He's as slippery on the issue of abortion as he has been on everything else. Sometime we might like to ask ourselves how we allowed such a candidate -- a man hauling around with him laundry bags full of variably dirty linen -- to get this far.
Amy Davidson issues a warning.
When he was trying to get elected in Massachusetts, he mentioned an in-law who had died after an illegal abortion and was outraged by the suggestion that he would ever be less than supportive of a woman’s right to choose. Since then, with fits and starts, he has steadily abandoned and worked to undermine that right, and even lied about his past positions. (William Saletan has a chronology.) This is ultimately a more harmful hypocrisy than that, say, of a “pro-life” Congressman who tried to persuade his mistress to have an abortion. There is, at this point—the one where the election is taking place—plenty to suggest that on the broader issue of women’s health Romney would cause actual harm, particularly in the lives of poor women. And when Romney had the right to choose a running mate, he picked Paul Ryan, who has always been opposed to abortion rights. One hopes, as I wrote over at Daily Comment, that abortion comes up in the Vice-Presidential debate; it is a loss that it didn’t in the first Presidential one.
If there is any logic to Romney’s wiggles it is opportunism, with swerves toward power and toward those whose lives are most similar to his own. That is not the same thing as being a moderate. Maybe he doesn’t mean it—but how would one find out? One doesn’t want to play dice with a Presidential election. ...Amy Davidson, New Yorker