Hello there! You have probably noticed that I’ve taken a mini blogging break. I’m in Florida visiting relatives for an early Christmas and will return home tomorrow. But I did have something I wanted to comment on recently.

Mayor Giuliani seems to have been out of the media spotlight lately in the wake of all the “Huckabuzz.” I’m telling you, I can’t turn on my computer without a seeing how great he is or how terribly bad he is. The MSM and the bloggers are all over him. But this little story caught my eye after the final debate from Julie Rovner at the NPR news blog – a reminder that Rudy Giuliani is still in the race and still dancing around his abortion position:

During Wednesday’s final debate in Des Moines before the Iowa caucuses, Giuliani was asked about abortion — never an easy question for a pro-choice candidate in a largely pro-life party. He’s mostly managed to finesse the issue until now; professing his belief on the one hand, as he said at the debate, “that ultimately the government should leave that decision to a woman and her conscience,” but on the other hand promising to appoint “strict constructionist” judges that would, presumably, overturn Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that guarantees that decision is left to said woman and her conscience.

This time, however, Giuliani went off in a different direction after professing his core pro-choice view, saying: “I would like to see limitations on abortion. I brought those about in New York City. We reduced abortions.”

In her post she quotes Kelli Conlin, President of NARAL Pro-Choice of New York for the last 15 years who served on Giuliani’s transition team and many of his high-level councils while he was mayor. Conlin doesn’t recall this latest claim of America’s mayor and in fact says that “[o]nly the state has the power to limit abortions.” Actually what he did was sign a bill that

“clamped down on those who would blockade clinics…he was a real booster and champion for reproductive choice and health in New York when he was here.”

Needless to say, no, I still do not trust Rudy’s promise to support abortion restrictions or his position on judges, for that matter. I question the constitutional judgment of a man who finds a “constitutional right” to abortion and his ability to pick judges who would interpret the document correctly as well

Regarding Huckabee: I am no supporter of his really. I understand that there is a considerable amount of disdain for the man among many conservatives, however I do agree with a fellow blogger who has said: I will take solace in one fact should Huckabee emerge as the nominee. We did not lose the soul of the party (as would have happen if Rudy were the nominee), only its brain.