Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
THE CASEY MYTH ONCE AGAIN.
Bob Somerby notes Michael Gerson once again repeating the Myth of Bob Casey, blubbering about Casey Sr. being "banned from speaking to the Democratic convention for the heresy of being pro-life" without mentioning that Casey refused to endorse the Democratic ticket. (Not that I think that parties preferring speakers who reflect the party's values, as well as in this case the values of a majority of Americans, is any kind of scandal even if it was true.)
The rest of the column -- about Obama's abortion "extremism" -- is as bad as you'd expect. He dishonestly claims a majority for a near-total ban on abortion. On the authority of Daniel Patrick Moynihan but needless to say making no actual argument on the merits, he attacks Obama for opposing transparently irrational "partial birth" abortion legislation that does nothing to protect fetal life but does threaten the health of women obtaining abortions (something that to Gerson's friends in the "pro-life" movement is apparently a feature, not a bug.) And then there's this:
Having endorsed partial-birth abortion, Obama has little room to maneuver on the broader issue. But he does have some. He could take the wise counsel of evangelical Democrats such as Amy Sullivan and come out strongly for policies that would reduce the number of abortions -- support for pregnant women, abstinence education, the responsible promotion of birth control.Except of course, that Obama already supports "the responsible promotion of birth control." What's more, "abstinence education" doesn't work and won't reduce abortion rates, and perhaps we should even do more to support parents after they have children. Finally, supporting access to birth control and rational sex-ed wouldn't help to create a greater consensus because Gerson's pathetic attempts to project a non-existent Christian Democratic tradition onto the Republican Party notwithstanding Republican anti-choicers generally oppose these policies, for the obvious reason that support for criminalizing abortion is generally bundled together with reactionary conceptions of sexuality and gender relations. (The fact that Gerson advocates useless abstinence education as opposed to sex-ed that might actually work gives away the show.) And moreover, advocates of reproductive freedom don't need the "wise counsel" of Amy Sullivan to support policies that reduce abortion rates; they've supported them for many decades.
--Scott Lemieux
COMMENTS (7)
Anyone who touts the "wise counsel" of Amy Sullivan is de facto a hack, since Sullivan's tripe has been debunked again and again and again. Sullivan, like Gerson, misreads polls, fails to back up her assertions, and fails to offer any legitimately useful advice.
I'm so sick and tired of these concern trolls who proclaim that the Democratic Party has a problem with its position on abortion, when its official position, endorsed by damn near all Democratic office holders, is that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare," a position held by an overwhelming majority of U.S. voters.
It's the Republican position on abortion that is badly out-of-step with the U.S. voters, so why do we not see articles and op-eds from these idiots on how badly the Republican Party is being damaged by its extremist views?
Posted by: PaulB | April 3, 2008 10:33 AM
"It's the Republican position on abortion that is badly out-of-step with the U.S. voters, so why do we not see articles and op-eds from these idiots on how badly the Republican Party is being damaged by its extremist views?"
You can't write those stories because they're not true. It damages the Republican Party in *your* eyes, but apparently not everyone is going along with the way *you* think.
And, frankly, the "problem" with the public perception on this set of issues doesn't have that much to do with the Democratic Party per se, but the way that social conservatives have sucessfully associated garbage culture more generally with "liberals" and the Democratic Party in the eyes of a subset of their constituency.
Unfortunately, this is sort of a real issue because when it comes to their own precious babies, an awful lot of completely moderate parents fear the same kinds of things "social conservatives" do-- they're just less likely to go off the deep end (until you come to their school).
So, even if some anti-abortion extremists, glom all these issues together-- the legal status of abortion, the availlability of birth control, what kind of sex ed you do in local schools with *their* minor children, the nature of gender roles, etc, it's no doubt destructive for you to follow *their* lead.
You may want to keep abortion legal, but if Biloxi, MS wants abstinence only education for its 14 year olds, who are "you liberals" to tell them no?
If that don't work out for them, they'll change their tune soon enough.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2008 11:06 AM
"You may want to keep abortion legal, but if Biloxi, MS wants abstinence only education for its 14 year olds, who are "you liberals" to tell them no?"
Same thing goes for teaching Creationism in school. By dumbing down the academic abilities of their students, that means less competition in college admissions, high-paying jobs for students from "blue" states that receive a fact-based education.
As long as my tax dollars don't have to go to support the inevitable products (STDs, unwanted kids) of the ass-backward education system in Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, etc. Unfortunately, it seems that blue states like mine send far more tax dollars to DC to be redistributed to the cracker barrel belt than we ever get back.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2008 11:24 AM
"Unfortunately, it seems that blue states like mine send far more tax dollars to DC to be redistributed to the cracker barrel belt than we ever get back."
Well, at least *that's* being honest about the motivations of the "liberal elite," as opposed to the puning and wailing we usually hear about "women's rights."
Stick a little norplant in the white trash so we keep the burgeoning cost of food stamps down.
Honesty is usually the best policy, kids. I prefer that the moralizing of Scott Lemiex, Amy Sullivan, and middle class mommies and daddies any day.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2008 12:14 PM
"You can't write those stories because they're not true."
Yes, actually, they are. The Republican Party's official position on abortion is supported by only a minority of voters, based on poll after poll after poll.
"It damages the Republican Party in *your* eyes, but apparently not everyone is going along with the way *you* think."
Sorry, but the majority of voters agree with me that the Republican Party position is extreme. Do you even know what it is? Or know what the state of the opinion polls are?
Posted by: PaulB | April 3, 2008 2:05 PM
Yeah, I know what it is. No doubt Amy Sullivan knows too, and that's more or less why she's signed on to the forces of liberal decency. (That, and, male caterwauling about the sex lives of pubescent girls hurts mom's ears, and makes her want to puke).
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2008 2:47 PM
This recent story caught my eye - "A recent survey that found some Florida teens believe drinking a cap of bleach will prevent HIV and a shot of Mountain Dew will stop pregnancy has prompted lawmakers to push for an overhaul of sex education in the state.The survey showed that Florida teens also believe that smoking marijuana will prevent a person from getting pregnant." I grabbed it from here-http://www.local6.com/news/15773787/detail.html - by doing a Google for Florida and Mountain Dew. God only knows what "Florida" and "bleach" would pull up...
Posted by: dilford | April 3, 2008 3:30 PM