wpostServer: http://css.washingtonpost.com/wpost2

Most Read: Opinions

direct signup

Today’s Opinions poll

Will Rep. Paul Ryan's anti-poverty proposal help the poor?

Submit
Next
Review your answers and share
Right Turn
Posted at 01:30 PM ET, 09/10/2012

The Democrats’ abortion extremism is revealed

First, Margaret Carlson warned the Democrats that their abortion extremism was a problem. Now another Democrat, Cokie Roberts, has stepped forward, trying to explain to Newark Mayor Cory Booker (D) that their party risks alienating a lot of people:

Booker’s concern about “gutting family planning” is beside the point. Planned Parenthood “planning” services are not the problem; it is the number of abortions (329,445 abortions and only 841 referred women to adoption agencies were documented in its 2009-2010 report) that is the concern.

Frankly, it is not such a good idea for Democrats to talk a lot about abortion and “extremism.” The Post’s Josh Hicks reminds us of the “infant born alive” legislative fights in Illinois when Obama was a state senator:

The 2001 and 2002 measures included a controversial line that proved to be a sticking point. It said, “A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.”
Obama took issue with that part of the bill, saying it could interfere with a woman’s right to an abortion, as established through the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision. . . .
Critics contend that this interpretation is not necessarily true . . . [and they] argue that Obama essentially opposed protecting the survivors.

Illinois lawmakers voted down a version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in 2003 that was “an almost exact replica” of a federal law passed in 2002. Obama was one of the senators to vote no, even though he chaired the committee that sent the bill to the state Senate floor.

Obama swore during the 2008 election that he would have supported the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act. . . . Obama denied any contradiction during an interview that year with the Christian Broadcasting Network, accusing the [National Right to Life Committee] of lying about the circumstances of his vote. . . .
The evidence suggests we could have awarded Four Pinocchios to the former Illinois senator for his comments to the Christian Broadcasting Network.

Well, it’s good that fact checkers have now concurred with numerous conservatives who made exactly these points in 2008.

But getting back to 2012, if Obama really wants to get into abortion extremism — pitting Mitt Romney’s view that abortion exceptions should be allowed for life of the mother, rape and incest against Obama’s belief that live infants who survive abortions don’t deserve protection — pro-life forces would welcome that fight.

It is only in the liberal echo chamber that extreme pro-abortion voices can convince themselves that their abortion “any time, for any reason paid for by the taxpayers” is a mainstream view. In making an issue of this, the Democratic convention did the pro-life movement a great service.

By  |  01:30 PM ET, 09/10/2012

Categories:  2012 campaign

 
Read what others are saying
     

    © 2011 The Washington Post Company