Hmm Maybe pro-lifers may need to take a serious look Democrats for Life. If the Republicans are only going to pay lip service to pro-life issues, we need to show them that we can't be taken for granted. And the Democrats are so desperate to win that they might be willing to compromise if they see the possibility of attracting voters. And Democrats for Life have been working hard to free the party from its pro-choice chains.
Bush is much more of a doer than a talker. Both he and the Republican party will be judged by the judges appointed, most critically those to the Supreme Court. Since Bush is so polarizing and so bad at changing minds (I don't think anything he said about the Iraq War helped or hurt his cause much) I don't think his lack of pro-life talk means much.
Any thoughts on Jeb Bush's call for an investigation into the Schiavo case? Bad loser?
"Safe, legal, and rare" was Clinton's mantra about abortion. Apart from vote-catching sloganeering, do you really think Bush has anything more stringent to propose? His flamboyancy around the Schiavo issue was a bid to capitalize on pro-life sentiment on the cheap. But it backfired, as his stance was so obviously a very flawed one. I note the right-wing outlets like the Drudge Report are keeping quiet about Gov. Jeb Bush's campaign to cast suspicion of wrongdoing on Michael Schiavo; it is too obviously vindictive and mean-spirited, and obviously a smoke-screen to banish the embarrassment caused him by the autopsy. The naivety of pro-lifers expecting to find sincere "respect for life" in the bosom a President who lied the US into a murderous war, and who had a huge execution rate in his home state as Governor, is amazing.
Anyone who thinks that disappointment with the President over this issue would lead Bush supporters to jump in bed with the likes of John Kerry and Bill Clinton needs to have his head examined.
Anyone who supported Bush should already have found a qualified head examiner.
I suspect the problem with Bush's inactivity is not with his convictions but with Laura, who has made no secret of her view that Roe should stand. Like too many American bishops confronted with dissenting or otherwise errant priests, religious, and lay employees, the President would rather keep domestic peace than exhibit the courage of his convictions.
Who's to judge? I hold bishops to a higher standard than I do politicians, and as a twice-divorced father of three minor children, I can't judge Bush for wanting to keep domestic peace.
I think Laura and her mother-in-law do have something to do with the president's lack of zeal on the abortion issue. Sadly, they are both mothers,and have felt new life firsthand, but appear to feel that other babies'lives are not as important as their own childrens'.
That's can be a pit that some mothers can fall into. I wonder -- and I'm only wondering -- is Barbara Bush's views aren't somewhat colored by the trauma of the loss of her little daughter to cancer. Maybe on some level, on account of her pain, she sympathises with the plight of some women, and feels it is wrong to impose on them any trauma that might come from bearing a child, say, out-of-wedlock, or who may have grave birth defects.
Like I said, I'm just wondering. I haven't got anything to support this speculation, and I'm certainly in no position to psychoanalyse her.
Commenting by HaloScan
