Democrats Start to Back Away from Roe v. Wade
Friday, January 27th, 2006If you haven’t already, you should go read Ann Coulter’s latest column entitled Abortion Stops A Bleeding Heart because it appears NARAL is being thrown under the bus:
It’s been a long time coming, but the Democrats are finally throwing the NARAL ladies off the boat.
One by one, the Democratic Party keeps having to abandon all the insane positions that have made it the funny, silly party we’ve come to know and love.
The gun control fanatics were thrown overboard after President Bill Clinton and a Democratic Congress passed the 1994 crime bill that banned so-called “assault weapons” — i.e., otherwise completely legal semiautomatic weapons that looked scary to Dianne Feinstein.
As a result, the Democrats lost Congress for the first time in 40 years and lost the South forever. When is the last time you heard a Democrat use the words “gun control”?
In 1995, the new Republican Congress sent a welfare reform bill to Clinton, a man who had campaigned on “mend it, don’t end it” and then refused to do anything about it.
Not one Democrat resigned from the Clinton administration when Clinton turned out to be molesting the help and committing lots of felonies. But a whole slew of them resigned to protest Clinton’s signing the Republicans’ welfare reform bill.
You never hear a peep out of Democrats anymore about restoring government welfare programs to their former glory.
Now it’s the abortion ladies’ turn.
It appears to me that a fundamental shift in the Democrat Party Platform is beginning to take shape. Democrats who could regularly be counted on to siphon all the cash they could out of the American taxpayers so that they could buy votes from the people on welfare are no longer doing so. The last two Democrat Presidential Candidates went out of their way to appear to be gun-loving hunters during the elections. Could it be that soon Democrats who are running for office will campaign on the position that human life is sacred, no matter if it is in the womb or not?
Well, I don’t think that I’d go that far. For one thing, there are only a very few people in the Democrat Party who are thinking about turning pro-life. Really, they are only thinking about it, considering it, not getting ready to change. So, a lot more will have to happen before before this whole scenario could play out. First of all, Democrats like Ted “The Swimmer” Kennedy, John “Reporting for Duty” Kerry and John “Let’s Sue ‘Em” Edwards would have to leave the party. The only reason these types of people continue to get elected is because their following is so liberal that their entire decision on who to vote for is based upon a candidate’s willingness to allow them to receive abortion on demand. Candidates like these have made their living on representing themselves as the only thing keeping women from killing themselves in dirty backstreet alleys with a coat hanger. If they start talking about overturning Roe their mealticket would disappear and they’d be unemployed. Never mind that if Roe gets overturned, the only thing which happens is that abortion would be regulated by the States, not the Federal Government, they don’t want to hear that.
In my opinion, the Democrats as currently constituted are not capable of making such a dramatic shift in their Party Platform. You’ll get some mavericks out there who’ll try to get their fellow Democrats to listen, but they’ll just be dismissed and marginalized within the Party. I’d love to be wrong on this; relieving themselves of spending all of their time defending the right to kill unborn children at will would free them up so that they might actually propose something worthwhile. However, people like Howard Dean just fail to encourage me in this regard. I mean, when was the last time they didn’t just complain about something, but actually proposed a credible solution?
Print This Post






