Joseph Lawler references the Washington Post‘s Jonathan Bernstein to argue that the Rudolph Giuliani presidential campaign is “doomed from the start. Why? Because he’s pro-choice.”

Only he’s really not, as I argue in a post, “Run, Rudy, Run” on the main site. In fact, quite the opposite. Practically and operationally speaking, Rudy is pro-life. He has pledged,

to appoint conservative judges who will interpret the law and not legislate from the bench. Given Roe v. Wade, this is the most important pro-life policy a president can effect; and Rudy clearly is on our side, the pro-life side.

Moreover, according to one of the commenters on my post, “The (not conservative) Guttmacher Institute reported that abortion under Giuliani decreased 18% (the national decrease was 13%), largely because of Giuliani’s adoption policy and general ‘culture of life.'”

Rudy’s purportedly “pro choice” for one reason and one reason only: for political reasons unique to far-left New York City, he said that he was pro-choice. He was running in an extremely liberal jurisdiction and, in order to win, had to pledge fealty to abortion on demand. But as practical public policy matter, a President Giuliani would be pro-life.

You can judge a man by his enemies. Rudy has made all the right enemies — in Albany and Manhattan, as well as in the liberal media.