Planned Parenthood

The big debate question on Wolf Blitzer's "Situation Room" today was whether the revelation that Rudy Giuliani and his former spouse gave $900.00 to Planned Parenthood will kill his chances of winning the presidential nomination. It shouldn't, if he points out that PP's work is much more about preventing pregnancy than abortion. The debate may now focus on just what it is that the "pro-life" cadres of his party seek in this regard. I'm convinced that a large percentage of Republicans have much in common with the three wing-nuts who held up their hands as "nonbelievers" in evolution in the recent debate; they're fundamentalists who would not only restrict a woman's right to abortion, but would invade the bedroom of each and every American to deny us birth control pills and other forms of contraception, and would shut down sex education programs in our public schools. The debate should be much broader than whether to reverse Roe v. Wade -- abortion was available in Hawaii, New York, and other states before 1973, and would remain so regardless of a retreat on privacy rights by the U.S. Supreme Court. Instead we should establish once and for all that freedom of (and from) religion is a cornerstone of the American experiment, and rebuff those who would require a religious test for any woman or man seeking to hold public office. In this I support Mr. Giulani, and I sincerely hope he wins the nomination of his party-- I do so for the same reasons many Republicans secretly hope that the Dems pick Sen. Clinton as their standard bearer. They assume she'll be easier to defeat than Obama or some others. I think they're wrong about that, but I'd bet lots that Giuliani will go down in flames like the WTC if he manages to spin his way onto the Republican ticket.