matter, a President Giuliani would be pro-life.
You can judge a man by his enemies. Rudy has made all the right enemies — in Albany and Manhattan, as well as in the liberal media.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?