All right, let me go through here, and preface the whole thing with the "If he's telling us the truth" (Like I say, Bowa, I'm just... it's a spidey-sense kinda thing, but I just don't trust the guy). Here's the quote, and I'll add my comments in brackets to differentiate:
He's Pro-choice [he's personally against it, if I remember correctly, but ultimately won't work against it, which is good] pro-gun control, [bit of a shame here; if he's just saying he's against civilians owning anti-tank weaponry and full-autos, then okay, I can go along, but I don't know, haven't had a chance to look] pro-civil unions [bloody excellent here, I officially give Giuliani kudos for this one] -- that's pretty damn "progressive" if you ask me.
He's also for lower taxes, [again kudos, but what's he going to do to get them down, I don't know where he is with regards to cutting the spending, what's he going to propose we cut] universal health care through tax credits, [hmm... not sure if I agree with him on this or not; I'd have to know more on how it'd work] school vouchers, [I'm against this; I'd prefer to see private schools lower their costs a bit and make it more enticing for people to send the kids there on their own, sounds like more of a free market solution to me] continuing the patriot act and the war on terror, [parts of the Act, absolutely, but you know that folks will squawk about loss of civil liberties on this, and parts of the Act (this is just me talking) should be discontinued, because they will allow for abuse as they are written currently, regardless of who holds office; some nutbag will do it, don't care what political party he is] shutting down the borders, [hell yes!] deporting all illegals now in jail, [again, hell yes] and putting strict constructionist judges like Alito and Roberts on the bench. [do you mean strict Constitutionalist judges here? And of course the hot button Constitutional issue is RvW. If he wants to put people on the bench that will actually be strict Constitutionalists (which would overturn this because it ought to be a states' rights issue), then all right; if on the other hand he wants to go ths route because the folks he's put up are strictly "pro-life", then no, because I don't see socially conservative judges on the Court (who might, and in some cases would, reduce our personal liberties, and therefore our personal responsibilities, because they think people shouldn't "live like that because we don't agree with it"... then no.)
Add it all up and Rudy is a GOP moderate, [sounds almost, almost like a Goldwater Republican. And if he proves out that way, I can in fact get behind him. But I've got to see the proof that he'll prove out that way first.]
(Man I hope I proofed this correctly.)
