There was an article at MSNBC last night about Roe’s army. It points out that the Third Way (the DLC) is promoting involving the pro-life groups in the Democratic party. I suspect this is part of the reason that Democrats for Life, a group that did not support John Kerry, is against stem-cell research, and is against the morning after pill….got such access to the DNC. This is why there is such pressure on Howard Dean to speak in a different way about abortion.
What makes me really upset is that I think they are the ones being disingenuous about the real life support for this issue. I am posting the Media Matters summary of recent polls to show that America does support this right of women.
Here is a snip from the MSNBC article about Roe. They speak about how women who support the right to choose are getting fearful. It mentions how some of the groups are gettng militant.
There is a very important paragraph from this article as well, at Tom Paine. It shows that the DLC is into painting an untrue picture of American values in order to further their agendas. By the way, this is an excellent article over all, not just the paragraph I present…worth the read.
position. In survey after survey, the overwhelming majority of the public wants legal abortion, a higher minimum wage, strong environmental protections, strict regulation of corporations, an end to the electoral college, universal health care, a strong and unprivatized Social Security system and on and on.
Now remember the polls given at Media Matters not long ago? They show irrefutably that America supports the right to choose. Yet our own party is telling us we need to be more conservative on the issue, to talk to the heartland. This worries me, as these are a variety of polls. Here are the ones from Media Matters.
Similarly, a Gallup poll conducted July 7-10 asked the same question to half
of its respondents; 68 percent said, “No, not overturn,” while 29 percent responded, “Yes, overturn.” Gallup asked the other half of respondents a different version of the question: “Would you like to see the Supreme Court overturn its 1973 Roe versus Wade decision concerning abortion, or not?”Sixty-three percent responded, “No, not overturn,” and 28 percent responded, “Yes, overturn.”
A Gallup poll conducted June 24-26 found that nearly two-thirds of respondents want a new Supreme Court justice who would vote to uphold Roe. Gallup asked: “If one of the U.S. Supreme Court justices retired, would you want the new Supreme Court justice to be someone who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade — the decision that legalized abortion — or vote to uphold it?” Sixty-five percent responded, “Vote to keep it,” while 29 percent responded, “Vote to overturn.”
In addition, a CBS News poll conducted July 13-14 asked: “More than thirty years ago, the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe versus Wade established a constitutional right for women to obtain legal abortions in this country. In general, do you think the Court’s decision (to uphold Roe) was a good thing or a bad thing?” Of the 632 adult respondents, 59 percent called the decision a “good thing,” and 32 percent called it a “bad thing.”
“It should be noted that “pro-choice” and “pro-life” are vague terms, and different respondents surely understand them differently. A May 12-16 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll asked a more specific question: “Which of the following best represents your views about abortion — the choice on abortion should be left up to the woman and her doctor, abortion should be legal only in cases in which pregnancy results from rape or incest or when the life of the woman is at risk, or abortion should be illegal in all circumstances?” A majority, 55 percent, said the choice should be left up to a “woman and her doctor”; 29 percent said abortion should be legal only in cases of rape, incest, or a threat to the life of the mother; and 14 percent said it should always be illegal.”
One of the main talking points of those on the blogs who are strongly pro-DLC (assuming that is who they are…not some who are not as they seem to be) is that we have to be more moderate and conservative to win. It is like a mantra. I wonder why they do it, and I wonder what the goal. I am not sure I fully understand its purpose.
is to look at the Congressional district, or state, that a congressperson represents.
Look at the poll numbers in the district or state and you can usually guess whether the person representing it is pro-life or pro-choice.
The party is not the best predictor. So, Olympia Snowe and Gail Collins from Maine are pro-choice, while John Breaux (retired) and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana are pro-life.
What this tells me is that many politician are not sincere about their position, but fit their position to fit their constituency.
Al Gore, Dick Gephardt, and Dennis Kucinich were all pro-life until they ran for President. George H.W. Bush was pro-choice until he ran became Vice- President.
What the DLC wants to do is institutionalize this cynicism and make it easier for Democrats to sell themselves in pro-life districts.
They have determined, probably erroneously, that no Democrat can win in the south until we lighten up on supporting Roe.
I agree with you in that the only way the party feels a chance to win, is to slip into the stream, one foot at a time, testing the waters of the voters so to say.
You can change things once you in the position, but first, you have to be there.
Such a shame. I can tell them how to win in the South. Just open your mouth and tell the truth.
Stop letting a small percentage of ideologues define our issues and our stances.
The majority support a woman’s right to choose. Our politicians in both parties are playing games with these rights.
The “right to life” is not the issue. Many of the anti-reproductive rights crowd are no longer even bothering to project the hollow image of a great and powerful Oz who wants to save unborn babies. The truth, that they have so carefully kept behind the curtain until now, is much more simple. Sex is bad. At least where women are concerned. Women should never be free to enjoy a fulfilling sex life. They should only have and enjoy sex when they are prepared to suffer the consequences: pregnancy and motherhood.
but they aren’t entirely wrong in their logic. reproductive rights and sexual freedom for women has ruined their patriarchal lives. reproductive freedom has allowed many women to have financial independence from men. and with financial independence comes true freedom. so now, to keep a woman, they have to treat her like a human being. after all, it’s hard to keep your wife and daughters on the farm after they’ve seen Paris.
maybe its true…maybe they do hate us for our freedom.
Would be if McDonalds aloud franchises to do anything they wanted – sell anything they wanted. Suddenly the name McDonalds means nothing.
Their stupidity is frightening.
Did you mean Susan Collins? I think Gail Collins is the NYT Editorial Page Editor.
That the DLC wants to pull the plug on Roe v. Wade despite overwhelming public support for safe and legal abortion is, as far as I am concerned, proof positive that the DLC is a Republican front organization.
If they were sliding towards the anti-abortion camp because it was the majority — instead of a modest minority — then it could be written off as craven pandering for votes. That is, however, not the case. The DLC and its fellow travelers are a conservative fifth column, bent on destroying the Democratic opposition from within. The DLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Republican Party and needs to be dealt with as such.
exactly right.
Oh, so you don’t think the DLC is movitated entirely by overwhelming concern about the “rights of the embryo”? (/snark)
But I would really like to understand why someone would want female sexuality to be surpressed? Who benefits? Why, why, why.
Those who are threatened by it.
Who benefits from suppressing gays? Who benefits from oppressing blacks and other racial minorities? In a practical sense, no one. But those who are governed by fear and hatred are comforted by dishing it out.
Yes, they are. The dlc are scumbags, but that has nothing to do with Dean. Dean is trying to appeal to the moderate prolifers by encouraging birth control. Not by banning abortion or stem cell research. The DLC probably want to reverse Roe. They are moles, so what’s new?
Yes, but Dean is interested in supplying Financial Support to Pro-Life Candidates. I don’t think anyone has an issue with reaching out to Pro-Life voters provided we are honoring the Democratic Party Platform.
for governerships and positions that aren’t going to affect whether abortion is legal or not in this country.
I don’t know that I could agree with that. Governors are the stock from which most future presidents are chosen.
That, of course, is another reason I think the DLC is actively trying to sabotage the Democratic Party. Congresscritters only seldom get elected to the presidency. I suspect they’ve thrown their backing behind Hillary Clinton for that reason above all else: being a Senator, she’s practically unelectable.
Conversely, in fairness to Dean, his emphasis on winning governor’s houses is frighteningly pragmatic for a Democrat. I just hope he realizes that no pro-life Dem is going to be able to GOTV in a race for the Oval Office.
Almost certainly. I hope his goal there is to get the message across to people that voting for a Democrat is okay if you’re “pro-life”. The next step after that, of course, is that being “pro-choice” is okay if you’re “pro-life”…
Your Govenors position on Abortion will become very important.
I am not just feminist. I also support workers rights, and the feminists didnt’ complain about the third way when they were just screwing things for the poor.
governerships
Look, Two republican governors in blue states just vetoed EC bills and when an increasingly misogynistic, masculine and socially conservative SCOTUS overturns Roe, state governments are the next line of defense. On any issues affecting the well-being of women we are royally screwed and precisely because of this sort of thinking. And when I say ‘we’ in this case I mean anyone who hopes to defeat republicans; it should be perfectly clear to most people by this time that the Democratic party is controlled by folks, mostly male, whose concern for and understanding of ‘women’s issues’ is, um, limited and who would happily sell our concerns out for perceived electoral gain. The problem with this is that these strategists believe that 1) we regard them as leaders and that 2) we will believe and accept their spin and that 3) the fact that we do not have anyone else to vote for will mean we’ll vote for the shining stars of ‘Democrats for Life’ and none of these things are true for a significant portion of the traditional Dem base.
If a candidate for governer in a primary is prochoice but antiunion and pronafta and is his oppanant is prolife but antinafta and prounion, I will choose the prolifer. Sorry. The dlc also triangulates with economic conservatism.