Friday, April 03, 2009

Isn't that just a pro-forma statement?

I originally was just gonna post this comment in my last thread about liberals but wanted to draw more attention to it. When a reporter put the stem cell question to President Obama in his last press conference he said he has wrestled with stem cells just like he has wrestled with abortion. Is this really true though or how do we know it's true? It's what I call a pro-forma statement or saying what's required as a societal or cultural consensus is forming or has actually coalesced around a controversial issue. Now the abortion debate has been evolving lo these past going on four decades now. Maude's daughter once said it was just like getting a tooth pulled but those were the early years, the consensus now is that the act itself does have a certain gravitas to it thus the pro-forma statement BUT let's say someone has really really wrestled with the issue as Obama has said he's done, on the whole list of sub-issues important to both sides wouldn't the wrestler come down sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other? Put another way you have two columns, the official NARAL positions and the official NRTL positions so wouldn't our wrestling Commander-in-Chief have checkmarks in different columns going all the way down the list? "Should Roe vs. Wade be overturned?" NO "Parental notification" YES "Should we have what are known as informed-consent laws?" YES "Parental consent" NO See what I'm saying? BUT Obama has a 100% approval rating on issues of concern to the abortion lobby. Brilliant? I thought it was.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

7 comments:

  1. Beth4/03/2009 9:05 PM

    But of course when questioned Obama is going to say he wrestled with the issue, so that he appears to have a heart, but yup, that old nasty voting record just cannot be ignored. Not that the MSM would point it out.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BB-Idaho4/04/2009 9:08 AM

    The litmus thing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Z-man4/04/2009 2:04 PM

    I'm not so much getting into my own pro-life arguments again here but saying you wrestled with the issue is, well so much polite bullshit. The NARAL checklist, if you've wrestled with the issue what is it just a coincidence that you've checked off all the correct answers? it's just accidental there's no deviation from what Planned Parenthood considers important? It's part of the reason why the issue is so tiring for me, the obligatory statements that mean nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Beth4/04/2009 9:17 PM

    With politicians, I doubt anything they do is coincidental.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Z-man4/05/2009 2:01 PM

    What I don't get is this. By now it's pretty much conventional wisdom that the vast majority of the country is in the muddy middle on this issue, neither entirely with the RTL crowd or with the NARALers so if Obama was just trolling for the most votes wouldn't it have made the most sense to have a variety of checkmarks on both their lists? He says he's all about Hope and Change but to be THIS beholden to a special-interest what's the motive unless he's secretly a fervent believer in the abortion agenda?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Beth4/05/2009 9:02 PM

    His desire to kill babies who survive abortions is more telling than him trying to make us believe he has struggled with the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Z-man4/06/2009 3:00 PM

    Even Hillary and Ted Kennedy of all people voted to save these babies for God's sake. I wonder when he'll be getting around to FOCA.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)