The candor of Giuliani
The larger question is whether winning the GOP nomination as a down-the-line pro-choicer might prove to be a poisoned chalice. Frankly, if Giuliani being the Republican nominee doesn’t prompt a third-party run by a pro-life candidate that cuts into his general-election support, then social conservatives ought to retire from politics out of sheer embarrassment.
It’s still not clear to me that Rudy Giuliani, avowed pro-choicer that he be, must necessarily support the nationalization of abortion policy mandated by Roe.
I appreciate Rudy’s candor, and, while at long last I don’t see any circumstances that could arise whereby my conscience could permit me to support his candidacy at the primary stage, it’s not exactly like it’s probable the Democrats will nominate a prolifer. And given a choice over who I’d prefer to have choosing federal judges, I’d just as soon have Giuliani as Clinton or Obama.
Thing is, though, it still seems like Rudy’s almost going out of his way to antagonize voters like me. I’m pretty close to an absolutist on the issue of abortion, but even I could pull the level for a pro-choicer if that pro choicer happened to believe that Roe was a badly reasoned decision, and that social policy in general is best decided by voters (not by courts) and their representatives at the state level.
So, I wonder, as the pre-primary season rolls on, if Rudy’s new frankness on abortion policy will extend beyond a mere defense of the concept of abortion rights to a defense of the concept that abortion is a right guaranteed by the federal constitution as demanded by Roe. We shall see. I think the jig’s up, and it’s basically pretty clear now that Rudy’s a Margaret Sanger lovin’, fetus hatin’ extremist, but I’d love to be proven wrong.