Hillary leads shift to right on abortion

Sunday Times
Sarah Baxter, New York



SENIOR Democrats are encouraging opponents of abortion to run for the Senate in an attempt to challenge Republicans on their most prized electoral turf: moral values.

Support for a woman¡Çs right to choose has long been part of the Democrat party platform, but politicians have been toning down the rhetoric after Senator John Kerry¡Çs defeat in last year¡Çs presidential elections.

Hillary Clinton, the hot favourite for the Democratic ticket in 2008, led the shift last month by saying that abortions were a ¡Èsad, even tragic choice to many, many women¡É and should be reduced.

Howard Dean, who galvanised the left of his party last year and has his eye on another presidential run, declared last week after his election as chairman of the Democratic National Committee: ¡ÈThere¡Çs nobody in America who is in favour of abortion.¡É

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1491672,00.html

is not a shift to the right. Stopping unwanted pregnancies is not a shift to the right. President Clinton said abortion should be safe, legal and rare and he was the most pro choice president in the history of this country.

She didn't even change her position. I'm not opposed to make abortions safe, legal and rare and that's where Hillary stands and has always stood.

They just want to be seen as right on an issue like this and I think that's why they said they did. The Clinton's have always had this issue. Just me wondering, what was the highest percentage rate of abortion in the Clinton years? And in the Bush years? Today a girl at my church brought up abortion and homosexuality and I wanted to say something but didn't know the stats of abortions in Clinton's years. I know since Bush has been in office the rates have gone up. I know they were pretty low in Clinton's years because he was a very financially responsible President.

:-)

I'm frankly sick and tired of labels.

Keep playing on the fascists turf, you will get no where.

"Liberal" and "pro-choice" have been demonized by the right and there is no going back as far as those "labels" are concerned.

7. Organized Propaganda:

a) "The creation of social mythology that venerates (creates saints of) one element of society while concurrently vilifying (dehumanizing) another element of the population through misinformation, misdirection and the obscuring of factual matter through removal, destruction or social humiliation, (name-calling, false accusations, belittling and threats).

b) The squelching of public debate not agreeing with the popular agenda via slander, libel, threats, theft, destruction, historical revisionism and social humiliation. Journalists in particular are terrorized if they attempt to publish stories contrary to the agenda"...

..."Fascism promotes chauvinist demagogy, (appealing to the prejudices and emotions of the populace) by fostering selective persecution and accepted public vilification of the target group. It then promotes this a "patriotic", "supportive" or "the party line" and disagreement with such as "anti-government", "anti-faith" or "anti-nation""...

...3. "Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause -
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc"

http://www.couplescompany.com/Features/Politics/Structure3.htm

I'm sick and tired of labels that close people's minds to anything that you have to say before you even open your mouth.

In the words of Chris Rock, I can't stand labels because "anyone who makes up their mind before they even hear the information is a *expletive* fool."

but they will just come up with another one, won't they?

I'm not a Hillary fan, but this is unfair to make what any compassionate and thinking person would believe, that abortions should be rare, into a rightie position. And, by doing it, it presents a false *left* position.

a false leftist and poster child for women hating rightists.
screw her and her friends in the Bushcorp oligarchy.

She has the correct frame on this issue. Safe, legal and rare.

where she really shows her stuff.
screw her.

but her position on choice has never altered. Safe, legal and rare.

how can you reconcile that scale of hypocrisy?

that abandoning the prochoice plank in the party platform would cause a mass exodus of women from the party.

She's entitled to her opinion, and it may not have been presented accurately here. However, the bottom line is that the DLC has always been wrong about where the party should go. The proof of that is the loss of all three branches of government.

saying abortion should be safe legal and rare is not turning to the right. Pro choice doesn't mean pro abortion. It means preserving the choice. She is not moving to the right on this issue at all.

She is not just saying that abortions should be rarer, she has been waffling on other important rights including making reference to state laws she would embrace and then having her staff "clarify". She is a 55+ year old woman; doesn't she know where she stands on this?

Shouldn't abortions be legal,, and rare? Would anyone besides someone trying to falsely imply that leftists are for abortions as an answer to pregnancy all the time rather than, say, informed birth control, actually ARGUE with that position?

Look, I'd rather argue about Hillary going over to Iraq on her dog and pony show and backing up the admin claims that the insurgents are failing. It more than annoys me that she is PRO-WAR. But that has nothing to do with the above stance, which the ARTICLE is reframing as a bad thing.

SAFE and rare is a good frame.

to change the color of a few red states

So what is the correct "left" position?

Hillary - and the other Democrats who are talking like her - are simply mouthing apologetics for the US Taliban when they adopt their language.

The mantra that abortion should be "rare" and is a "sad and tragic choice" or a "failure", is actually a coded way of saying that women are too fucking stupid to keep their legs closed and can't deal with a pregnancy they weren's prepared for - THEREFORE - we smarter people must deny women the rights other people in our society are entitled to and we will do that by takig medical decisions from the trained physicians and pass every modern back alley law to keep young women especially under the thumbs of their parental "owners" or their handlers. We should also regulate medical facilities that perform a surgery less dangerous than the surgery a dentist performs so that the abortion facilities have to carry the equivelant of an emergency hospital operating room while there is no need to change the facilities for dentists. Furthermore we need to regulate the methods used by physicians in the treatment of patients even if we have never had any medical training - because we know better than physicians what the patient needs. These regulations will also help us do the thinking for the women who are old enough to be simply evil instead of stupid and therefore they are in need of our guidance"

The truth is that there was only one of the Democratic presidential contenders who had the abortion issue aced and that was Dean - no doubt because he had seen the after effects of the Taliban approach in his early days in medicine. Kerry fucked up the answer royally and instead of pointing out that the so called "PBA" is a "Phantom Procedure" and a propaganda slogan, he himmed and hawed about a need for appropriate regulation.

"The abortion issue" is a rights issue it IS NOT a moral issue and it IS NOT a subject for negotiation - and the outcome of that one issue will affect future generations of more than 50% of the population. If the right to bodily autonomy is denied to women who will be next? Will the right to "unreasonable search and seizure" and the right to "be advised of your rights upon arrest" ETC ETC ETC also be up for removal? They all derive from the same source in the constitution.

I HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF WOMEN - LIKE HILLARY - AND MEN - LIKE KERRY - DEVALUING WOMEN AND DECIDING THAT THEY ARE MORE QUALIFIED THAN WOMEN THEMSELVES TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT WILL HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE REST OF THE WOMAN'S LIFE. I WANT THEM TO GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY BUSINESS. WHEN AND IF A WOMAN DECIDES TO CARRY A PREGNANCY IS THAT WOMAN'S BUSINESS AND NONE OF ANYBODY ELSES BUSINESS. IF SHE DECIDES NOT TO CONTINUE A PREGNANCY SHE NEEDS TO JUSTIFY HER REASONS FOR THAT DECISION TO NOBODY. ANY REASON SHE HAS FOR HER DECISION IS LEGITIMATE. THAT'S HOW THE RIGHT TO BODILY AUTONOMY WORKS.

Many women reluctantly voted for Kerry because they knew he was the better of two evils where their rights were concerned.

My current thinking is that a Dean / Boxer ticket most closely would represent where I stand on this - and many other - issues.

- Eileen`s always in process page -


Eileen

*Sigh* If only it could come true!

:party:

and saying that abortion should be safe, legal and rare does not diminish that right one bit. Most women in this country, even those who have had abortions, want to reduce unwanted pregnancies so women don't have to make this incredibly difficult decision. But that decision should always remain legal. That is what this language means.

then you cripple hir language.

Those of us who have been on the front lines of this issue for any length of time, and watched the incremental encroachment on and removal of women's rights particularly, recognize the coded language - and understand that by adopting the language of those who oppose abortion we provide them with a legitimacy they have no right to.

Abortion is a medical procedure and as such it should remain 'legal'. Abortion should be no more rare than cardiac surgery. If the patient has the indications for the medical intervention and the intervention proposed is appropriate then that should be the only criterion for the frequency of the procedure. Of course abortion, like every other medical procedure, should be performed in as "safe" a manner as any surgical intervention.

I understand this is not what you mean - or what the anti-choice zealots mean - by the code phrase "safe, legal and rare" however. What they mean to do is make a morality issue of a medical procedure and imply "jump through hoops to have access and ability to perform in an emergency room hospital setting after careful consideration by a panel of appropriately thinking physicians" for the word 'safe'; imply "make as many roadblocks and legal restrictions on access as are necessary to prevent most women from the ability to make this choice" for the word 'rare'; and imply "the setting up of a legal minefield which the woman attempts to traverse at her peril and any portion of which may result in prolonged incarceration or murder charges (google "Regina McKnight")so that while it may remain "legal" it is no longer a viable option.

Hillary is no fool and understands the implications of the adoption of the language of the misogynist anti-choice zealot. So do the others who use the language. If they do not understand that the words they use as politicians have political implications then it is time for them to get the hell out of politics.

- Eileen`s always in process page -


Eileen

is that unwanted pregnancies should be reduced. This means real reproductive health care. Birth control options of all sort. This is why Abortions went down under Clinton and up during Bush. To me this is an economic issue as well. Grow the economy, offer real education to women, and unwanted pregnancies will go down.

rather than spouting right wing coded slogans.

Have the courage of your convictions - if you are actually taking that position - and stand behind them or STFU on the issue.


Eileen

however when I have something to say, and I want it to be noticed, I reserve the right to use any method open to me to get the message across. C'est possible!

I have no intention of remaining one of the invisible ones where this issue is concerned. It is, after all, one other of the signs of the rise of fascism.

To paraphrase Wiesel and Friedlander:

"First they came for the pregnant women - but I was not pregnant.......

- Eileen`s always in process page -


Eileen

You tell them and say it as fucking loud as you can. These dopes don't
even know when they are being duped, echoing all the cute little slogans without thinking them through. Imagine hedging your bets on the issue of slavery to pander for votes. That would be downright Clintonian. Someone needs to tell them their presidency is over, get the hell off the stage, they are a drag on future hope.

...was very supportive of a woman's right to choose. This is a very important issue with me too, and I voted with confidence for Kerry, because I thought he was very pro-choice - he even voted against the late term abortion ban because it had nothing written in it to assure that if the woman's health was being endangered by the pregnancy, then the pregnancy could still be terminated.

What do you think Kerry did or said wrong, Eileen?

Pretty much every Dem candidate has been espousing the same stand on abortion-- "safe, legal and rare." Hillary is neither unique nor unusual in this, IIRC Bayh, Gore, Kerry et al. have been declaring the same thing. Typical MSM attempt to "make an issue where there isn't one."

What else is new?

Not to mention running to the right as the DLC candidate for prez.

the Hillary apologists in DU will close ranks behind her big sorry ass and argue that Hillary is expanding the Democratic tent by inviting Rev. Randall Terry and his kooks to join.

Catering to the rightwing will not gain a single vote, but it will lose votes for the Democrats.

its reframing the issue to capture voters who are pro choice, but who also want abortions to go down in number. This is not the right wing.

It is not reframing but framing the issue so that the anti-choice faction can be appeased and by doing so it is either being deceptive or being ignorant of the facts, and failing to recognize nobody on the anti-choice is fooled by the ploy, and they will soon be saying - as they did with Naomi Wolfe a few years ago "See - we were right all along and even Hillary agrees with us".

It is simply framing "the abortion issue" in right wing misogynist language.

Don't spout that bull about "reframing" the issue. It's exactly the same frame Bunnypants and the fascist oligarchy have been using to justify the war on women and women's rights.

- Eileen`s always in process page -


Eileen

they are nothing but Fascists pretending to be pro-life. I don't see any of them adopting unwanted children, particularly children of color.

I'm talking about talking about abortion as safe legal and rare.

RARE? Gaddam--and if it is not RARE, who is to blame?

You got it--the sinful and ignorant women, who do not, because they are stupid, use birth control.

Bullshit on this RARE stuff.

It is still a judgement on women who choose to have an abortion. Good grief--if I choose to have an abortion am I contributing to something that by all accounts according to Hillary, who id playing this abortion game, should be RARE?

Jeezus--I am to be shackled with the guilt that it should have been RARE, but it was not RARe because I choose abortion, and therefore am amongst those who used birth control or who were smarter? but I am led to believe that I am not contributing to that smarter approach by not subscribing to RARE?

Bullshit. It is no one's business if it is rare or not.

Moderate Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins,R ME, both pro-choice from the beginning, although usually towing the line for Republicans, have never capitalized on this RARE crap.

This is all political word smithing, and those who think that abortion is "killing" have bought into it

Without a doubt, she is triangulating, because she is putting a moral spin on it to pander to anti-abortion forces.

She fills me with profound and utter disgust, to think that she a hubby were launched into the Whitehouse on this issue. I saw the piece of sell-out trash on the morning talk shows onboard with the we-must-win this-war team and acting coy about Social security.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to minimize the need for abortions! It isn't like having your tonsils out! When a woman finds out that she is pregnant a whole host of emotions follow ESPECIALLY an unwanted pregnancy. AND any "medical procedure" involves risks AND should be done only when necessary. Avoiding unnecessary medical procedures by "proactive" steps is always a better way than "reacting" with a "medical procedure".

I think that "Safe, Legal and Rare" perfectly describes what should be said about abortion. Succinct and easy to grasp for everybody!

Being overly sensitive is counterproductive at best. Looking at the issue in an analytical way does lead to making abortions "safe, legal and Rare, Rare meaning that precautions are taken, proper birth control, education.... What is wrong with that?

I have always been pro choice and I highly resent the hypocrisy of the Right Wing Radicals spewing their stupid controlling garbage - I also resent radicals on the left who are so hypersensitive that they alienate normal average thinking people. Face it some people are torn on the issue of abortion but will always defend the woman's right to choose. The "over the top" way of expressing woman's rights simply alientate people that we need to be on our sides if this comes down to a battle on the streets.

I hope that there are not too many people out there like that because they do the "right to choose" more harm than good.

comparable to having your tonsils out, or your appendix out.

Both contain cells that are removed for the health of the person involved.

This is the choice of the woman for her own health, for her own well being and for the well being of other children in the family.

By saying itshould be RARE is heaping guilt upon women. I don't care how you rationalize it, it is still blaming women.

It is NOT a baby and it is NOT killing. It amounts to a tablespoon of blood and cells and with today's technology, a pregnancy can be detected even before a missed period. Inthat case, pathological examination of the uteran contents cannot even, many times, find the cells that determine the pregnancy.

I could go for RU 486 but that has

also been denied women. I certainly can go for birth conrol pills for both men and women. But that has been denied women also, by using the religion card--no birth control, abstinence only. Which is a failure also.

This is a disgusting way to treat women.

A bunch of cells is NOT a baby and is the same as another part of the body that needs to be removed. In fact, it is even less than a part of one's body, such as an appendix or tonsils.

You are not, in most cases, removing an inflammed thing that is making you sick.

And to address a part of the discussion elsewhere in this thread, I say that to deny the emotional pain of a person who choses abortion as being part of the guilt imposed on her by society is to devalue that woman because she disagrees with the pro-choice stance. Has she know right to what she feels? And people say that the language that Kerry was using was devaluing women? I'd say dismissing the pain and hurt of a woman who chooses abortion is to devalue her as being too stupid to know honest emotion from imposed guilt. How is that better? She can't feel real pain emotionally because it would weaken the pro-choice stance of some in the pro-choice movement? So it is denied as being not real? How valuing of women is that?

To deny the emotional pain of some women as they have this procedure, or the risks involved in having ANY procedure done is to deny reality based on ideology, which is just as bad as what the extreme pro-life movement does, only going in the other direction.

I was glad to have the right when I needed it and I'm prepared to defend other women who need that right. In my case the father was my husband and he was an abuser and I don't regret it one single bit. If I hadn't made that choice he would still be a part of my life and I would still be abused and so would the child. No guilt and no regret here, and I'm not sorry I did it. (Oh and fuck covenant marriages and making divorce harder/ I live in Arkansas)

It is your thought process that leads the hopeful RARE occurence of abortions to JUST women. That is what is wrong with people. THEY jump to their own conclusions and react. RARE means just that - RARE as in not a common occurence - period. RARE means either almost flawless birth control OR abstinence and since birth control is the responsibility of both the man and the woman, then a FAILURE of birth control is a failure by BOTH of the sexes since it is BOTH of the sexes responsibility to stop unwanted pregnancies. Thinking in any other way is a though process clouded with personal opinions.

If we are to win and maintain our personal rights, then we must let go of ALL of the preconceived opinions and stop fingerpointing but simply and analytically state the FACTS - again, PERIOD.

Compromising on abortion doesn't need to be one of them. We're talking about a party that defends the death and sickness of children due to corporate negligence. So much of the party is in the hands of corporate America that we can't even do that. This article makes it sound like Hillary is one of those Democrats.

make abortion rare is going to the right or challenges Republicans on the issue at all. Republicans want to ban abortion under any circumstances. Period.

Pregnant by your DAD? So what? Have the kid anyway.

More people need to call on the Repugs to tone down THEIR rhetoric but I don't see anyone doing that. They have no claim on "moral values" unless they want to admit they have none.

Keeping abortion legal BUT rare is not "leaning to the right" or appeasing wing-nuts. Many people are on the fence where this issue is concerned and I'm glad Hillary is speaking up.

Nobody likes abortion but I don't see where Hillary made any kind of assertion that it should be made illegal.

Geesh, some people will always make something out of nothing.

voted for her (35) have ALL said they will NOT vote for her ever again in any race ....she is DEAD in NY and chuckie is right behind her!

If there was a good candidate running against Hillary, then maybe this would be so. But, I don't think Hillary will lose in 2006 - though of course if she lost, then she couldn't run for president.

She is now in the war zone with sen McCain and praising the
progress made in Iraq & Afghanistan. She said the insurgents
are losing. She is saying abortion should be rare. This is
looking very good for her run in 2008.

they are in no way saying abortion should become illegal. they are REFRAMING the issue. the point needs to get across that pro-choicers do not "support abortion", but support the legalization of abortion.

are you pro-abortion? no. you are pro-choice, right?

choice will never fly in the red states. The wishy washy flip flop charge will kill us. We must stay where we are on this issue and focus on economics instead. That's the winner for us.

if the only choice is abortion, then we're not talking about being pro-choice.

I don't know about flying in the red states, but I think this stance, properly said, is where many folk actually are on the issue.

"Would you have an abortion?"

"No"

"Does that mean you're going to tell another woman what to do?"

"Again, no. This is my choice. It's up to the other woman to make her choice and live with it, whatever it is."

It's a position better than theirs and it works where theirs has proven not to.

... who is "pro-life" is EVER, EVER, EVER going to vote for Hillary Clinton.

The triangulation trick worked at one time, it is not going to work for her. She's shooting off her silver bullets, and missing the target completely.

She's embarrasing.

Hillary cannot win the election in '08 no matter what she does. She may win the nomination, but she cannot carry the country.

She has just outlined her longstanding opinion on the matter. No one likes abortion and they should be safe legal and rare.

The Dems are changing the way they talk about abortion and showing that they are a bigger tent party than the Republicans.

She and hubby were swept into office on the tails of the pro-choice struggle.

I just turned 50 and I have attended many protests and demonstrations. By far, the largest ever was the pro-choice march in DC at the end of Poppy's presidency. The crowd was so thick that it was essential to hold the hands of the people you were with--just to prevent anyone from being swept away and lost.

What is longstanding about Clinton is her spanning the breech to pander to both sides. While triangulating through the use of loaded terms and inflamatory language she erodes away at hard-won gains -just for her own selfish ambition. I have escorted at clinics and have wide experience on the attitudes of women regarding abortion, and they are not weepy or tragic or fucking "sad" as Clinton would portray it. For the most part, they are PISSED OFF that anyone would seek to prevent access or stand in their way.

Do you understand?

I have worked as an escort at clinics, and attended The Largest Protest EVER on the mall the March for Women's Lives this past April. I know the temperment and I know these women are here to fight. They will fight Bush and the Republicans and they will do it well. Hillary Clinton has reservations about Abortion, but would always seek to uphold a Woman's right to choose.

Look The Democrats are getting DESTROYED on abortion. We need to change the way we talk about abortion to a large portion of the electorate. There is middle ground in a lot of places on this issue. Saying that one has reservations about abortion and then doing things to make sure that fewer unwanted pregnancies occur (like better sex ed and access to contraception) is the only way to negate that.

We still always will support and fight for Women's rights, never give an inch. But we need to sell it (and a lot of other issues better)

She can't do it. She shouldn't do it. But apparently she will.

Using the RW language, testing out the RW planks to see if they'll support her. First there is her shift on the abortion issue, now she is joining up with McCain in calling for a permanent military presence in Afghanistan, supposedly to keep terrorists from taking Afghanistan back over, when in reality it is to protect the pipeline her oil buddies are building.

Sorry, but we don't need anymore Clintons in the White House. Bill did enough damage while he was in office, having another faux Democrat who takes his orders from corporate America will simply destroy what is left.

:eyes:

feel guilt and shame over their fundamental human rights re sexuality and reporduction capabilities.

Those who fought tooth and nail for female emancipation, universal suffrage and the right to legal abortions knew the price that would be paid even when the Dark Ages finished and women became empowered to the rights they hold today: more attacks from male dogma propagandists.

Hillary is competing in a male world. To stand any chance as a senior politician she may also be coming under huge pressure to lean towards a less liberal agenda.

Recent press reports in the Europe focused on the Pope's latest rant where he said that abortion is like the holocaust.

This provoked outrage among many women's groups who saw this as yet another attempt by the ultraa right wing to whitewash over the docuymented past associations of the Vatican and the Nazis.

The following article is a good example of the horror expressed by Jewish groups at JP2's rant:
Pope riles Jews by comparing abortion to holocaust:
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=13675336

Hillary may become an even bigger target of the right wing in the future.