Dean tells (CA) state Democrats abortion rhetoric needs to change

[question everything]

Dean tells state Democrats abortion rhetoric needs to change

By John Marelius
STAFF WRITER

April 17, 2005

LOS ANGELES – Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean told California Democrats last night the party needs to change its rhetoric on abortion to project a more mainstream image.

"I think we need to talk about abortion differently," Dean said. "Republicans have painted us into a corner where they have forced us to defend abortion. I don't know anybody who's for abortion."

(snip)

On abortion, Dean stressed he was not advocating that a party dominated by supporters of abortion rights change its views. "We can make common ground with folks," he said. "The issue we need to debate is not whether abortion is a good thing. The issue we need to debate is whether a woman gets to make up her own mind about her health care or whether Tom DeLay gets to make up her mind."

After one meeting, Dean, surrounded by a phalanx of aides, blew past a group of reporters waiting in the hallway. Dean's stand did not sit well with Marcia Patt of Oceanside, who was waiting outside a door with a sign reading, "Don't abandon choice." Patt, an activist in the North County Coalition for Peace and Justice, was angered by an article in USA Today in which Dean said "pro-life Democrats" should be encouraged to run for office.

(snip)


Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050417/news_1n17dean.html

[xultar]

1. I remember som ANGRY ASS posts about us being softer on our

abortion stance. Now that Dean is saying it louder and more frequent ya'll gonna spew gas on him and light him up like you did Hillary?

Hum????

Inquiring minds wanna know?

[ProudToBeLiberal]

2. safe, rare, and legal nt

[cap]

4. i feel betrayed by our leadership

but have no choice

[IronLionZion]

10. Why?

:shrug:

He wants to reframe the issue so more pro-choice Dems can get elected. And pro-life red staters will often elect pro-life Democrats. A pro-life Democrat is better than a pro-death Republican. Hell, I'll take Dennis Kucinich or Al Gore over any Republican.

[calimary]

91. I was there at the convention and heard him speak. And as an ardently pro-

choice Dem, I'm here to tell you I am NOT threatened.

Not in the LEAST. For heaven's sakes, look at his track record, will ya?

How could I be threatened to hear the issue framed as "a woman being able to make up her own mind" or "letting a woman decide what's best for her rather than letting tom delay decide what's best for her"?

It doesn't seem (or sound) to me that he's waffling or back-peddling - AT ALL. He's doing what many of us here on DU have constantly yearned, for YEARS now, for our leaders to do: REFRAME THE MESSAGE more shrewdly. Dean says the republi-CONS have painted us into a corner and forced us onto the defensive on this, merely by exploiting the use of the hot-button word "abortion." And he's SPOT-ON. I'm as pro-choice as they come and I myself am not in favor of abortion. It's a None-of-Your-Business issue. And that's how he's recommending that it be played. That, frankly, is how it SHOULD be played.

[jdj]

101. you and Dean are both wrong.

we dont "frame the message" the media does. Duh.

and since the right owns the media, the right gets to frame the message.

We ought not to even go there, how many times to we have to go through this same useless argument about how we talk when they aren't listening anyway, and when they are it is only to misquote us.

What dems need to do is pick a lane, stay there and NOT BE MOVED. Show some fight, stand up to the bullies, say this is my story and I'm stickin' to it, quote some country songs, like say "you gotta stand for something or you'll fall for anything", show some balls, show some testicles, show some freaking backbone, but get it through our thick heads that like Audre Lord said, "the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house", and right now we are all just the media's bitches to do with as they please.

reframe the issue...snivel..snarf... we aren't going to win any votes this way but we sure might lose some.

[calimary]

111. Actually, if you'd heard him speak on Saturday night, you would have heard

Dean's version of what YOU, yourself, have just called for:
"What dems need to do is pick a lane, stay there and NOT BE MOVED. Show some fight, stand up to the bullies, say this is my story and I'm stickin' to it, quote some country songs, like say "you gotta stand for something or you'll fall for anything", show some balls, show some testicles, show some freaking backbone".

He talked repeatedly about conviction, speaking from the heart. It made me think that some of the things I've long lamented were actually coming out of his mouth. Showing conviction. Standing for something. No waffling. Whether you think they're gonna agree or disagree - a point Dean made while describing an encounter with a "pro-life" fundie lady deep down in the bowels of the Bible Belt, who heard him speak and was won over - because she liked how he spoke his mind and his heart with such conviction, even while she didn't agree with him on the nit-pickings.

You actually share a lot of the same convictions with Dr. Dean.

[chomskysright]

129. fucking A+: women who are saddled w/ child raisin' MAKE THE CHOICE

[Seabiscuit]

109. Bingo! I thought what you're saying was obvious from the article.

Dean isn't abandoning anything. He's very smartly sending the right message about refusing to allow the Repukes to frame the issues and put us on the defensive.

The right to abortion is all about a woman's right to choose, not Tom Delay's supposed right to make choices for her. Dean made that crystal clear in his statments.

[jaysunb]

5. uh huh...

sounds like a pattern don't it ?

[MrModerate]

6. I'm for Dean because he has moxie, smarts, and has developed . . .

A strong organization. All of which we need.

But he is waaaay wrong on this issue. Just using the term "pro-life" to describe anti-abortion forces is a tactical error. As we all know, they aren't pro-life at all (once an unwanted child is actually born, they're perfectly willing to toss it on the ashheap). What they ARE is morbidly concerned with the status of embryos.

What we need to do here is stand up for a woman's right to choose period. Yes, we need to keep Delay out of the doctor's office. But we don't get anywhere by implying that women who choose abortion are morally wrong -- and that's what Dean has done.

[Erika]

9. Where did Dr Dean say that? eom

[MrModerate]

17. In the article, he refers to "pro-life democrats"

Which I think surrenders the floor to anti-abortion zealots. Pro-choice and Pro-life are not equally opposing terms. The correct terms are Pro-choice and Anti-choice.

Now as it interpret it, that's what Dean wanted to say -- but he gives the game away by using "pro-life." Who the heck is "anti-life?"

He also says (paraphrase) "no one thinks abortion is a good thing," which is true on one level -- but also carries the implication that if you have an abortion you are "bad."

I just think we need to stop handing the anti-abortion forces these backhanded victories.

[PA Mamma]

18. Finally Someone here who has been doing their homework ...

Listen to this post it is the TRUTH !

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

26. Abortion is always a tragedy

in a sense.

Its either a failure of birth control, of planning or even worse.

A failure of morals (incest) or public safety (rape).

Or its a tragic medical crisis, with a women's life in danger, or a child severely deformed.


I think we would all agree that we would prefer if abortion would never happen, that the choice never had to be made.

And Dean is right in that regard.

We should be defending the individual's liberty to make the decision, but we should in no way celebrate the decision. It is as the court rightly found, a privacy issue, one in which the debate should center on privacy and rights, and not on defending what decision people make with the choice.

[renaissanceguy]

84. Excellent post. I think Dean is doing the right thing

by reframing the debate: Do we want the government and politicians making these decisions for us?

The next step is to advocate birth control, reduce poverty, etc... all the factors (or lack of) that lead up to an abortion.

It's an emotional issue, and I would have a hard time believing that any pregnant woman would not have some sort of emotion during the abortion process. If we could help them so that they would never have to make such a decision, while still keeping it on the table if all other means fail, then we are only empowering them more.

Safe, legal, and rare is the way to go.
http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.14744291

http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.16778998

[Maat]

105. Some anti-choicer define BIRTH CONTROL as 'abortion,'

because it prevents implantation of the fertilized egg to the uterine wall.

I have saved many quotes from the Religious Right defining it that way.

I, for one, will fight against any policy that precludes the use of Plan B or birth control. And I do CELEBRATE someone availing themselves of those choices.

Why? Because I was a Child Protective Services worker for seven years and saw what happens after an unwanted child comes into the world.

So, it depends on what one means when one says 'abortion.'

This is a very slippery slope.

[PA Mamma]

117. Yes, we shouldn't be celebrating it ...

But please don't say it's always a tragedy. It isn't.
For some it's a relief or their only option.
The real tragedy is what will happen to women should they be forced to other means.

[rayofreason]

128. well said

[chomskysright]

132. DOESN'T WASH, BABY; Mary Wollstonecraft 250+ yrs ago:.....

"....Consider, I address you as a legislator---whether, when men content for their freedom, and to be allowed to judge for themselves RESPECTING THEIR OWN HAPPINESS, it be not INCONSISTENT AND UNJUST to subjugate women, even though you firmly believe that you are acting in the manner best calculated to promote their happiness? WHO MADE MAN THE EXSLUVIE JUDGE, IF WOMAN PARTAKE WITH HIM THE GIFT OF REASON?..."

A VINDICATION OF THE RIGHTs OF WOMAN:

Mary Wollstonecraft: 1792

[pres2032]

36. um, i have to call bullshit on that

Which I think surrenders the floor to anti-abortion zealots. Pro-choice and Pro-life are not equally opposing terms. The correct terms are Pro-choice and Anti-choice.


I think that is absolute bull-crap and narrow mindedness. I am absolutely pro-life, from the womb to the tomb, I am against the death penalty, guns, and war. I am for health care and all kinds of social services. I am against abortion, but i am for EVERYTHING that has to do with life.

If anything we have to reframe what the republicans call pro-life. They are pro-birth, I AM PRO-LIFE. I am sick of this bullshit on this board that lumps me with republicans just because i am pro-life. I am the complete opposite of a republican! So CUT THIS BULLSHIT!!!

[Dhalgren]

74. But are you against a woman's right to make the

decision whether or not to have an abortion for herself? Would you outlaw the procedure? If you say that for reasons of the woman's health, she may receive an abortion and that she should have complete confidentiality with her doctor, then all abortions are legal and no one else's business. This bullshit about what "I" believe and "what should" be the law is just that - bullshit. You can crow about "pro-life" till the cows come home, but what it means is second class citizenship for women - and THAT is bullshit!

[MrModerate]

75. Which was exactly my point.

You define "pro-life" in a comprehensive way, which happens to include opposition to abortion. In the context of abortion, I'd have to stick to my guns and call you "anti-choice" because you state that you are against it. Anti-choice, but not anti-life.

However, as the term is used by Republicans, "pro-choice" is the antithesis of "pro-life." But we all know that one can be opposed to abortion and perfectly willing to countenance war, guns, the death penalty, denial of health care and crippling restrictions on social programs.

We Democrats do ourselves no good by letting the Republicans frame the debate as pro-choice vs pro-life, exactly because of the objections you have raised.

[PA Mamma]

100. Can I ask you a question, Pres ????

If You are:
"I am absolutely pro-life, from the womb to the tomb, I am against the death penalty, guns, and war."

Then why are you supporting Casey?

Who is Pro-GUNS, Pro-Death Penalty, and Supported the War.
http://ttagaris.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/25/165623/726

I am not being nasty. Just wondering, really.

[bunkerbuster1]

71. While I bristle at the term pro-life, if it's used to describe our Dems...

and we can siphon off votes that'd go to reThugs, I don't much care.

Better that we reclaim the term than to allow those pigs to use it unfettered.

Naive of me? perhaps. But I wouldn't bet against Howard Dean's instincts on this issue.

[benny05]

115. I Agree with Dean about Reframing the Issue

But I would do it differently:

Pro-birth (Rethugs)
Pro-family (Dems)

[madfloridian]

13. No, that is not true at all.

He wants to put the emphasis on "choice", a woman's right to choose her health care without legislative interference. He just wants to quit using the pro con and abortion words, make it about choice.

You know what? There is more bashing of Dean here than at some of the conservative blogs I read. Some of them take time to think things out. I posted some notes in a blog in GD Politics in Amy S.'s post.

[OzarkDem]

21. He's right

and moving in the right direction. Dems have failed to control their message on this issue for decades.

[never_get_over_it]

85. Yep the correct term for them

is pro-birth because many of them don't give a shit once there is birth. But I'm thinking I do like Dean framing it around the Delay and the repunks barging in on the Shiavo case. I really think that the repunks are never going to let abortion be abolished because they will lose a wedge issue and will piss off and hopefully activate the vast majority who support a woman's right to choose.

[pokercat999]

66. If Hill had said the SAME THING she would not

have been flamed.

Dean's theme is if I read it correctly is "it's none of the gov'ts goddamn business". Which IMHO is the very best argument, not pro-abortion (a losing position with many) not pro-life (a losing policy) but simply put none of your or my business, period end of subject. This theme puts any other argument outside the main stream.

[KittyWampus]

77. Hillary Already DID Say The Same Thing & Was Flamed. Apparently

some people will kiss Dean's ass if he says the Moon is made of green cheese while simultaneously damning Hillary C. as a DLC whore.

The evidence is now quite clear on this.

Edit- of course both Dean and Hillary are right.

We need to find Common Ground after the GOP has spent decades looking for wedge issue to cause divides within America.

[xultar]

89. Straight up she wanted to open the dialog to our pro-life Dems and

got flamed off her ass.

[ronnykmarshall]

98. Bu, but, but

It's DIFFERENT when DEAN says it!! :sarcasm:

[xultar]

90. That IS WHAT HILLARY SAID. She wanted to open a dialog to

our 'Pro-Choice' Dems, brought up the Big Tent and the SAFE RARE & LEGAL stance and got FLAMED HERE!

So, DU is 2-faced. Who woulda thought? Hate Hillary but LOVE DEAN when they both have the same stance on the same issues. :crazy:

[KittyWampus]

76. Damn Straight, Xultar. Hillary Said Same & MANY DU'ers Cussed Her Out.

The hypocracy is now plainly evident.

[saskatoon]

119. xultar-YUP

YUP

[Erika]

3. This was discussed earlier here

The Dems are the party of caring about children and family planning so abortions will be reduced. The GOP has weakened support for both and appear to favor back alley abortions with coat hangars.

[IronLionZion]

7. I agree with that strategy

nobody is for abortion. Hell, I think Democrats are all pro-life. But many of us support choice too.

And pro-life Democrats should definitely run for office, and pro-choice Democrats too, and any other kind of Democrat. We need more Democrats in office period.

Democrats are as different as Kucinich and Lieberman. One of them has a pro-life record and the other has a pro-choice record. Guess who is which? Go by their lifetime of votes, not their presidential platforms. Democrats have to be pro-choice when running for president. Even Al Gore changed to pro-choice. Kucinich is (was?) pro-life, Lieberman is pro-choice.

We don't ever have to defend abortion and we are NOT abortion rights supporters. Clinton said it best when he said it should be "safe, legal, and rare." Even the most militant pro-life Democrat, late PA Governor Bob Casey Sr., still increased access to health care and raised the standard of living for my state. What do you think Republicans do? :scared:

[BattyDem]

22. You made an excellent point

You can be both pro-life and pro-choice. The issue is about people being allowed to make choices for themselves, regardless of what other people believe is right or wrong.

I don't care if a politician is pro-life, just as long as he respects my right to think for myself and not have my decisions made for me by the government. I don't tell people how to live their lives and I don't want anyone telling me how to live mine.

Perhaps that's how the debate should be framed:

The Repugs want to make your decisions for you based upon their personal and religious beliefs.
The Dems respect your right to make your own decisions, regardless of their personal and religious beliefs.


For years, the Repugs have framed the debate as a moral issue, but it's really an issue of freedom. Do we want the government to make our most personal decisions for us?

I have no intention of supporting any Dem candidate that doesn't support choice, but I understand what Dean is trying to do. However, I think he needs to choose his words very carefully when reframing the debate or else the Dems are going to lose a lot of support. He needs to make it clear that the Dems will remain the party of choice because if that ever comes into question, they're finished.

[Blue_State_Elitist]

8. Another weak chairman

another failed election year...

[Erika]

11. Dr. Dean is doing one fantastic job!

He's showing the Dems are the party of freedom and moderation.

[IronLionZion]

12. yeah reframing issues is so "weak"

:eyes:

[Blue_State_Elitist]

14. Actually yes.

Kerry reframed the democratic stance on the Iraq War, look at the results.

We have not reframed the democratic stance on social security, look at the results.


Dean is still far better than Terry Milquetoast, but we as progressives need to be critical.

[Erika]

15. Dr. Dean is doing great

and the GOP are running scared. He's done a darn good job.

[Blue_State_Elitist]

16. I agree

Let's keep him moving in the right direction.

[Erika]

27. He's moving to the left

Check your directions.

[OzarkDem]

23. The rest of the party

would do well to follow his lead.

Reframing issues has to be done with skill, clarity and simplicity. Other Dem candidates may have tried to do it in the recent past, but didn't do it well. Kerry didn't try to reframe the Iraq issue, he just muddied the waters.

[calimary]

92. Kerry did NOT reframe the democratic stance on the Iraq War.

All we had were various permutations of "I voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it..." and never coming flat out and saying the war was wrong and based on lies, period, end of sentence, amen, over and out, thank you and goodbye. He NEVER came out and said anything near that. And he couldn't because his own stand on it was so muddy.

[pelagius]

108. Most politicians are lawyers and they tend to use lawyer-talk...

...when highlighting differences. But lawyer-talk is a specialized form of communication useful for lawyers and amazingly obtuse to everyone else.

Two-and-half cheers to Dr. Dean for trying to speak a language understood by the people.

I'm holding that last half cheer in reserve, but I am wary of this re-framing disintegrating into pandering and equivocation.

[PA Mamma]

20. He actually not reframing it ...

And people like you are still using the words "Pro-life". That's the problem. Come on Folks, use your noodle, here.

[IronLionZion]

95. I think we're all pro-life

we should use that term to describe ourselves, we have to own that term just like the term "liberal". Pro-war, pro-death, anti-health care, anti-social security Republicans are not pro-life, and we have to call them out on their hypocrisy.

That's why Dems can be pro-life AND pro-choice. While Republicans are anti-choice AND anti-life. Life should be a general umbrella term and used for more than just unborn babies.

How would you like to frame it? Because the way it is framed now just helps Republicans.

[chomskysright]

133. Yes, but I HAD AN ABORTION:......let's hear about THAT here....

[oneold1-4u]

19. If you cant take the heat -get the hell out of my kitchen!

The most progressive changes in American society in the past century was first, giving women the right to vote and second giving her the right to a life of her own mental freedom. THE RIGHT OF CHOICE!
If a woman is willing to return to serfdom of male dominance, let her move to the new free Afghanistan! Oh, and Dean and a lot of other males might choose an islamic country too and "have it their way"!
I don't get angry easily by getting shoved but don't try kicking me back a century!

[Festivito]

24. Abortions reduced to nonexistance, yet legal, even free

This should sell well enough.

A Democratic pro-life candidate can want laws making abortion illegal, but, accept the compromise of yearly reductions.

People will skirt laws against abortions. When still legal, people talk to doctors and counselors. When illegal they just go to another provider, underground or outside the country.

Let people into the tent. Listen. Then make policy.

[Zhade]

113. As long as that policy does not restrict womens' rights one bit.

NT!

[Festivito]

114. How far would you take that?

If it meant, for example, having to listen to a prepared obnoxious badly written right-wing excoriation of the abortion procedure, WOULD YOU RATHER to have abortions made COMPLETELY ILLEGAL?

Abortions reduced to nonexistance, yet legal, even free could be very powerful in not making a medical procedure illegal.

[Zhade]

118. "WOULD YOU RATHER to have abortions made COMPLETELY ILLEGAL?"

I have absolutely NO clue where you got THAT from.

It's simple: a woman has complete sovereignty over her own body and medical decisions. PERIOD. I can't make it any clearer than that.

[Festivito]

121. If only the real world were so simple.

It's a Sophie's choice question. Is EVERY right so important that you would give up both rights rather than decide between two of them.

Here my question is between accepting a dislikable requiement, reading a right-wing pamphlet before allowing the abortion, versus losing the complete right to a lawful abortion.

In other words, would you rather risk making abortions completely illegal rather than to allow a requiement of forcing the mother to read a pamphlet first.

I hope I've been clear enough.

[Zhade]

122. It's a false choice, though.

There is no requirement that a woman must read bullshit propaganda from the anti-choicers, or lose her inherent right to control her own body.

And that right is inherent, no matter how much some wish it weren't.

[Festivito]

123. Hypotheticals don't exist yet, but, they could. And how would you react?

Yes, there is no federal requirement... (I posed a hypothetical.)

If it were to seperate candidates, would you accept the compromise, rather than allow the alternate candidate to destroy all rights to abortions?

My dear Zhade, I would really appreciate your response to this question, and only in the context of this branch in this thread.

[Zhade]

124. There is no need to affect such a compromise.

It would be just as wrong to try to push "abortions tickle!" pro-abortion propaganda on women as it would be to try to coerce them in a certain way using propaganda from anti-choicers.

Women have the inherent right to control thier bodies. It's a birthright, just as men have the inherent right to control their bodies. One cannot compromise where rights are concerned - you can't be a "little pro-choice" just like you can't be a "little pregnant".

The only reason for such a 'compromise' is to weaken a woman's rights. I will not entertain such questions, because womens' rights are as fundamental as mens'. They don't have to compromise, and shouldn't.

[Festivito]

125. Thank you for your responses.

I admire your fervor.

Your humored metaphor cf a "little pregnant" yields rich irony under this topic.

I'm afraid that all your women's rights, inherent right, and fundamental rights, may disappear in a much bigger political game. A game I don't want to lose over words like, wrong, cannot compromise, only reason, and I will not.

[Zhade]

126. I guess I really don't get where you're going with all this.

:shrug:

(Btw, I'm a man. They're my sisters' rights, not mine.)

[Festivito]

127. Nope. Sorry. Those were the rights you chose to list.

That's what I meant by your rights, the rights you listed. Sometimes English expressioning feels like hunting with bludgeons. Few words cut cleanly like knives anymore.

Nice of you to concern yourself with your sister's rights. She's lucky to have you for a brother.

For everyone I know, I want all to be safe and free. You might want this also, but, we may just differ on how to get there.

I have enjoyed our interchange.

[Zhade]

135. I have no sisters - I meant, you know, women are my sisters.

I've enjoyed the exchange too. :thumbsup:

[PA Mamma]

25. This is a very important part of the Article...

"We can make common ground with folks," he said. "The issue we need to debate is not whether abortion is a good thing. The issue we need to debate is whether a woman gets to make up her own mind about her health care or whether Tom DeLay gets to make up her mind."

After one meeting, Dean, surrounded by a phalanx of aides, blew past a group of reporters waiting in the hallway. Dean's stand did not sit well with Marcia Patt of Oceanside, who was waiting outside a door with a sign reading, "Don't abandon choice."
Patt, an activist in the North County Coalition for Peace and Justice, was angered by an article in USA Today in which Dean said "pro-life Democrats" should be encouraged to run for office.
"That's not the Democratic Party anymore," she said. "That's the party of the far right and that's the direction we're moving in when everybody starts talking about abandoning choice for women in the Democratic Party."

[Erika]

28. Where's your head at? Dean is pro choice

Why are you trying to mislead?

[madfloridian]

31. You are being very misleading on this issue.

Dean is very much for women's rights. We have questioned, and he is listening. Please read what he said in Seattle to a woman's group.

I posted some in another forum. I like what he is saying. He hates when people don't understand what he is saying and doing and will keep trying to explain. These notes were taken by a DFA person in attendance there.

SNIP..."When you talk about a woman’s right to make up her own mind, you are talking to every woman in America, not just the people who think they are pro-choice or pro-life or what ever it is. My strategy on “Choice” issues (I’m trying to ban that word from my vocabulary) is to refuse to let them make it an issue about the morality of abortion and make it about whether a woman has a right to make up her own mind. Cause we’ve got to have a ton of women on our side who may be uncomfortable with the issue of abortion. I think many Americans are uncomfortable with the issue of abortion. They don’t know what to do, they don’t really want it to be illegal, but they don’t want abortion on demand, which is what the Bush people say we’re about. We’ve got to make the debate about whether a woman has a right to make up her own mind, or whether that should be left to politicians.

If we can re-brand this issue in that debate, then I think that’s the end of the debate. It’s always going to be a very difficult issue because you’ve got - it’s a queasy issue for people, but we can win it if we say and make sure the debate’s about if a woman has a right to make up her own mind.

"Obviously, I’m a doctor, I don’t think its any of the governments business whatsoever. I think it should be left up to medical ethicist and patients, and whoever else the patient wants to bring in. But that’s not the prevailing view, it’s a very difficult issue for most Americans and my strategy to deal with it is to talk about a woman’s right – not “Choice” - to make up her own mind. Rights, we’re talking about rights here, not talking about abortion rights, we’re talking about a woman’s right to make up her own mind....."

He says the same women who might support the right of someone to have an abortion if needed....will recoil from the word "pro-choice."

I was glad to read this. I was concerned, but I feel he knows what he is doing on this. I can tell by your attitude that you are not willing to understand what he is doing, but I hope you will.

[PA Mamma]

96. Look I think that this is Great ...

This is what has been missing, a real dialogue, but this honestly bothers me:
" They don’t know what to do, they don’t really want it to be illegal, but they don’t want abortion on demand..."

Abortion needs to be on demand.

[Democat]

29. Democrats need to stand up stronger, not weaker

If there is one thing the Republicans don't avoid, it's being controversial. Democrats need to learn that they need to stand for more, not less - they need to stand apart from Republicans, not make their stand seem closer to Republicans.

Dean is sending me mixed messages so far.

[in_cog_ni_to]

30. Dean said "pro-life Democrats" should be encouraged to run for office?

:wtf: I don't think so Howard. Give a pro-lifer an inch and he'll/she'll undo Roe V. Wade. What happens if ALL Dem candidates are pro-life and get elected? How long will abortion be legal? NOT LONG...IMCPO.

[madfloridian]

32. Fire him.

.

To you guys nothing he does is right. So be it.

[in_cog_ni_to]

33. Nah. Lets just make abortion illegal. That would be better. n/t

[madfloridian]

34. You will not listen or read up on it. Just bash.

Clark perfect, Dean bad....that is where it is heading. This crap is going to destroy all of us.

[in_cog_ni_to]

35. Excuse me? Where the hell did I mention Clark? I didn't.

Geezus. Lighten the fuck up. Not EVERYONE thinks pro-life people are to be trusted. I am one of those people and Howard Dean is NOT perfect.

[pres2032]

37. thanks for that

It feels so nice to know that not only do i get crap from repubs because I'm a dem, but i get crap from dems because I happen not to march in lock step in all issues. I'm pro-life dem who's also pro-life across the board. but since you don't trust me, should i not vote for dem candidates then? guess i should go off into the woods and stop all my campaigning and no longer give money to dem candidates. After all, i can't be trusted, who knows who i'm helping out. :eyes:

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pres2032]

43. who says i'm going to donate to the repuke party?

I wouldn't DARE do such a thing. I am a DEMOCRAT and will forever be a DEMOCRAT. Sure nice to know that this is still the party of inclusion and the big tent. :eyes:

[in_cog_ni_to]

45. If you're anti-choice

and there was a chance to overturn Roe V. Wade, would you support that? If not, why not if you're anti-choice?

[pres2032]

47. now? no. 20 years from now? who knows

depends on what society is like and whether we can take care of everybody and whether we have a world class adoption program.

I strenously have to object to the term "anti-choice" I think it is a bullshit term by people who don't understand that not everyone shares the same kind of "pro-life" stance as republicans. Republicans are pro-birth, I am pro-life as I am pro-life across the board. I am against the death penalty, guns, and war. I am for health care and all kinds of social services. I am against abortion, but i am for EVERYTHING that has to do with life.

[in_cog_ni_to]

51. You wouldn't support overturning Roe V. Wade if that chance

presented itself, but you're anti-choice? Interesting. I really have a hard time believing that. If you're anti-choice, you're anti-choice. There have ALWAYS been unwanted children up for adoption...FOREVER. Why would 20 years make a difference? 20 years ago we had many, many, many unwanted babies/children up for adoption. BTW, how many of those unwanted babies have YOU adopted? Just wondering.

Anti-choice is a LIBERAL term to answer to the repuke's pro-life term.

[pres2032]

53. alright, this arguement is obviously over

you're obviously too close-minded to understand nuances or whatnot. go ahead, keep using the term "anti-choice" with middle america and see how many elections we win.

[in_cog_ni_to]

55. That's what you are. Anti-Choice.

If you don't want a woman to have the right to have the CHOICE to have an abortion, you are anti-choice. Period. I don't care if you don't like the term. I don't like the fact that you are anti-choice.

[pres2032]

58. uh huh, sure, whatever

so apparently it means nothing to you that i'm the good kind of pro-lifer as talked about madfloridian here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1401976&mesg_id=1402154&page=

i differ from you and that's all that matters. God forbid, i differing opinion! the world is going to end!!!!!!

[in_cog_ni_to]

61. An "opinion" from an anti-choice MALE goes in one ear and out the other.

Why would you care about the struggles of women who can't afford a baby?

Why would you care if we go back to back alley abortions?

Why would you care if a woman has to use a dirty old clothes hanger to abortion her own fetus?

Why would you care if a woman died from a self abortion?

Why would you care if a woman is sterile after a self abortion?

Why would you care if a woman took dangerous drugs just to abort?

Why would you care if a woman had to raise money to go to another country for an abortion?

Damn. THESE ARE ALL THINGS WOMEN HAD TO GO THROUGH BEFORE ABORTION WAS LEGAL!!! Do you even understand that? Do you have any damn idea what we went through to get to where we are? It is not something to be taken lightly. It was a HARD, HARD battle to fight and I'll be damned if I am going to accept any man's anti-choice opinion without a comment on it.

[doc05]

120. I don't see any gender identifiers on pres2032's posts.

Nice chip on your shoulder.

[othermeans]

87. I agree with you

Somehow abortion has become a litmus test about whether a person is a "good" Democrat or not. If people were to do just a modicum of research they would find that many progressives were and are opposed to abortion. This ridiculous stance costs us votes in major elections and alenates huge blocks of voters who would otherwise vote our way.

Isn't it interesting that many Democrats, who yelp like puppies about abortion, don't seem to care that a majority of Democratic Senators support the death penalty?

I like the fact that they flame you for taking a different tack regarding your belief. Yet when my two Democrat senators rush to voice their unwavering support of the death penalty not one little whimper of opposition.

[in_cog_ni_to]

88. Just dandy. another man with an anti-choice stance on abortion.

Do you have a womb? and how many unwanted children have you adopted?

A MAJORITY of Democratic Senators are pro death penalty? Do you have a link to back up that statement? I'd like to see the statistics.

[othermeans]

116. Well. I guess you got me there. Logic won out

I don't have a womb, haven't adopted any, as you so passionately put it, "unwanted" children. So I guess you win. No common ground continue in the same mode let the Republicans, conservatives, right to lifers do their thing.

Nothing like a good ad hominem attack to bring the light of day to an argument while skirting the real issue(s).

Oh, I did a little research for you. I know how very difficult it is to put "US Senator and death penalty" into your search engine while wondering if the Republicans are going to hold onto the government for another four years. So here is your link:

http://www.issues2000.org/default.htm

In case your wondering a moratorium is not the same as being opposed to the death penalty. But I guess that only applies if you have a uterus.

[BadNews]

103. I'll agree with you too.

Understand this. There are many people who plug there noses and vote for pro-choice candidates BECAUSE they are democrats and stand for other pro-life issues as well as socially progressive programs. Anti-choice/Anti-abortion does not mean pro-Repuke/anti-democrat.

Would I be for overturning Roe Vs Wade? Yes I would. As I know the other women in my family would. Men are not the only ones with anti-abortion sentiments. I do agree that abortion should be safe, legal, and RARE. Ladies, all of us need to stand up and be responsible for our actions. You don't go to Vegas, lose your money, and then ask the casino for your money back because you didn't think you'd lose. I feel the same way about people who choose to have sex. You know the risks before you make the decision.

Here, I have to agree with much of the right wing. Outside of rape, incest, and times where the pregnant woman would run the risk of death if she gave birth, abortion should be illegal.

Having said that, I am not a single issue voter. That is why I vote Democrat. Would you rather people like me leave the party? If the only difference between the democrats and Repukes were abortion, I would do exactly that. That is not the case so I vote for the candidate I believe will do the most good for this country. Those candidates are Democrats.

[madfloridian]

38. The insults here have been overwhelming. It is disheartening.

I don't expect anyone to think anyone is perfect, but when our party is fighting for its life with a chairman who works his butt off trying to be fair..the attacks here are uncalled for.

He is not pro-life. He knows what they are like in some cases. He is trying reach out on both sides. You did not have to say a word about Clark,..the picture stands out.

The whole internet is so full of this stuff about his running today that I was called a liar by someone over something silly. It is just crazy.

And a lot tonight are getting back at us by slamming Dean. That is so silly and it so senseless. It is hurting all of us, it is hurting the party.

[Erika]

40. Dr. Dean is great

However, I think many of the slams are coming from infiltrating Freepers, not dems. The GOP are scared ----less of Dr. Dean.

[in_cog_ni_to]

44. Maybe Pro-Choice Progressives just need their own damn party.

Where would that put the Democratic Party? I don't think kissing up to anti-choice people is the way to go.

[madfloridian]

46. If you took time to read and look up stuff, you would see he is not.

But never mind. Does not matter. Remember Kipling's "never the twain shall meet."

I am beginning to believe it.

[in_cog_ni_to]

48. I KNOW he's pro-choice, but why on earth is he begging for

anti-choice people to come into the party? It's not the way to go. What the hell do anti-choice and pro-choice have in common on the abortion issue???? NOTHING. IF there was a chance to overturn Roe V. Wade...would those anti-choice Dems support that? If not, why not if they are anti-choice? Answer that please?

[pres2032]

49. did you even read my last post???

[in_cog_ni_to]

52. That post wasn't for you. n/t

[pres2032]

54. the hell it wasn't

you asked the EXACT same thing you asked me and I answered you, but apparently you don't accept opinons which differ even slightly from your own.

[in_cog_ni_to]

57. I don't accept opinions on abortion from MEN who are anti-choice.

and that post was not for you.

[pres2032]

59. so aren't you anti-choice then?

how dare we choose to have another opinion!!!

[in_cog_ni_to]

62. Exactly my point. How dare a MAN have an anti-choice opinion. n/t

[pres2032]

64. hmm, 3 times you emphazied the word Male or man

i think you have some problems you need to work out, so i'm gonna leave now and perhaps return when you're able to have an intelligent conversation.

[in_cog_ni_to]

65. Problems? The only problem I have is a man being anti-choice.

see ya. :hi:

[madfloridian]

50. Not all, some. The logical ones, about 27%..

The ones who would not deny other women the right. The ones who don't want to be called pro-choice because they have been told it is bad. That group is the ones who are truly sincere and can be won over.

He hired new pollsters, and this 27% is what he is concentrating on without losing the base. They are the good kind of pro-lifers, who simply disapprove of abortion, but would not deny.

He explains this a lot.

[BadNews]

104. Where does that put me?

Outside of the abortion topic, I agree with the progressive points of view. I do happen to be against abortion and would like to see Roe Vs Wade overturned. Yet I am not a single issue voter so I vote Democrat. I can't believe I am the only one with this point of view who votes Democrat. Do people like me need our own party?

I think Dean is doing a wonderful job.

[Cha]

106. No Dean isn't perfect..I don't believe

I've EVER seen a post from a DUer that said Dean is "perfect".

And for the record ..I like Clark.

[PA Mamma]

97. No but what would we be if we didn't think...

for ourselves. If we just took what was given to us and told to shut up. We need to have this talk. We need to hone our skills. We need to work this out.

[Writer]

39. (big furtive smile)

;)

Writer.

[Straight Shooter]

41. Dean is smart to link so-called pro-life issue with the nutcase Tom DeLay.

He's sending the message that we can think for ourselves, and be guided by our own beliefs residing within our own conscience, or we can have Daddy DeLay make our decisions for us.

If Tom DeLay wants the power to control whether a woman will carry a fetus to full term or not after her birth control method failed, then Tom DeLay can pick up the frickin' hospital bill if that woman has no health insurance and her boyfriend/husband/whatever abandoned her.

[w4rma]

78. Don't use "pro-life" to specifically refer to anti-choice. Only use it

when refering to someone who is truely pro-life and the abortion issue doesn't affect whether someone is pro-life or not.

For example I am pro-life and I am also pro-choice. I support other means to reduce abortions rather than simply making them illegal and driving them underground where women will die of coathanger abortions and the like. I also support the environment and anti-poverty policies. I oppose the death penalty. I oppose war except as a last choice. And there are a number of other issues that I take the pro-life side on.

[calimary]

94. Good post.

When my best friend got pregnant and had a morals clause in her employment contract (she was unmarried, and it forced her then-boyfriend to marry her to protect her job) she called me about it. My response was "what do you want to do?" She later told me that ALL her other friends told her "get an abortion! Get an abortion! Get an abortion!" Her other friends tend to be rawther staunch conservative, pro-bushie republi-CONS, yet every last one of them TOLD her to "go get an abortion!" I'm the only one who didn't, and I'm probably the only "leftie" in her crowd anymore. I explained to her that this is what "pro-choice" means. The individual woman gets to decide - yea or nay. It's nobody else's business.

And Dean is not just correct, he's fuckin' BRILLIANT to tie it directly around tom delay's neck. I think delay makes a good figurative noose to hang around ALL the republi-CONS' necks in 2006. He even referred to "tom delay republi-CONS." A meme we should ALL be repeating.

[Cha]

107. I'm "pro life", too..but I believe in keeping

the government out of the bedroom and OUT OF DECISIONS between a Dr. and his or her patient!

[Book Lover]

56. OK, Howard - what are you offering *us*?

Dean, if you want to move the rhetoric in this direction (and I understand the broader Party goals of the wherefore), I want to know what assurance you can give us, the pro-choice women for whom there is no discussion regarding our absolute right to control our bodies, that the Democratic Party is taking our fears seriously? Choice is under fire everywhere, Doctor, and if the one political party we have to choose from to represent us politically begins to shift its choice rhetoric toward the middle and those who oppose choice (sans corresponding movement from the other party, by the way), we have to know that the Party is not forgetting us. What have you got to offer us?

[madfloridian]

63. Reposting what he is offering us.

I posted some in another forum. I like what he is saying. He hates when people don't understand what he is saying and doing and will keep trying to explain. These notes were taken by a DFA person in attendance there.

SNIP..."When you talk about a woman’s right to make up her own mind, you are talking to every woman in America, not just the people who think they are pro-choice or pro-life or what ever it is. My strategy on “Choice” issues (I’m trying to ban that word from my vocabulary) is to refuse to let them make it an issue about the morality of abortion and make it about whether a woman has a right to make up her own mind. Cause we’ve got to have a ton of women on our side who may be uncomfortable with the issue of abortion. I think many Americans are uncomfortable with the issue of abortion. They don’t know what to do, they don’t really want it to be illegal, but they don’t want abortion on demand, which is what the Bush people say we’re about. We’ve got to make the debate about whether a woman has a right to make up her own mind, or whether that should be left to politicians.

If we can re-brand this issue in that debate, then I think that’s the end of the debate. It’s always going to be a very difficult issue because you’ve got - it’s a queasy issue for people, but we can win it if we say and make sure the debate’s about if a woman has a right to make up her own mind.

"Obviously, I’m a doctor, I don’t think its any of the governments business whatsoever. I think it should be left up to medical ethicist and patients, and whoever else the patient wants to bring in. But that’s not the prevailing view, it’s a very difficult issue for most Americans and my strategy to deal with it is to talk about a woman’s right – not “Choice” - to make up her own mind. Rights, we’re talking about rights here, not talking about abortion rights, we’re talking about a woman’s right to make up her own mind....."

He says the same women who might support the right of someone to have an abortion if needed....will recoil from the word "pro-choice."

I was glad to read this. I was concerned, but I feel he knows what he is doing on this.

[bklyncowgirl]

86. The right to medical care without government interference.

That is very good.

Forgive me, but I've never liked the phrase--pro-choice.

Choice seems too facile--sort of like do I wear blue or red today. The question has to be, on a question where there is no consensus of right or wrong in our society, who makes the decision. If I am a Catholic and I talk to my priest about having an abortion--he will tell me it is a mortal sin. If I am a reformed Jew and I ask my Rabbi, he or she will tell me that it is my decision based on my ethical understanding of the situation.

Framing this as the Republicans want to control the most private personal decisions that people can make--not just abortion but the right to die with dignity--is I think a very good thing politically.

If something is not done to change the political dynamic, the right to make these decisions will be taken from us--and a hell of a lot more too.

[Writer]

60. Just a thought here...

I do not believe that Dean is sitting at his desk - alone - writing down these talking points. More likely he is planning these talking points with a group of experts then delivering them publicly.

Nothing from the DNC Chair is the sole brainchild of that individual. Please do not laud Dean or criticize Dean, and Dean alone, for his public statements. It's actually the end result of a group effort.

Writer.

P.S. When we start winning again - and we will - I think the inner-party bitching will subside.

[Guaranteed]

67. I think he's wrong on this.

You can't say "Abortion is wrong, but a woman should be able to make up her own mind about it."

That doesn't work. You don't say, "Stealing is wrong, but people should be able to make up their own minds about it."

You have to make the argument. Abortion isn't "wrong"- not in the classic sense, at least. It is perfectly within a woman's right to remove a fetus from her body.

I hate to use the word "parasite," and we shouldn't, but the concept works on the same principle. The woman, if she allows the fetus to grow inside of her, is doing the fetus a favor- a favor which she is under no obligation to perform. She can terminate the pregnancy at any time. ANY time.

That's the basic argument. You have to make it, though. You don't concede that it's "wrong" and then say "So what?"

[bklyncowgirl]

69. The morality of abortion is something about which there is no consensus.

Everyone agrees that stealing is wrong and laws must be enacted to protect property. No one agrees about abortion. Good God, take a look at the major religions--take a look at the posts on this topic on a liberal message board.

The major religions are all over the map. Catholics consider abortion to be a mortal sin. So do Evangelical Christians and most Orthodox Jews. Most mainstream Protestant denominiations are pro-choice with varying degrees of enthusiasm as are most Reformed Jews.

We're a pluralistic society and the Democrats are a national party. Most Democrats are pro choice. For many it is their primary issue. Other Democrats, who are anti-abortion look at the goals of the party as a whole and stick with the Democrats despite their position on abortion.

Many people are anti-abortion but feel that it should not be a political issue (good luck on that one) Framing the debate as a matter of a woman's right to not have some politican impose his personal moral views on a her is something that these people can latch on to. It's the same reasoning that brought me to the Pro Choice rally in Washington last year even though I am personally ambivalent about the morality of abortion.

I think that Dean is doing the right thing here. Do not change our stance on the right of a woman to a safe legal abortion one iota but change the terms of the debate from the morality of killing babies (a sure loser) to the right of the individual to make personal decisions without interference from an overreaching moralistic government when there is no consensus in society that the choice she is making is morally wrong.

[renaissanceguy]

83. I think you hit it right on the head.

I'm not sure what exactly people on here are bitching about. Pregnancy and abortion are emotional issues that women face. Dean is simply acknowledging that, but nowhere does he say that more restrictions should be put on abortion. If anyone has listened to his past campaigning, he has always categorized abortion as a medical procedure, and has always said that women have the right to that procedure.

There are also some people out there who would never have an abortion themselves, but would never impose that view upon somebody else. Along that same line of thought, Dean is showing the rest of the country that the Republicans want to control all our decisions, beginning with our reproductive ones. While it was probably not the smartest idea to say if abortion is right or wrong, he DID later on reframe the debate, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE WANTED TO DO AS A PARTY ALL ALONG.

You guys should know better. Dean has never changed his position, but instead, he's trying to get more people to say, "OK, I might not personally like abortion, but I would not want the government to decide what is right or wrong for me or any other American."

http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.14744291

[Guaranteed]

99. Then why concede that it could be wrong?

That's what this approach does. We shouldn't be doing that.

[bklyncowgirl]

102. Because for many people abortion is wrong.

You are not going to change their opinions on this.

What you are going to do by holding a hard line position on the language used to talk about abortion is drive people who agree with you on other issues away from voting for Democrats--they may not vote Republican--more likely they won't vote at all.

That seems to me that is a bigger threat to reproductive rights than any subtle shift in language.

[Hekate]

68. Keep at it, Dr. Dean. Make allies for legal, safe, and rare

Dr. Dean consistently works on reframing the issues, because the Repubs have indeed painted the Dems into a corner and have managed to seize and maintain the moral high ground on "values" by proclaiming their own morality at every opportunity until a lot of people believe them.

He's right, and I speak as a woman who has been a voice for choice for over 30 years. We need to make common cause with some of the folks who call themselves pro-life -- the ones who are willing to let abortion remain legal and safe, as long as we convince them our candidates' policies will help to make it very rare.

There are people who call themselves pro-life who are very uncomfortable with the wingnut position on abortion. The wingnuts, neocons, and theocons claim they have the moral high ground -- and we have to stand ready to help potential allies see how our core values are expressed in humane policies that make life better for everyone and as a side effect, drastically reduce abortions.

Hekate

[Voltaire99]

70. LOL! Who is this jackass trying to fool?

Here's the deal, doc. Abortion rights are completely, utterly non-negotiable with us.

You can try to soft-peddle them to holy roller America, but it's pointless, and frankly, dishonest. They don't want to hear your candied euphemisms.

They know a dead fetus when they see one.

They haven't "painted us into a corner." They've got ineffectual centrists like you bending over backwards to be sensitive to their positions. Stop already! Fight! Nobody asked you to be the Welcome Wagon to repressive, reactionary Red America.

Wise up, doc. Respecting unlimited choice is the only way you're going to get progressive votes. We despise your and Hillary's right wing flirtations, your mealy-mouthed cozying up to the GOP.

Above all be assured of this: if your agenda is accommodation, then go court NASCAR country for help electing your "pro-life Democrats." You'll get no money or votes for such creatures from us.

[in_cog_ni_to]

72. ditto. Hillary pulled this crap and I'll be damned if I vote for her.

ENOUGH of this moving to the center crap. If we're Democrats, we're Democrats. Not "Moderate" Democrats, whatever the hell THAT means.

[Raster]

130. Halle-Fucking-Lujah!!! Unrestricted Free Choice without compromise...

IS NOT ON THE TABLE!!! Never was, never will be.

Women are not chattel. Women are not broodmares. Women are not birthing units for the human race. Period.

[Raster]

131. And to quote the WORST unlawfully elected pResident in history...

...BRING IT ON!!! Dump the "pro-abortion" rhetoric. It's all about personal choice and freedom. If the so-called leaders of the Democratic party can't get their little minds around that, then get the fuck out!! Now!

[bread_and_roses]

73. The phrase "pro-life" is NOT reframing it is using the RW code for

denying women the right to reproductive rights. Period. It is a grave mistake to use that term because it validates the RW position.

No, Democrats should NOT be inviting "pro-life" candidates to run. Democrats should be stating loud and clear that a candidates religious belief's are a PRIVATE matter and have no place in an election and a woman's health care decisions are a PRIVATE matter and not an election bargaining chip. They should be saying loud and clear that Americans don't want the FBI in their bedrooms, their Dr's examining room, or by thier hospital beds with their families.

It dismays me that Dean, whom I think has generally been doing a good job as DLC chair would make these statements. And I am dismayed that his supporters would not call him on it.

[Voltaire99]

110. Well said.

Indeed, the doc must be called to account. His expansion of the public space for right wing language and ideas will not stand--it's surrender.

[salib]

79. Sucks, doesn't it?

I really wanted to get behind this guy because he seemed like he would be a fighter. I still have some hope, at least from the grassroots energizing the seems to be going on with him. However, I too will be damned if my party is going to back down to the right-wing Christo-facists.

And these arguments from the so-called "pro-life democrats" on this board and others are meaningless. The ONLY reason we are having to fight so hard for CHOICE is because there are a bunch of mind-controlled wannabe pious folks who would just as soon watch a public execution and then egg on an abortion clinic bomber. THEY DO NOT have ANY moral high ground! Let's stop wringin our hands over the few who actually TRY to be consistent on a so-called "pro-life" position. Those are SUCH a minority that none of this debate would exist if it was actually their opinions that mattered to the "pro-life" candidates out there.

[Romulus]

80. Dr. Dean is IN THE HOUSE

I wish he was my president . . .

[Dhalgren]

81. Democrats need to stand up and speak very plainly

about what we stand for. We need to speak directly about what we believe and how we will work. We don't need to try and "triangulate" how to fool people into voting for us. The progressive population in this country is larger than the republican's fundie base and most people poll closer to Democratic beliefs than Republican. The problem is that we try and deceive the non-Democratic voters into believing we are something we are not; then the Republicans call us on it and -pow- we can't be trusted. We have to stop trying to be all things to all people and just tell the truth. Democrats are categorically and fundamentally supportive of women's rights. Period. We can not and will not budge from this position. We are for equality and civil rights, fair and inclusive taxation, sound and controlled fiscal responsibility. We are against preemptive war and against "free trade". We are for a strong defense and "fair trade". This list could go on and on and there may be some disagreements as to items on the list, but we as a party have got to come to some agreement on the basics. You draw people to the party through the pull of strong ideals, truthful presentation, and honest discourse. You cannot just tell everyone whatever it is they want to hear and expect to be supported. After all of our defeats (the legitimate ones), this should be clear...

[chomskysright]

134. as in: GET YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF MY BODY; is that clear enuf?

[Patiod]

82. "fooling" people vs. getting them to think about it differently

I don't know that Dean is trying to "fool" anyone.

But let's say he can get some NRA-types to think about abortion they way they think about their gun rights -> that maybe neither wants the government getting involved, I don't see where that's a problem.

Maybe they could be made to understand that a ban on abortion would be about as effective as a ban on gun ownership in the US.

And maybe Dean can point out that most Americans (including the devout Catholics and Fundamentalist Christians with mysteriously small families) do not want the government involved in their decision to use birth control, in spite of the teachings of Fundamentalist Christianity and the Catholic Church.

And he can remind them that most Americans do NOT want government involvement in what happens in families (including the DeLay family) when the decision has to be made to remove life support.

[Voltaire99]

112. How will running "Pro-Life" Dems...

...get the other side to see that the foundation of gun rights and abortion rights is the same thing--personal liberty?

If you can answer that question, the rest of your argument seems sound to me.

But it's a tall challenge, Patiod. Unless you imagine that these Pro-Life Dems of which Dean dreams are somehow abortion's Manchurian Candidates, ready to spring up at the last minute and defend our liberty. ;-)

Dean is being disingenuous. There is no way to soft-peddle "murder" to its opponents--for that is what the opposition claims for abortion. Yes, as you speculate, they may reach the conclusion that individual rights are fundamentally secured from the same constitutional source. But even so, they have already demonstrated that for them secular law takes a back seat to religion. Compelled by their faith, they will still oppose the existence of a right to "murder," to take "innocent life," as they say. In claiming that rhetoric is the issue, Dean is doing us a disservice by not taking either the arguments or the power of our foes seriously.

[MadisonProgressive]

93. Abortion rights will never be overturned

I'm not worried about that. We can express the truth which it is a sad decision to have to make and nobody want's to be in that position. It must remain a choice for women, however, because we've already seen how prohibition works.

[LeftyMom]

136. Why should, we compromise or reframe this issue?

We have the suppourt of the american people on this one. Thier side yells more, but we have the numbers. If they press the issue they lose a lot of women's votes and piss off whatever small-govt types haven't jumped ship already.

If we press the issue, we alienate the rabid anti-choice crowd, but they don't vote dem anyhow. If we talk about the importance of suppourting women and children so those who would prefer not to abort have valid choices, and about the importance of access to effective and affordable birth control to prevent unwanted pregnancies, we'll win over the people who are ambivalent or sqeamish about abortion, but who don't identify with the fetus sign waving clinic protestors.

Why retreat when we have the numerical advantage?

[PA Mamma]

137. Yeah ...

What she said !!!

[Southern Dem 2005]

140. Except its not clear the you do have the numbers

The support for abortion varies depending on how the question is framed.

[PA Mamma]

141. True...

it does.
That is why we need to Re-Frame the issue as about Reproductive Rights; something that an overwhelming majority supports.

[Southern Dem 2005]

143. You are correct

The fact that pro-life forces are winning the war of rhetoric is pretty damaging. Even being coined "pro-life" is a win.

You know what else bugs me. All these "pro-life" people like Dobson are attacking Justice Kennedy because he decided that we shouldn't execute minors! I find that terribly hypocritical.

[PA Mamma]

144. Their Hypocrisy knows no bounds …

Rick Santorum in my Senator and hypocrisy should be his middle name. It’s truly astounding…It’s starts with him being elected by criticizing his opponent’s residency and HE now lives in Virginia…it goes on and on and on…

They must be stopped !
:spank:

[PA Mamma]

145. Southern Dem, ...

Would overturning Roe save democracy?
(Good links on the "numbers")

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2005/04/would_overturni.html

[tinanator]

138. this is leadership?

Its bullshit. He is either incompetent or bound and determined not to make a positive difference. What a shame.

[Southern Dem 2005]

139. Have you ever had anything positive to say about any political leader?

[tinanator]

142. why yes

why?