Hillary's Special Dispensation
Will Saletan makes some wonderful points about how Hillary is setting up for '08. And here, James Taranto exorcises his insatiable need to express other people's thoughts in his own words, twisting what is to all appearances a politically shrewd and morally cogent strategy into a sort of double-standard special dispensation. To wit:
Even if you think that an abortion ban would be a greater evil than the absence of one, there are alternatives besides a total ban and total deregulation. Indeed, as we argued in December, Republicans have benefited politically from Roe v. Wade because that decision, by making impossible any draconian antiabortion measures (and many nondraconian ones), puts the "pro-life" party in a position of advocating only the most moderate of restrictions, such as the (possibly "unconstitutional") Partial Birth Abortion Act of 2003--which Hillary Clinton voted against.
Clinton has one great advantage in pressing this argument: Because of her iconic status, she is the one Democrat who can get away with making pro-life noises without alienating the party's pro-abortion base (cf John Kerry, now under attack from Planned Parenthood for his clumsy efforts to paint himself as non-pro-abortion--and it isn't the clumsiness that PP doesn't like). She probably could even get away with endorsing some modest legal restrictions on abortion, though as far as we know she hasn't yet had the political courage to do so.
But the best thing that could happen to a prospective presidential bid would be if the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in the next four years (a very unlikely prospect). If banning abortion were an actual political option, she could very easily position herself as a true moderate.
_________
Even if you think that an abortion ban would be a greater evil than the absence of one, there are alternatives besides a total ban and total deregulation. Indeed, as we argued in December, Republicans have benefited politically from Roe v. Wade because that decision, by making impossible any draconian antiabortion measures (and many nondraconian ones), puts the "pro-life" party in a position of advocating only the most moderate of restrictions, such as the (possibly "unconstitutional") Partial Birth Abortion Act of 2003--which Hillary Clinton voted against.
Clinton has one great advantage in pressing this argument: Because of her iconic status, she is the one Democrat who can get away with making pro-life noises without alienating the party's pro-abortion base (cf John Kerry, now under attack from Planned Parenthood for his clumsy efforts to paint himself as non-pro-abortion--and it isn't the clumsiness that PP doesn't like). She probably could even get away with endorsing some modest legal restrictions on abortion, though as far as we know she hasn't yet had the political courage to do so.
But the best thing that could happen to a prospective presidential bid would be if the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in the next four years (a very unlikely prospect). If banning abortion were an actual political option, she could very easily position herself as a true moderate.
_________
posted by hellisotherpeople at 10:43 PM
<< Home