John Hawkins at Right Wing News considers the "trust index" on the issue of abortion for the top-four candidates for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. Hawkins, who, full disclosure, is also doing some consulting for the Duncan Hunter campaign, writes:
First of all, if you want a candidate who is really rock solid on the life issue, you have to dip down in the 2nd tier. Among others, Duncan Hunter, Sam Brownback, and Mike Huckabee have exceptionally strong credentials on the issue.
But, in the top tier, there are no rock solid candidates on the life issue. So, what you have to do is look at the candidates as a whole, both their strengths and weaknesses, and decide whom you trust.
Now personally? Being pro-life is extremely important to me, especially because with a split Supreme Court, the next SCOTUS appointment has the potential to swing Roe v. Wade. So, here's my personal "trust index" on the pro-life issue.
Here's what he says about each of the top four...
Fred Thompson: "High level of trust" despite some "squishiness" in the early 1990s on the issue, because of Thompson's 100 percent pro-life voting record during his eight years in the Senate and...
In addition to his excellent voting record, Thompson is a diehard Federalist. In other words, philosophically, he believes that the abortion issue should be returned to the states. That suggests he would want a Scalia or Thomas type judge for the Supreme Court. It's also worth noting that he's the most reliably conservative candidate in the top tier. So, he just does not strike me as the kind of guy who would go against the base on an issue that's this important. So, despite the fact that he's not as solid on the issue as I'd like, as someone who's pro-life, I'd feel very comfortable with Thompson picking the next justice who's going to be on the Supreme Court.
Mitt Romney: "Moderate level of trust" given Romney's flip-flopping on the issue.
Quite frankly, given his flip flopping on a wide variety of issues, I think Romney's conversion on the abortion issue has been purely motivated by politics. So, can you trust him on the life issue? Maybe, maybe not -- although it would probably be in his interest to appoint an originalist judge since it's such an important issue to the base and to be honest, I'm not sure he has any genuine principles on the issue that he wouldn't be willing to toss overboard for politics' sake. So, that's why I'm willing to say that I have a moderate level of trust in him on the issue. He's motivated by politics and the smart political thing to do would be to appoint an originalist judge.
John McCain: "Low level of trust" despite McCain's solid pro-life voting record.
McCain has an excellent voting record on abortion, but he is pro-embryonic stem cell research. However, back in 1999, he said explicitly that he opposed overturning Roe v. Wade on more than one occasion.
Moreover, McCain -- being McCain -- loves nothing better than to make conservatives howl in anger in order to get praise from the mainstream media. There would be few better ways to do that than to appoint a "moderate" Supreme Court Justice who wouldn't threaten Roe. v. Wade. So, he is just not trustworthy on this issue at all.
Rudy Giuliani: "Low leve of trust" for obvious reasons:
Rudy is pro-abortion. Regardless of what he says publicly about the issue, is a pro-abortion President going to appoint a judge who could be the deciding vote in overturning Roe v. Wade? I sincerely doubt it. President's aren't in the habit of appointing judges whom they believe won't see eye to eye with them on issues like Roe and I doubt Rudy would be an exception.
Good analysis.
Comment Preview