will this get blamed on Hillary Clinton too?
Yesterday, the Politico reported that ex-NYC Mayor, Rudy Giuliani gave to planned parenthood, the evil face of the pro-choice movement to anti-choice activists. Rudy gave contributions, according to his tax records, in 1993, 1994, 1998, and 1999.
Also, Giuliani has addressed crowds more recently, making a case that republicans should adopt the more "libertarian" stance on abortion, like him. For example, he appeared at a NARAL / Pro-Choice America luncheon in 2001,where he voiced a conservative case for abortion rights, arguing that it "might be more consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party.
Giuliani defended his pro-choiceness there...."Because the Republican Party stands for the idea that you have to restore more freedom of choice, more opportunity, more opportunity for people to make their own choices rather than the government dictating those choices,"
The story was actually nothing new, it had been in the public record for years. But the details and the copies of the actual returns were provided by a rival campaign to give new life to the story , who insisted on not being identified. So, it's not just the Clintons, or the democrats for that matter who are guilty of underhanded techniques and the politics of mud throwing.
Hillary's campaign has been accused of doing this very type of thing, even tho there is no evidence or admission of such. A couple of months ago, an ad resembling some of the old Apple Computer Inc.'s ads that made Barack Obama look good and hillary not so good was 1st believed to be a plot by the Clintons. It turned out that an overly enthusiastic underling at a company that Obamas campaign employed made the commercial, unsolicited, to show his support. Recently, similar charges have been made, again, without much to back them up.
But here, clearly, the "gentlemanly" bunch that some are amongst the 1st to accuse the Clintons of campaign undermining have at least 1 guilty party themselves. And i'm pretty much discounting the libertarian campaign of Ron Paul, who will be lucky to make the next debate after his gaffe concerning a lack aof any crisis management experience and his insistence that we get out of Iraq. Call me crazy, but I don't think it was him especially considering that their views, especially about the states' rights angle of it, are pretty much spot on. The other 8 make it clear that they see it as an issue of morality, unlike Paul. He leaves the moral choices to the individuals and opposes the federal funding of abortion, as he opposes much federal funding in just about every area of government. Paul has opposed efforts by neoconservative activists to make crimes out of interstate transport and other restrictions (not all) if a state rules that abortion is not legal in a state where a woman seeking one resides.
So that leaves 8, assuming Giuliani didn't rat out himself on an issue he'd prefer not talk about.
News that Giuliani isn't gung-ho pro life in a neoconservative or evangelical frenzy is hardly a scoop. the more important story here is who can't play fair, even at this early stage? Is that the charachteristics we are looking for in our next leader?
And if this is a "staff" blunder, or blunder with someone not officially or actually involved with the campaign, the candidate needs to speak up. Now the important matter is how the candidate in question handles this attack with no name or face. Clearing it up now will mean a world more than cleaning it up a year or so from now.
"