Dems Rethink Abortion (Cont.)

Adam Nagourney of the Times tackles the Dem's Big Rethink on abortion.  One needs a Secret Decoder Ring to get the best bits - fortunately, I have one!

WASHINGTON, Dec. 23 - Democratic leaders say their party needs to de-emphasize the issue of abortion rights, concerned that Republicans have hurt the Democratic Party by portraying it as an uncompromising champion of abortion.

In interviews and public appearances since Election Day, Democratic officials have said that the party should open its doors to abortion opponents and that candidates should make abortion a less central focus of future campaigns.

...The debate also comes as Democrats are reappraising the party's positions on gay marriage, another social issue with which Republicans appeared to hurt Democratic candidates in the recent elections.

On abortion, Democrats said they were particularly frustrated that Republicans portrayed them as out of step on the issue during the campaign, noting that polls show a majority of Americans support at least some access to legal abortion.

"All these issues that put us into the extreme and not the mainstream really hurt us with the heartland of the country," said Donna Brazile, a Democratic Party leader who managed Al Gore's campaign in 2000. "Even I have trouble explaining to my family that we are not about killing babies."

Donna Brazile has a problem explaining this to her family?  That is as close as Mr. Nagourney will come to noting that the black constituency of the Democratic Party polls a lot like Republicans on the issues of abortion and gay marriage.  Hispanic voters also tend to be conservative on these issues, but the Times won't mention that either, presumably so that their readers can enjoy their Holiday lattes.

We enjoyed this:

But Democratic leaders said they were concerned that their candidates - in particular John Kerry - were perceived as morally untroubled about the issue.

How many times can I say "I told you so?"  Well, here is one more!

Kevin Drum noted these developments yesterday, and went off-message here:

I'm usually in favor of more inclusive language, greater sensitivity, etc. etc. But obsessing about the emotional turmoil of getting an abortion just doesn't work. Since we fundamentally believe that there's nothing wrong with pre-viability abortion, shouldn't our job instead be to persuade women that they shouldn't feel emotionally whipsawed if they choose to get an abortion?  It's awfully hard to take both sides.

Emphasis added.  Look, "not illegal" does not equal "not wrong".  Clinton's "safe, legal, and rare" captured the spirit, and if there is a prize available for being the ten-thousandth person to say that today, I want it.

Finally, let's introduce a bit of intrigue with this from the Times:

Some Democrats from more conservative states have already found their own way on the issue voting in recent years to ban a procedure that its opponents call partial-birth abortion.

Timothy J. Roemer, a former congressman from Indiana and a member of the Sept. 11 commission, is one of them and he is running for leader of the party, making no secret of his views.

Roemer is being mooted for head of the DNC.  He is strong on terror, moderate on abortion, but wrong, wrong, WRONG on Social Security.  (Wrong from a Dem perspective, natch.)

Comments

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Yeah, the party that can't even deal with "Merry Christmas" is sure to want to come to grips with abortion.

[Francis W. Porretto]

"Since we fundamentally believe that there's nothing wrong with pre-viability abortion, shouldn't our job instead be to persuade women that they shouldn't feel emotionally whipsawed if they choose to get an abortion?" -- Kevin Drum

But Kevin, haven't the pro-abortion forces been trying to achieve exactly that, with all the powers of the Old Media behind them, since 1973? Haven't Planned Parenthood and NARAL got "counselors" on staff for that purpose? Haven't a gaggle of Democratic pols and a bevy of Hollywood types been ranting about how abortion is just one more "safe medical procedure" -- even when it requires the abortionist to partially deliver the baby and suck out his brain?

The human race is so constituted that women will never be able to regard the extinction of the children within them with equanimity or insouciance. In fact, a woman who's able to do that would be odds-on to exhibit lots of other kinds of sociopathic behavior...hopefully toward life forms more capable of defending themselves.

[Harry]

Overturn Roe, send the abortion issue back to the states and let democracy take its course. Since there's such a "clear majority" of the public that supports uninhibited access to abortion, I'm sure the voters will do the right thing.

Personally, I'm very willing to let women make "the choice" as soon as the law requires an informed choice: a simple requirement that they be shown an ultrasound as part of the decision process.

[Jor]

As much as I agree that democrats need to moderate on abortion, I really don't think that alone will be electorally effective. As atrios pointed out, people like Amy Sullivan, are more likely frustrated voices rather than real constituencies. To take, an unrelated, but telling example, before the election, somewhere between 1/4 to 1/2 large conservative publications effectively ccame out against re-election. Obviously, these chattering conservatives had zero real electoral pull. I'm not sure why this case, where a bunch of talking-heads saying it, but very little evidence of a constituency, is going to be any different.

It's not like Bush's policies make him the "safe, rare, legal" president either. If such a constituency existed, it would be hard to believe they'd vote for a party that tells us HIV is spread by tears. The sexual education programs Bush is funding are so incompetent, tha they are almost surely going to increase the number of unwanted pregnancies enormously.

Anyway,I think a lot of this is attributable to the infinitely supperior republican marketing apparatus
Gloria Feldt, the president of Planned Parenthood, said Democrats "need to stop allowing the extreme, anti-choice right wing of the Republican Party to paint them into a corner where all they talk about is abortion. We have the high ground here if we focus our policy and our discussion on the prevention of unintended pregnancies." That sounds about right to me.

Now maybe, maybe, if there is a latent evangelical progressive movement waiting to be tapped -- moderating on abortion, ALONG with de-secularizing the democratic party could result in some electoral gains. I mean, Bush does his best to screw the poor, from f'n faith based charities and cutting aid to college students. And of course, last but not least, cutting food aid (by christian organnizaitons) to the poor right before Christmas. Merry Christmas, Patrick.

[Thomas J. Jackson]

Yeah a party that embracesAl Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and Michael Moore has got to connect with middle America.

[Liberal AND Proud]

Yeah...let's embrace the values of middle America. Let's be the party of bigger lies and half truths than the Republicans. Let's turn our backs on all of what we believed in.

RIGHT ON! Let's DO IT! woo woo woo woo wooo.

[Joe Mealyus]

[Kevin Drum] "Since we fundamentally believe that there's nothing wrong with pre-viability abortion, shouldn't our job instead be to persuade women that they shouldn't feel emotionally whipsawed if they choose to get an abortion?"

Kevin Drum is insane. The comprehensible tack would be the opposite: "of course you'll be emotionally whipsawed, but that doesn't mean abortion is wrong." Aren't we often emotionally whipsawed by even small, relatively insignificant decisions - but still have to make them?

What's next for Kevin? "Dont feel emotionally whipsawed if you choose to get a divorce?" "Don't feel emotionally whipsawed if you choose to have your pet put down?" "Don't feel emotionally whipsawed if you choose not to let your child do [something]?" It's the (usual suspect, the) perfectly passionless Europesque future - life is better if everything is clinical, detached, and "healthy."

[TM]

"Don't feel emotionally whipsawed if you choose to have your pet put down?"

Funny you should mention that.

[Jack Tanner]

'Republicans have hurt the Democratic Party by portraying it as an uncompromising champion of abortion.'

'another social issue with which Republicans appeared to hurt Democratic candidates in the recent elections. '

It's fantastic news that the Dems believe they are being portrayed a certain way or that their position is being marketed in a certain way. Fantastic news for the GOP anyway. It's another example of the reflexive contempt the Dems have for the, stupid, stupid, people who don't share their beliefs.

'"Even I have trouble explaining to my family that we are not about killing babies."'

Well why should she have to worry about that? I forgot, stupid, stupid people.

'in particular John Kerry - were perceived as morally untroubled about the issue.'

I'll give Kerry the benefit of the doubt on this one. Since when can robots show emotion?

[Harry]

I'd have to say that the democrats have hurt themselves by BEING the "uncompromising champions of abortion."

Anti parental notification, anti waiting period, anti any restrictions on partial birth abortion, etc, etc.

My point above remains: If there is such broad support in the country as is claimed by the so-called pro choice folks then let the supreme court overturn Roe and send abortion back to the states for the people to decide.

Same point for "gay marriage." Let the people decide.

The whole point in my mind is that judges are legislating from the bench, a job that is constitutionally reserved for the federal and state legislatures. Personally I trust the American people over most judges.