Republican Rep. Pete Sessions, a staunch opponent of abortion rights and a vocal supporter of Rudy Giuliani, told TV preacher Pat Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network that the former NYC mayor would, if he were in Congress, be considered “pro-life.” He did not appear to be kidding.
“In a hypothetical comparison of congressional votes, Mayor Giuliani’s voting record would mirror the voting record of Fred Thompson, including votes on partial birth abortion, taxpayer funding on abortions, and parental notification laws. Mayor Giuliani respects the values of social conservatism, and his position on these issues would categorize him as a predominately pro-life Member of Congress.”
This is more than hyperbole; it’s ridiculous. As Marc Ambinder put it, “Sessions is probably joking. If Giuliani is willing to let surrogates describe himself as pro-life, then the words have no meaning, and Giuliani is pandering.”
The Giuliani campaign? Pander? Never.
Sessions added, “Mrs. Clinton will not be their friend and not see it the way they would. Rudy Giuliani respects life.” Now, that’s slightly closer to a defensible position — it’s arguing that Clinton is pro-choice, and by comparison, Giuliani is closer to conservatives than the Democratic frontrunner. But that’s not what Sessions, speaking to CBN on Giuliani’s behalf, claimed.
To even try to pull this flip-flop off is painfully ridiculous — and it runs counter to everything Giuliani has vowed to do on the issue.
The YouTube clips are, at this point, practically legendary. Here’s Giuliani vowing to protect so-called “partial-birth abortions.” Here he is explaining why public funding for abortion is absolutely necessary. Here he is talking about all the money he’s donated to Planned Parenthood.
“His position on these issues would categorize him as a predominately pro-life Member of Congress”? Please.
But just as importantly, I’ve been thinking about this piece from May in the NYT:
After months of conflicting signals on abortion, Rudolph W. Giuliani is planning to offer a forthright affirmation of his support for abortion rights in public forums, television appearances and interviews in the coming days, despite the potential for bad consequences among some conservative voters already wary of his views, aides said yesterday. […]
The campaign’s approach would be a sharp departure from the traditional route to the Republican nomination in the last 20 years, in which Republicans have highlighted their antiabortion views.
Mr. Giuliani hinted at what aides said would be his uncompromising position on abortion rights yesterday in Huntsville, Ala., where he was besieged with questions about abortion and his donations to Planned Parenthood. “Ultimately, there has to be a right to choose,” he said.
Asked if Republicans would accept that, he said, “I guess we are going to find out.”
Mr. Giuliani acknowledged that his stance on abortion alone might disqualify him with some voters, but he said, “I am at peace with that.”
The strategy, the campaign said at the time, would be to just let Giuliani be Giuliani. He’s pro-choice, he’s always been pro-choice, and there’s no point in trying to argue otherwise. Indeed, it would be insulting the intelligence of the voters to even make the effort.
So much for that idea.
Update: As it turns out, Sessions’ comments might be part of a broader strategy. Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), another close Giuliani ally, tried to make a similar argument on MSNBC last night, saying he’s “pro-life” and he’s supporting Giuliani, in part, on “the life issue.”