Giuliani says he supports public financing of abortions, a quite left-wing view that I happen to share but which isn’t very popular. Conservatives, predictably, say that this is even more social libertinism than they signed up for when they agreed that a pro-choice, pro-gay, twice-divorced occassional cross-dresser was a paragon of cultural conservatism on “leadership” grounds. So now his campaign says he wouldn’t try to change the Hyde Amendment which means, I guess, that he doesn’t support public funding for abortions and was just lying to Dana Bash or something when she interviewed him.
My guess is that Team Giuliani will somehow wriggle out of this morass. Still, it reminds us that to a remarkable his campaign has thus far been able to shield him from the sort of mild media scrutiny that even your typical Republican endures. This whole debacle was prompted by Giuliani being asked a fairly basic, obvious question. More questions like this are coming down the road. In that very same interview with Bash, Giuliani said he recognizes the right to abortions as a constitutional right. How does that square with his sub rosa promises to appoint judges who’ll overturn Roe v. Wade? And theories of the judicial function aside, would he sign pro-choice federal legislation like The Freedom of Choice Act? Ordinarily, this is the sort of thing a semi-skilled politician can handle, but Giulini does have a tendency to flip his shit over things like getting tough questions about his ferret policy (really!) but I just don’t see how he can win the nomination without opening himself up at some point.