Friday, June 01, 2007

Giuliani Leading in South Carolina?

This story from the Charlotte Observer claims that a new poll shows Giuliani & Clinton are leading in South Carolina. While Clinton had a strong lead, Giuliani only has a slim one (thank God) and the margin of error would probably allow for the poll being wrong. But that is really alarming to see South Carolina - historically a very conservative and values oriented state - picking Giuliani as the lead GOP?! Can you imagine a ballot with two culture of death politicians?

12 comments:

sarah said...

Thanks for the balanced comment over on Chad's site.

JP Manzi said...

We may have gotten off the the wrong foot over at "A Catholic Life", I am enjoying reviewing your archives on your conversion story as well as your defense of the RCC. As a born and raised Catholic who fell away from the church and dabbled in many churches of the Protestant persuasion, I am really contemplating again, where I stand with the Church. I can surely tell you that I miss it. I just need my head and heart to be on the same page.

TheGodFearinFiddler said...

JP - any 'getting off on the wrong foot' was my fault.

Im sure we have a lot of fundamental agreements Ive just been ungraceful with my comments lately. Looking over your blog I think we may have a lot more common ground than we realized.

Peace of our Lord be with you.

JP Manzi said...

My blog is the inside of my brain. Constantly changing as the wind blows. That is, I guess, what happens when you are on a journey of faith as such. You cling to things hoping for truth later to be disappointed. Such is life at times.


Also with you....

Pilgrimsarbour said...

GFF,

I don't think Giuliani is a bad choice, all things considered, and I mean ALL THINGS. Looking at his record as Mayor of NY and as a lawyer, he brings sound judgement and a keen mind to most issues, especially the War on Islamofascists. It's true that he is a bit muddled in his expression of his thoughts on abortion, but he has claimed specifically that he would appoint strict-constructionist judges to the Supreme Court. A strict-constructionist is one who sees Roe v. Wade as bad law which needs to be overturned. Other than appointing judges, in his capacity as President, Giuliani would have no real legal influence on the life question. Yes, his personal life leaves much to be desired, but so do most of the other candidates. Ironically, the only guy without a plethora of wives is Mit Romney, the Mormon! LOL!

Best,

Pilgrimsarbour

TheGodFearinFiddler said...

Well I think Giuliani would be better than Clinton or Obama - in the same way that Hitler would be a better choice for president than Stalin since:

1. Hitler was a better military/economic leader - better for the security of the people.

2. Hitler murdered a lot less than Stalin.

So in that way, yes Giuliani wouldn't be a total loss. But I pray to God that it doesn't come down to a vote where I'm trying to pick whose policies will get the fewest children murdered...

Getting judges with moral backbones appointed to the supreme court is potentially the most important thing that the president can do but it's not all. Look at the number of pro-death bills Bush has vetoed. Giuliani wouldn't hesitate to sign any of those. He's also pro-gay marriage and pro-embryonic stem cell research.

Sen. Brownback is by far the strongest moral candidate for the GOP. I think the election last year showed how crucial the value voters are for the GOP. Giuliani will never have those votes, so they'll simply stay home again (or vote for someone who has no chance of winning).

Personally, I have 0 loyalty to the GOP. I pick the strongest moral candidate regardless of their denomination. (99% of the time, its the Republican but that seems to be changing)

TheGodFearinFiddler said...

*Party* not denomination! Hehe

Pilgrimsarbour said...

Well, I wouldn't make Giuliani responsible for 40 million abortions the way I would make Hitler responsible for 11 million plus any others who were killed in the war. I find the Hitler analogies to be a bit over the top. One can only hope that the voting public will be less hysterical this time around and not, by default, let Obama or Clinton get in. Not to vote at all, in my view, is irresponsible. So is throwing away one's vote on a no-chancer. We're not going to get everything we want, but we should never give up trying, and that may mean taking the path of incrementalism. I'm not altogether happy with the choices either, but less than perfect choices, in my view, have always been the way of things, and we have to take the long view of things for the sake of our children.

TheGodFearinFiddler said...

I think the analogy is reasonable. Its not a question of whether Giuliani is directly responsible for the murder of children - of course he isnt. But then again, Hitler wasn't directly responsible for all the Jewish murders either.

Im using extremes to make a point. That is, Giuliani is siding with evil - regardless of his leadership ability or his political clout. He is supporting the culture of death regime which is no better - or in terms of numbers of innocent people killed actually much worse than someone who actively campaigned as a supporter of the Nazi regime.

I can certainly see your point and agree to a certain degree - that not voting can be irresponsible. But sometimes - like last November I think it can possibly have positive effects (maybe Im just a dreamer) but the value voters staying home I would HOPE sent a strong message to the GOP. The fact that Giuliani is even being considered as a possible candidate for the Presidency has made me start to think that the GOP is in the process of abandoning the value voters. To whom do we turn?

In the question of the lesser evils argument - again consider the very conceivable (although obviously not historically plausible) scenario of a vote between Hitler and Stalin. Who would you vote for?

People tend to shut down an argument once it hits extremes, preferring to stay in comfortable ranges - such as Clinton Vs Giuliani or Bush Vs Kerry but when pushed to the extremes, the same principles apply. If its ok to select the lesser of two evils on an (arguably) lesser scale, then it would certainly be ok to do so in the more extreme case.

Again, I'm not saying Giuliani is responsible for the millions of murdered children in our country each year, but he definitely would do little if nothing else to deter it from happening as his democratic opponents.

I think Giuliani on the ballot will be a Clinton or Obama victory by default. I would never vote for him. Long term - the best thing that could happen to the GOP is a huge and utter disaster by nominating a pro-death politician. If Giuliani is nominated, I hope thats what happens. There needs to be at least ONE party somewhere that stands up for the life of the innocent. What good is our economy and our national security, if we ourselves are murdering our own children?

If a strong candidate can protect us from Jihadists, thats fine but who will protect us from ourselves?

What it all boils down to, is that we're in the middle of an active holocaust much worse than the Nazi holocaust, or nothing is really happening at all. When I think back to the WW2 era, its sometimes mindboggling and you wonder, how did so many people let this happen? But here we are right here right now where not only are so many ordinary people allowing something even worse, but so many CHRISTIANS are doing so. We can't turn a blind eye to it, and we can't support anyone who is even marginally sympathetic to the culture of death. Giuliani goes beyond sympathy and borders on active support.

Pilgrimsarbour said...

I am not, by the way, saying that I am a Giuliani supporter. And I agree that the GOP has lost its way. This idea of "sending a message" to the party is very nearly useless. The truth is, regardless of how many elections they win with conservatives, they have decided again to ignore and abandon them. Your passion for life is commendable. I too have been passionately involved in protests and marches for the cause of life. I can't answer the question of where Christians should go at this time. I can only say that I am not ready to abandon the process because I cannot find a candidate yet that I approve of 100%.

Pilgrimsarbour said...

And by the way, Hitler WAS directly responsible for the murders, in my view, because he was the one who either created and/or signed off on the policies. Giuliani did not create the policy of abortion on demand, and he did not sign Roe v. Wade into law. Perhaps we could persuade someone like him to the truth of life over time through letters, prayer, etc. A little honey instead of a sledgehammer might do some good. Who knows? I think it's time we stop seeing our fellow Americans as evil enemies and view them compassionately as the mission field that they are in Christ.

TheGodFearinFiddler said...

I'm not commenting on Giuliani's soul that's between him and God. He is not my enemy, but he is wrong on this issue and so severely wrong on such a huge issue that I cannot support him as president.

Now you said that he didn't draft Roe V Wade- but thats just it.. He said he would! He's pro-choice. He believes that the government should not stop this murder from happening!

He says he's personally against abortion etc... Come on, if you find me one person that speaks of abortion as a glorious wonderful thing I'll shut up. But the truth is, Giuliani's message is no different than Clinton or Obama's on this topic.

"I am personally against rape, but that should be a man's choice and the government should stay out of it" Do you see how terrible this logic is? Thats what ALL of the culture of death people say.

I know Giuliani isn't your ideal candidate either - and I'm not talking about ideal candidates. We're not going to elect a saint.

But they at least need to have the moral integrity to know how insanely wrong it is for a mother to murder her child and how solemn of a duty it is for society to protect its weakest citizens.

I'm not interested in politics at all. We're fighting a spiritual battle (as you well know). It's time to stop playing the world's game of politics and start standing up for what's right without compromise.

Depending on which way the political scale tips, don't be surprised to see anti-Christian legislation in the next few years.