Archive for May, 2007

The Truth About Rudy and Gay Marriage

May 28, 2007

Have you ever read a news article about Rudy Giuliani that’s cited him as being in favor of legalizing gay marriage, and then sat back and thought to yourself, “Huh, I didn’t know Rudy was in favor of that.”

Well, it might just be because he’s not!

Somehow, a completely concocted meme has cleverly infiltrated the media from top to bottom, that Rudy Giuliani is pro-gay marriage, when, in fact, he is absolutely not.  In fact, Rudy has been one of the staunchest supporters of preserving traditional marriage, even when his position was unpopular in the most liberal of cities.

Here’s what Rudy had to say about the marriage issue recently: “I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, that it should remain that way, it should remain that way inviolate, and everything should be done to make sure that that’s the case.”

Here’s what Rudy had to say about the marriage issue back in 2000: “The institution of marriage should remain defined as a man and a woman.”

Rudy has always been in favor of traditional marriage, and has never changed his views based on the office he’s running for.  It’s as simple as that.  Rudy is not pro-gay marriage.

Perhaps the confusion comes because Rudy is pro-gay rights, supports civil unions, and has a couple of friends who are gay.  Let’s set some things straight here:

Rudy is pro-gay rights because he is pro-human rights.  I think all sane, caring social conservatives share Rudy’s stance on this one.

Rudy is pro-civil unions, but opposes those civil unions that too closely resemble traditional marriage, as he did in the case of the New Hampshire civil unions law that made them the equivalent of marriage.

Rudy is known to have a couple of gay friends, but that is meaningless in the policy making realm.

The fact is, homosexuality is a personal issue, not one that a President should have to deal with.  People have the right to personally feel that homosexuality is moral or immoral, and they have the right to politely discuss amongst themselves the “rightness” of such a lifestyle, but social conservatives and evangelicals like us must understand one thing: The government, particularly the office of the Presidency, is NOT our vehicle to impose our morality on others!  We do not have the right to hijack American politics to make other people follow our lifestyle.  For those of us who are Christians, it is not our responsibility to force non-Christians to follow the minutae of all our religious laws and regulations.

Conservatives should not be pressing for a nanny-state that tells people what they can and cannot do in their own bedrooms.  In fact, true conservatism demands that government lessen its size and scope, and step out of the personal lives of its citizens.

Homosexuality is not the issue in 2008.  We need a President who can fix the real problems our country is facing: the national deficit, government spending and taxes, global terrorism, the health care system, the education system, Social Security, the energy crisis, and so on.  Rudy Giuliani is the candidate with the proven experience and leadership needed in getting results on these issues.  Rudy Giuliani is the candidate we need.

Josiah Schmidt


Why Pro-Lifers Should Support Rudy

May 28, 2007

Rudy Giuliani is pro-choice, short and sweet.  So why should pro-life Republicans support him for President?  Because, while he supports a woman’s right to choose, he personally feels that abortion is the wrong choice.

Interestingly enough, Rudy has a solid anti-abortion record as a public official.  While Mayor of New York City, Giuliani discouraged abortions and promoted alternatives like adoption.  As a result, the NYC adoption rate rose 17% over the course of his two terms, while the NYC abortion rate dropped an equally impressive 17%.  This was an even bigger decline than the nationwide drop of 14.8% during the same period.  Most importantly of all, Medicaid funded abortions in NYC dropped by 23% during Giuliani’s administration.  After Giuliani left office?  The downward abortion trend upended as the pro-choice policy maker Mayor Bloomberg took the reins.

How else, other than promoting adoptions, did the Giuliani administration push down the abortion rate so effectively?  Many attribute it to the atmosphere of hard work, accountability, and personal responsibility that Rudy’s policies fostered in New York City.  As Mayor, he got 60% of New York’s welfare recipients off the rolls, and restored to them the dignity of self-sufficiency.  He restored economic prosperity to the city by reducing the citizens’ tax burden by 20%.  He re-energized the city’s education system (the largest in the nation), bringing in 13,000 new teachers and increasing school funding by $4 billion.  He created a far brighter, far more hopeful atmosphere, slashing crime and homicides by 57% and 64%, respectively.  All this led to a city where more people were taking responsibility for their actions, more people were thinking ahead and investing in their future, more people were educated and able to make better choices, and more people felt hopeful about the kind of world a child could be raised in.  As a result of all these factors, tens of thousands of children who would have otherwise been terminated, had abortion rates continued at their pre-Giuliani rates, were not.

Giuliani, as a policy maker, has been strongly anti-abortion.  So, how does that play out in the ballpark of the Presidency?

There are really only two ways in which a President has influence on the abortion issue.

1). Through the kind of Supreme Court nominees he or she would appoint.
2). Through the passing or vetoing of certain legislation that would come across his or her desk.

How would Giuliani, as President, handle these roles?

He would handle the Supreme Court nomination process by nominating strict constructionists with strong conservative backgrounds.  As far as ideal Supreme Court nominees, Rudy has repeatedly named Roberts, Alito, and Scalia.  The next President of the United States will likely have the opportunity to nominate two Supreme Court justices.  Two more constructionist judges would tip the scales of the Court to conservative, and open the door for Roe v. Wade to be overturned for the first time in decades.

But let’s be realistic about Roe v. Wade.  The overturning of Roe v. Wade does not mean the criminalization of abortion in America.  It merely throws the abortion issue back to each of the individual states to decide.  This federalist system is exactly the way Giuliani would prefer (and exactly the way the father of American conservatism, Barry Goldwater, preferred it).

Secondly, on all the key pieces of legislation, Rudy remains staunchly anti-abortion.  For instance, Rudy is in favor of the Hyde Amendment, which severely restricts federal funding for abortion, and he is also in favor of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.  There can be no doubt that if those laws come across his desk as President, he will uphold them.

So, basically, how would a President Giuliani operate on the abortion issue?  The same exact way all the previous Republican Presidents have operated: He would nominate more Robertses, Alitos, and Scalias to the Supreme Court, he would keep partial birth abortion illegal, and he would keep tax-payer dollars out of abortion clinics.

The abortion issue is a non-issue when it comes to Rudy Giuliani.

The real question is, then: Why not just nominate someone who stamps themself simply “pro-life,” without delving into the intricacies of it?

Because abortion is not the only issue we elect our President on.  Elections are about choosing the candidate who can most efficiently solve the core problems in how our government works.  And when the full range of issues is taken into account–the size and scope of government, taxes and fiscal management, the strength of our national defense, our posture on the international stage, the health care, education, and Social Security systems, the energy crisis–Rudy Giuliani is the candidate most qualified to take on the job.

Giuliani is the best guy for the office, and pro-lifers should not feel that they are sacrificing the abortion issue for the sake of all the others.  They’re not.  President Giuliani will reduce abortions, nominate conservative judges to overturn Roe v. Wade, and keep all the reasonable restrictions upon them that we now have.  But a Democrat won’t.

Josiah Schmidt

James Dobson, Revoke Your Giuliani Comments Immediately

May 27, 2007

Recently, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson stated: “I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision.” We, as social conservatives, feel this is the wrong decision.

Issues like abortion are very complex and delicate issues. Such heavy-handed tactics as Dobson’s have not worked in the past, and they do not take advantage of the broad support on all ends of the political and religious spectrums for reducing abortions and promoting alternatives like adoption. Mr. Dobson’s statements were rash and divisive. Not only do they foster an “us-against-them” attitude in the struggle against abortions, they immaturely disregard a huge range of other important issues for the sake of a very narrow slice of issues.

If other social conservatives and evangelicals follow Dobson’s lead, we could end up with a liberal President who will nominate two similarly liberal Supreme Court justices, who will expand the role and size of government, raise taxes, take us back to being on defense in the War on Terror, weaken our national defense, and create a less prosperous, less secure America for our children and grandchildren, all while setting us back years on the abortion issue. All this to avoid a President Giuliani, who would nominate strict constructionist judges like Roberts, Alito, and Scalia to the Supreme Court and keep the Hyde Amendment and Partial Birth Abortion Ban in tact, not to mention employ the Reagan principles of less government, less taxes, and peace through strength, and who would aggressively wage the war against jihadists to ensure a safer homeland for tomorrow.

James Dobson’s comments on Rudy Giuliani are extreme, short-sighted, and dangerous to the conservative movement.

Sign our petition and urge James Dobson to revoke his statements on Giuliani and apologize for them immediately.

Rudy – The Candidate for Social Conservatives

May 26, 2007

Contrary to the mainstream pundits’ conventional wisdom that says former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani cannot win over the vast bloc of socially conservative Republican voters, Rudy remains a strong frontrunner in the race for the 2008 nomination.

Why do, and why should, social conservatives support Rudy as their guy in the presidential race?  Here’s why:

Rudy Giuliani is the consummate Goldwater-Reagan policy-maker and leader of our time.  His administration in NYC from 1994-2001 has been hailed by Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist George Will as the “most successful episode of conservative governance in this country in the last 50 years.”  Mayor Giuliani, who got his start running the US Attorney’s office in the Reagan administration, applied President Reagan’s principles of smaller government, fiscal discipline, less taxes, and more efficient law enforcement on an even more intense and focused arena: New York City, the rotting, drug and crime infested metropolis mired in decades of debt, bureaucracy, and outdated New Deal policies, and ruled by corrupt politicians, labor unions, and organized crime rings.

Finally fed up with the failures of such governance, New Yorkers elected a conservative Republican, Rudy Giuliani, as Mayor for the first time in a quarter century.  Rudy immediately set to work tackling the major problems: the city’s finances, the welfare system, rampant crime, and a failed education system.

At the close of his second term, Mayor Giuliani had cut the size of city government by an astounding 20%, turned a $2.3 billion deficit into a multi-billion dollar surplus, decreased the tax burden by 22% percent, increased school funding by $4 billion and added 13,000 new teachers, cut the welfare rolls by 60%, cut crime and homicides by 57% and 64% respectively, and turned the crime capital of America into what the FBI eventually classified as the “safest large city” in the country.

Rudy is not the typical politician.  Known for being a straight-shooter and a strong-willed leader, he does not do 180 degree turns on the big issues for political expediency or change his views based on the office he’s running for.  For instance, on the issue of abortion, Rudy is pro-choice.  On the issue of homosexuality, Rudy has pushed for gay civil rights and supports civil unions.  On the issue of guns, Rudy implemented some gun control measures (to great success) in NYC.  Throw into the mix the fact that Rudy has been divorced and has appeared in drag for a couple of comedy skits, and you can see why socially conservative Republicans might get nervous.  But there is really, truly no reason to worry.

Rudy personally disagrees with abortion and has stated numerous times that he feels it is the wrong choice.  However, he has taken the Goldwater stance that such issues should not be handed to the federal government to decide one way or the other.  But let’s be realistic here, a United States President’s realm of policy-making does not really include abortion.  The most influence a President can have is in the appointment of Supreme Court Justices (who might overturn Roe v. Wade) and in the signing or vetoing of certain legislation that Congress might pass to his desk.

Rudy has been crystal clear that the kind of Supreme Court Justices he would appoint as President would be in the mold of such strict constructionist conservative judges as Roberts, Alito, and Scalia.  A court of such conservative judges will likely overturn Roe v. Wade.  However, social conservatives must understand one thing: the overturning of Roe v. Wade does not mean the end of abortion in America.  It simply throws the issue back to the individual states to decide, where it belongs.  A President Giuliani virtually guarantees that this will happen.  As for the bills that might pass the President’s desk, Giuliani supports such key legislation as the Hyde Amendment (which limits federal funding for abortion) and the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.  As Mayor, Rudy Giuliani oversaw a 17% decrease in abortion (and, importantly, a massive 23% drop in Medicaid-funded abortions) in NYC, and this occurred because Rudy enacted no laws or initiatives supporting abortion, and, concurrently, strongly supported adoption as an alternative to abortion.

A President Rudy does not mean more abortions.  It means less.

Rudy feels that it is important that marriage remain an institution between one man and one woman, which is why Rudy has never supported gay marriage.  Rudy supports gay civil rights because he supports human rights, and he only supports civil unions if they do not too too closely resemble traditional marriage.  However, once again, this should not be the issue a President is elected upon.  While individuals can agree or disagree on the morality of homosexuality, this election is not about electing a Pastor or electing specific morals to be imposed upon the entire nation, but about electing an experienced leader who can deal with the big issues of how the government works.

A President Rudy does not mean legalized same sex marriage.  It means the preservation of traditional marriage.

Rudy unequivocally supports the Second Amendment right to bear arms, and kept that freedom in tact in New York City, even while implementing some particular controls and guidelines for gun ownership in his area.  Rudy acknowledges that not every place is like New York City, and that individual states and regions should be free to implement as broad of gun freedoms as they feel is wise based on their own particular circumstances.

A President Rudy does not mean more gun control.  It means guaranteed Second Amendment freedoms.

Likewise, Rudy’s personal history, which includes two divorces, has absolutely no bearing on how he will fight the war on terrorists, solve the problems we face in Iraq, bring fiscal discipline to our government, cut taxes and welfare, clean up our neighborhoods, fix the education system, and keep our nation safe and secure.  Rudy’s personal imperfections certainly did not stop him from doing all those things as Mayor of New York City, and his past, now behind him, should not be an issue in how he will administrate as the next President of the United States.

Some of the greatest conservative leaders in America have had less than spotless personal lives, but that did not stop them from doing what is right for our country.  President Reagan’s divorce did not stop him from vaulting a country languishing in the failed liberal policies of the Carter administration into a new era of prosperity and safety, House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s divorces did not stop him from leading Republicans to historic victory in Congress or from being one of the greatest conservative thinkers of our time, and Rudy Giuliani’s did not stop him from executing one of the most successful episodes of conservative governance in modern history, nor will it stop him from doing so in the White House come 2009.

This is why social conservatives continue to support Rudy Giuliani for President.  And this is why those who don’t, should.

Josiah Schmidt