Paul at Thoughts of a Regular Guy writes:
…My analysis is that crying didn’t get Sen. Clinton more than just a few new votes. What put Clinton over the top in New Hampshire yesterday was that she cast doubt on Sen. Obama’s pro-abortion credentials. Less than with Republicans, abortion is the still THE litmus-test issue for Democrats. They may forgive a vote for "Mr. Bush’s War", but they’ll never forgive a lapse in promoting or defending abortion.
No doubt that among so many Democrat voters that protecting abortion is such a major concern for them. I for one would like to see this as an issue between Senators Hillary and Obama in the primaries since what they say can hurt themselves in the general election. Sen. Hillary has already started making this an issue with push calls and bringing it up in her stump speeches. Though I guess a stump speeches is an ironically important place for referring to the right to dismember babies.
Over the last two years Sen. Hillary has tried to move to the middle on abortion by saying such things as "abortion in many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many" and holding to her husbands line about wishing for the day "when abortion is truly safe, legal, and rare." They never explain though how a "right" can be tragic and should be made rare. Though there has never been much frankness in support of abortion in the Democratic Party with much obfuscation such as "personally opposed", etc. Out of the current slate of Democratic Presidential Candidates only Bill Richardson is "personally opposed" to abortion this time. I guess it is only Catholic Democrats that have to add the "personally opposed" caveat which in itself is rather interesting that other candidates who say they are Christian feel no need to use such a modifier. This election though we have a strange switch with a Catholic who is a Democrat saying that he is personally opposed but will support abortion and a Republican who is Catholic saying he is personally for, but will vote against it.
In the general election though ardent support of abortion is an albatross so I say let the Democrats knock themselves out in portraying their loyalty to abortion in the primaries.
10 comments
(Psst! Jeff! You linked to the wrong post!)
Thanks for the link, though!
Abortion is just not the issue that will decide the election this year. Sadly, the issue is George W. Bush. The two possible stances are “I’m just like W, but more competent.” (almost all the GOP candidates), or “Despite the fact that I voted for every single thing W requested, I’m more different from him than any of the other cadidates.” (every single Democrat candidate). This is sad because it means that the Democrats will win the election, and carry along several house and a couple of Senate seats.
There are a couple of candidates (Paul, Gravel, Kucinich) who try to talk about issues, but the public isn’t really interested. The public seems to be divided into two camps: “let’s kill more Arabs” and “Let’s kill fewer Arabs more humanely, and make them respect women’s rights.” The “let’s stop killing Arabs” camp seems to be holding at about 12%
Not many consider abortion to even be an issue over here..they’re all of them practically in favour of it..
According to Terry Jeffreuy, of Human Events, in his interview with Ray Arroyo, Obama is more pro-death than NARAL. He killed the “born alive infant protection act” in committee in the Illiois legislature. Not even NARAL had the guts to do that in the US Senate where it passed unanimously.
Jackie the UK needs a William Wilberforce of the unborn babe. I nominate you for Parliament!
I’m confused. Obama has never, ever opposed any abortions, anywhere. I think he’d keep them legal through the fourth trimester if he thought he could. So, how is Hilary more pro-abortion than he is?!?? I mean, I can see that they are equally evil on this issue. But how can she claim the lower ground on this? They’re both in the sub-basement already…
Looks like Cthulu 2008 may have competition for the “Why settle for the lesser of 2 evils” slogan.
Margaret, I think at issue is that Obama merely voted “present” on a few abortion-related votings. I don’t see why that matters, though. Every time I look for anything on Obama and abortion I feel like he’s yelling (like he does all his speeches) that killing babies is his goal.
I’m going for Huckabee – and I think all the pro-lifers and the evangelicals (yes I know there is overlap) could get him the nomination.
I think the reason this works against Hillary more than Obama is because so far, Obama’s more extreme views haven’t been discussed all that much. In fact, Obama’s views on anything at all haven’t been discussed all that much, since the MSM is behaving like a deranged fangirl every time Obama’s in the building, and can’t manage to ask him anything substantial what with all the fawning and giggling.
Besides, with Mrs. C. you get the impression that the whole abortion thing is *personal*; one can just see her handing Bill a wad of cash and snapping “Well, tell your little ‘friend’ to take care of it!” through clenched teeth.
I’m still wary of Mike Huckabee, but he’s the most solid pro-life candidate. What that means personally is that, so far, he has my vote, only I don’t have enough confidence in him to support him in any other way. I’m walking on the fence.
Personally, I have added a prayer for fall-off-your-horse-stone-blind-conversional graces for all of our Republican candidates this year, particularly for whoever will win.
I don’t need to hear about it–a public, last-minute conversion would only seem too convenient, but a quiet, real conversion before taking office certainly has precidents–well, at least one.
I am abysmally underwhelmed with our conservative choices so far. I am disappointed that my hero from the successful Terri Schiavo murder conspiracy, Jeb Bush, isn’t running! Oh, and I still pray for W’s conversion to Catholicism, too. He’s more Catholic than a lot of Catholics I know. ;^)
In Christ’s peace and joy,
Robin