A confusing DLC article on a woman's right to choose.

[madfloridian]

Someone just said they interpret this to mean that Kerry's running mate must be anti-choice. The article is confusing to me, double-speak, convolution.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252549&kaid=131&subid=192&FREM=Y&sid=19513&mid=4641

Last paragraph:
SNIP..."There could soon be a test of the new willingness of pro-choice advocates to keep their eyes on the prize of basic abortion rights. In 2000, some abortion rights leaders publicly demanded that Al Gore refuse to consider for his running-mate any Democrat who had voted for any sort of abortion restriction -- even though a majority of Democrats, a majority of women, and a majority of Democratic women supported some restrictions. Similar demands should be avoided when John Kerry is considering his running mate in the new few months. Not only would such a litmus test eliminate a large cadre of potential worthy candidates: It would reinforce all the false lines that anti-abortion forces have busily drawn in recent years, and obscure the real choice facing the American people in November...."

[Christ was Socialist]

1. You don't actually expect them to stand up do you <nt>

[DaveSZ]

2. "and a majority of Democratic women supported some restrictions"

Do you support aborting a baby on the day before it's due (I'm not talking about for health reasons)?

I think some restrictions are reasonable, however I'm very against the propaganda laws and parental consent laws.

[DaveSZ]

3. To clarify:

I'm not at all a fan of the DLC (I'm more in the Kucinich camp).

[JI7]

4. prochoice groups prevented Gore from picking Evan Bayh

evan bayh was one of those on the list, but excluded from the final short list which included graham, kerry, edwards, lieberman.

now, the question is, do you think lieberman was a better choice than bayh, or no difference ?

[IndianaGreen]

6. Lieberman is a better choice than Bayh

Bayh is a puke! While many of us disagree with Lieberman on the issues, no one has ever accused him of flip-flopping or political opportunism.

Lieberman is more pro-choice than Bayh. As Governor, Bayh refused to veto a law that required women seeking abortions to view pictures of aborted fetuses.

[sandnsea]

5. Keep your eye on the prize

Man, how some people like to twist things.

"As Robin Toner of the New York Times noted in a perceptive Sunday article on the evolution of the right-to-life movement, abortion opponents have manufactured the more peripheral issues as part of a strategic campaign to "claim the middle ground" by maneuvering the pro-choice movement into "fighting legislation that, in and of itself, seems unobjectionable to many moderates -- among the voters and in Congress."

"Instead of rising to the bait of the anti-abortion strategy, pro-choice advocates should constantly hammer away at the underlying reality: The president and his party are fully committed to the appointment of enough new Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade."

And the TITLE of the article, "Time for Focus on Choice".

[JI7]

7. yup, Kerry will only appoint those who support roe v wade to SC

if he needs someone on the ticket who has voted for restrictions to win in the end, it would be worth it since he would be able to appoint justices to the SC. if we get a big enough majority, even if republicans are elected , they would not be able to take away prochoice rights because the courts will just overturn it. this is why bush signing that bill isn't such a thread now because the current makeup of the court will overturn it. but just 1 change and the court will allow for bans.

[IndianaGreen]

9. And if Kerry dies while in office, we end up with an anti-choice President

if he needs someone on the ticket who has voted for restrictions to win in the end, it would be worth it

How far are some people willing to compromise Democratic core values for the sake of political expediency?

[JI7]

10. Kerry isn't going to die

he is in good health . both his parents lived for a long time. they both died just in about the last few years which means kerry himself will most likely live long. also, teresa is very knowledgable about health issues and she makes sure kerry eats well and takes care of himself in other ways. she was the one who first suspected he had a problem based on some tests and got him to check it out and they found out early about the prostate cancer and were able to take care of it.

[IndianaGreen]

11. You are not God, and neither am I

People drop dead every day, and many of them are people that were in apparent good health.

Is tempting Fate now part of the Kerry campaign?

[sangh0]

15. You're not God?

Then why did you make a prediction that requires omniscience?

And if Kerry dies while in office, we end up with an anti-choice President

I think the issue is something other than omniscience. I think the problem is your flawed understanding of what the article argued. It didn't say that Kerry should name an "anti-choice" VP. It said he shouldn't disqualify a candidate for VP simply because they had supported some small amount of restrictions on the right to an abortion.

Is tempting Fate now part of the Kerry campaign?

No, but reading comprehension is

[Forkboy]

25. How does predicting that someone could die

require omniscience?

(and I know I'm going to regret asking)

[madfloridian]

30. LOL

:evilgrin:

[sangh0]

36. That makes two

You didn't understand the DLC article, and now you didn't understand which part of the sentence was a prediction.

Maybe you should find a hobby that doesn't involve much reading.

:shrug:

[Forkboy]

42. Reading is relative

some reading is easier than others.Some just gives people a headache :shrug:

[sangh0]

44. Exactly!!

If the hard stuff gives you headaches, then you might not be well-suited for political theory. The reading material is not known for being light and breezy

[Forkboy]

54. it's not the hard stuff doing it

it's the simple stuff.

[sangh0]

56. In that case

take up comic book collecting

[Forkboy]

66. it's the simple stuff giving me a headache

I have one now.

[sangh0]

35. The "if Kerry dies" was a conditional, and not a prediction

The part about an "anti-choice" VP is a predictions. *IF* Kerry dies (not a prediction) we'd have an anti-choice VP (a prediction).

The article doesn't suggest that Kerry name an anti-choice VP.

[Forkboy]

41. I was right

I regret asking.

[sangh0]

45. Just doing my part

and you did make a request

[Guaranteed]

70. LOL nt

[IndianaGreen]

8. Is Kerry going to pick an anti-choice running mate?

This is why I think this is what the DLC is trying to say here:

There could soon be a test of the new willingness of pro-choice advocates to keep their eyes on the prize of basic abortion rights. In 2000, some abortion rights leaders publicly demanded that Al Gore refuse to consider for his running-mate any Democrat who had voted for any sort of abortion restriction -- even though a majority of Democrats, a majority of women, and a majority of Democratic women supported some restrictions. Similar demands should be avoided when John Kerry is considering his running mate in the new few months. Not only would such a litmus test eliminate a large cadre of potential worthy candidates: It would reinforce all the false lines that anti-abortion forces have busily drawn in recent years, and obscure the real choice facing the American people in November.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252549&kaid=131&subid=192&FREM=Y&sid=19513&mid=4641

So who is Kerry considering as running mate? John Breaux? Maria Cantwell? Evan Bayh? Zell Miller (highly unlikely, Zell has endorsed Bush)?

[sangh0]

16. I think you need to read the article again

It says nothing about Kerry picking "an anti-choice" VP. It says he shouldn't eliminate candidates who have supported some limits on the right to have an abortion.

"anti-choice" is just propoganda. It has nothing to do with the article being discussed. Once again, DUers are getting hysterical and depicting molehills as mountains.

[demnan]

12. The DLC can say what it wants

Kerry would never pick an anti-choice running mate. It would be political suicide.

[AntiCoup2K4]

13. The DLC, advocating a Republican point of view??

Shocked I am! Truly beyond belief :eyes:

[rucky]

14. THIS is why Kucinich is still in the race

there's little else that's keeping the DNC from adopting the DLC platform whole hog.

[sangh0]

17. Given DK's record on choice

I think we can safely sau that DK isn't in the race to make sure Kerry picks a pro-choice VP.

[Freddie Stubbs]

20. The DLC is arguing that someone with a record on abortion like DK should

still be considered. Kucinich only recently became pro-choice. Funny how those things work.

[AntiCoup2K4]

22. Are you saying the DLC would pick Kucinich as Kerry's running mate?

If you believe that, I got a beachfront condo in Tucson you would love!

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. Oh course not

What they are saying is that a person haveing been pro-life at one time whould not disqualify them. If that were the case, Al Gore himself would be disqualified, as would Dick Gephardt.

[sangh0]

37. If they don't understand that "someone with a record on abortion like DK"

does NOT mean "Dennis Kucinich" then explaining it again isn't going to do much good.

[Freddie Stubbs]

47. There are other reasons that Kucinich would be unacceptable to the DLC

[sangh0]

49. Of course there are

That's why "someone with a record on abortion like DK" does NOT mean "Dennis Kucinich"

[AntiCoup2K4]

53. The number one reason Kucinich is "unacceptable to the DLC" is...

...he's actually a Democrat. And not a sellout to neocon corporatist fascism. Or fascist corporatism if you prefer.

[sangh0]

57. Actually, DK was unacceptable to Democratic voters

not that you care about them

[Freddie Stubbs]

60. The DLC doesn't have a problem with John Kerry

DLC | New Dem Daily | April 26, 2004
Kerry's Contract With the Middle Class

As we've hoped and expected, Sen. John Kerry moved his campaign fully into a general election mode with a speech last Friday that offered a positive argument for change building on the Clinton-New Democrat successes of the 1990s, while stressing several distinctive personal themes such as tough-minded internationalism and energy independence.

Speaking to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Kerry proposed a "Contract with America's Middle Class" with four main planks: making America safer; restoring fiscal responsibility while creating millions of new jobs; cutting middle-class taxes; and reforming government to reduce waste, end corporate cronyism and address the big challenges facing America.

Security First: Kerry emphatically refuted GOP charges that he is soft on terrorism and unwilling to use military force. "We are in a new kind of war, and we need a commander in chief with a plan to fight this war and win it," said Kerry. "I have many differences with President Bush over how we should wage the war against terrorism and extremism.... But we share the same goal of total victory. You can count on this: No matter who wins this presidential election, the terrorists will lose." To remove any shadow of doubt about his resolve, Kerry said: "I will never hesitate to use American power to defend our interests anywhere in the world. I will stand up for our country, our flag, and our values, and make it clear that the first definition of patriotism is keeping faith with those who wore the uniform of our country."

Cutting the Deficit and Boosting Jobs: Citing President Clinton's success in eliminating budget deficits while creating 23 million new jobs, lifting 7 million Americans out of poverty, and enabling more Americans to attend college, Kerry contrasted the Bush administration's determination to "put wealth ahead of work, something-for-nothing ahead of responsibility, and special privilege for the few ahead of what's right for the nation." Recalling his support for tough deficit reduction measures dating back to the 1980s, Kerry observed: "Our budget is a mess again, and we must fix it to keep our country strong. My plan calls for no new spending without cutbacks to pay for that spending. My plan will end corporate welfare as we know it, roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and impose a real cap on spending." On the jobs front, Kerry made clear his belief that "the private sector is the engine of economic growth, and that instead of being a burden to business, government has a duty to help business succeed" with measures such as tax cuts "for businesses that do right by America." He also said he will "create 10 million jobs with a proven strategy built on a simple principle: We should reward work, make sure Americans have a chance to work, and get ahead when they do."

more: http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=252547

[AntiCoup2K4]

67. Of course the DLC likes Kerry.

The guy started voting like a Republican 10 years or so ago, and is now parroting PNAC policies. What neocon infiltrator wouldn't like that?

[Freddie Stubbs]

69. Democratic primary voters don't have a problem with Kerry either

That's why he won the nomination. ;)

[sangh0]

23. Yeah, pretty ironic

The DLC argues that someone like DK is OK, and a DK supporter thinks DK entered the race to fight that idea

[Freddie Stubbs]

28. He entered the race to show that he should not be President?

He certainly has proved his point.

[dolstein]

18. There's nothing confusing about the article at all

The article says that pro-choice forces should keep the electorate focused on the fact that Bush and his antiabortion supporters have the goal of overruling Roe v. Wade, and should not allow themselves to get dragged into side arguments over partial birth abortion and parental consent. It also says that Kerry shouldn't impose a litmus choice on his VP choice that would automatically rule out anyone who had voted for the "partial birth" abortion ban or who supports parental consent. I know that Evan Bayh voted for the "partial birth" abortion ban, and it wouldn't surprise me if he supported parental consent legislation in Indiana. Perhaps Bill Nelson, Bob Graham and/or Mary Landrieu voted for it too.

The fact is, if the abortion debate centers around whether Roe v. Wade should be overturned, the Democrats win. That's where our focus should be in the 2004 election. The Republicans will do everything that can to avoid that kind of debate, and Dems shouldn't play into their hands by allowing themselves to get bogged down over partial birth abortion.

Let us not forget that Bill Clinton did not have an umblemished record on abortion when he ran for president in 1992, yet he ended up being the most pro-choice president in the history of the republic.

[JI7]

19. yup

that's the point i got.

[mdguss]

21. The DLC is right:

Kerry may well pick Mark Warner (who just pulled off a great budget plan with a Republican legislator). I believe Warner is pro-life. Warner wins in Virginia because he can go out to Roanoke and tell them, "I'm not for abortion, but I am for paying police officers, teachers, etc. a fair salary." That's the way to win in culturially conservative areas. Warner came up with a solution to a budget with a giant hole in it, and got it implemented. I still think Mary Landrieu is a better candidate.

This time the pro-choice groups have nothing to bargan with. They're lucky that Sandra Day O'Connor was caught saying, "This is terrible, I wanted to retire but can't if Bush isn't elected" when Bush was behind in Florida. If it wasn't for that vote, she'd already be retired, and Bush would've replaced her with the vote needed to overturn Roe v. Wade. I get the impression that the Supremes feel that because they decided the last election it's unethical for them to retire until after this year's election.

[AntiCoup2K4]

29. It's only obvious the DLC is "right", and extremely so most of the time.

But are they ever correct? ;)

Fact is that there are a good chunk of pro-choice Republicans who just might defect from Team Bush because of his obvious intention to pack the judicial system with right wing judges. If Kerry goes with a "pro life" (at least for the unborn, but also likely pro war if they're DLC) running mate, where's the incentive for them to cross over?

So let's take a count here....

Kerry loses the votes of the left by being pro war and pro Likud.

Kerry loses the votes of moderate Repubs by choosing a "pro-lifer".

Right wing Repukes of course, will vote for Bush anyway, as they are convinced the man is infallible.

So that leaves exactly WHO voting for Kerry? Other than the DLC sellouts themselves?

It's looking more obvious that someone's throwing the game here :grr:

[sangh0]

24. Not true. Something *IS* very confusing in that article

but only for those who think there is no middle ground in the debate.

Note how many posters have interpreted the article as arguing in favor of an "anti-choice" VP, with "anti-choice" defined as "someone who is not 1000% for abortions"

[Forkboy]

27. There is no such thing as 1000%

[sangh0]

38. THAT'S why it's confusing to them

They don't know that there's no such thing as 1000%!!!

[Forkboy]

43. Suddenly I feel like the perfect straightman

where's a rimshot when we need it?

[sangh0]

46. I wouldn't call you that

I'd never use the word "perfect"

:evilgrin:

[Forkboy]

55. 2 for 2!

[sangh0]

58. Hey, my daddy used to tell me "Just do what you do best"

That's why I do nothing!!

[OKNancy]

68. and neither did Al Gore, for that matter

He was anti-choice at one time.

Also the DLC can write and suggest all they want, but Kerry doesn't have to listen or take their advise. The DLC is just an interest group like any other. Dollars to donuts, he won't pick an anti-choice VP.

[IndianaGreen]

71. Anyone that voted for abortion restrictions is "anti-choice" by definition

Now ask yourself which of those names being floated as potential VP candidates on the ticket have voted for abortion restrictions such as "partial birth" ban etc.

[madfloridian]

31. Oooh, this paragraph just hit me. These are not symbolic issues!

Excuse me, Al From, but there is no such thing as "partial-birth" abortion. What it really means is that the doctor and a woman are not given the choice of saving the life of a woman if there are problems. This is NOT symbolic. This is dangerous.

If "fetal life" protections are enacted in certain ways as they apparently are now....it could lead to new definitions of life which could undermine ROE v WADE. It is called "redefining the issue." The GOP is very good at that. This is no way just a "symbolic" gesture.

DLC quote from the article: "That may be why most of the attendees at Sunday's event seemed focused on the growing threat to basic abortion rights rather than the large range of largely symbolic anti-abortion measures recently championed by the president and his congressional allies, such as parental notification, fetal life "protections," and the so-called "partial-birth" abortion ban. This new focus on the basics of choice couldn't come at a better time...."

I just saw a statement on another board from someone who said the DLC must have attended a whole other March than he did.

[madfloridian]

32. DLC warning to Gore from 2000.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=1343&kaid=131&subid=192

SNIP..."But strangely enough, it's Democrats, generally united in favor of basic abortion rights, who are now talking about an abortion litmus test for candidates. Even before Stenberg, key leaders of the National Organization for Women and the National Abortion Rights Action League were quoted as urging Al Gore to drop Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana from his list of potential vice-presidential candidates because Bayh voted for the partial-birth ban, even though he has voted with abortion rights advocates on every measure since coming to the Senate. Margie Kelly, spokesperson for the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, told the Baltimore Sun that "You cannot support choice and support the partial birth ban at the same time."

SNIP..."Abortion rights activists have every right to offer advice to Al Gore about potential running mates, but no right to impose a litmus test. We encourage Al Gore to reject it...."

They say only 1% would be affected. Yes, maybe true. But it means the woman's life most likely, a decision that should be hers, her husband's, and her doctor's. It should not be the DLC.

[beyurslf]

33. That article doesn't say that

It says that the test should not be that the person is against any restriction on abortion. I think most people and many who are pro choice support some restrictions.

[madfloridian]

40. Read the article I posted from 2000.

They consider it all symbolic gestures. Baloney.

[ulysses]

34. "double-speak, convolution"

Sounds like a DLC article to me.

[sangh0]

39. Did you read it?

Or is the formulaic analysis good enough for you?

[ulysses]

48. part of it.

Did you?

[sangh0]

50. part of it

and I understood all I read. There's nothing confusing or tricky about it. It's clear and straightforward.

So what "double-speak" did you see?

I saw none

[ulysses]

51. I didn't say that I did.

I do believe, though, and have said many times that missives that come from the DLC are deliberately obtuse. It would surprise me not a whit if this one is as well.

[sangh0]

52. I refer you to your #34

Does your #34 mean that many DLC articles are convoluted double-speak, but not this one?

For some odd reason, I thought it meant something else

here's the link to #34

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=511769#512155

[ulysses]

59. yes, I recall the post.

"Sounds like a DLC article to me."

Does your #34 mean that many DLC articles are convoluted double-speak, but not this one?

No, it means that many DLC articles are convoluted double-speak (those words are a quote from madfloridian's original post, btw - that's why I put them in quotation marks) and that I wouldn't be at all surprised if this one was too.

[sangh0]

61. "many DLC articles are convoluted double-speak ...

and that I wouldn't be at all surprised if this one was too"

IOW, a long, convoluted, way to say "I didn't read it"

[ulysses]

62. you're so cute when you try to put words in my mouth.

:D Desperate much?

As I said, I read part of it.

[sangh0]

63. Pardon me

make that "IOW, a long, convoluted, way to say "I didn't read it ALL"

[ulysses]

64. if you like.

:shrug: The original point wasn't about me, but I know you have your fixations.

[balanced]

65. I don't get this from your SNIP. I, personally, would not vote for

any restrictions on the rights of conscience. But I don't see how voting for restrictions on parental notification or third-term abortions if the woman's life and health are protected hurts a candidate as long as they are mainstream pro-choice.

[Tinoire]

72. DLC on abortion. Let me sum it up for you. Fast forward to 2005

It's not our fault that we voted to give them the right to overthrow Roe vs Wade; it's their fault for misusing our votes.

That's basically going to be the DLC's position of tacit complicity to everything until the day we wake up to find they will have totally merged with the Republican Party.


Won't be their fault then either.

It will be ours for letting them misuse our votes.