Time again to pretend Democratic Party does not have an abortion “litmus test” for candidates

By Dave Andrusko

“Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me” doesn’t even begin to plumb the depths of the Democratic Party’s deceitfulness, deviousness, and dishonesty on abortion and “litmus tests.”

We’re all adults here, so let’s cut to the chase.

The Democratic Party is so far out on abortion it gives extremism a bad name. There is absolutely nothing they will do to advance the cause of life and no limit to how far they will go to institutionalize a regime of abortion on demand.

The party is cheek by jowl with the Abortion Establishment. Their 2016 platform shredded the last pretense that as a party, Democrats believe in abortion “safe, legal and rare.”

The party, along with its presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, want abortion paid for at home and abroad and is dead set on any limitation, beginning with the Hyde Amendment. And anyone foolish enough to believe a President Clinton would not have come after organizations with religious objections to becoming entangled with abortion wasn’t paying attention.

Howard Dean

Howard Dean

But, like an ocean tide that rolls in and then recedes, periodically, we will hear noises from party officialdom insisting there is no pro-abortion “litmus test” for receiving financial support, only to be told a few days or weeks later the position has been clarified–muddied, in fact.

So Rep. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, tells The Hill’s Ben Kamisar and Reid Wilson on Monday, “There is not a litmus test for Democratic candidates,” adding, “As we look at candidates across the country, you need to make sure you have candidates that fit the district, that can win in these districts across America.”

Here’s what the Los Angeles Times’ Michael McGough wrote the same day the Hill story appeared:

Yet Lujan’s comments brought immediate denunciations from pro-choice groups and some prominent Democrats. The Hill reported that former Democratic national chairman Howard Dean threatened to withhold support for the campaign committee if it funded candidates who opposed abortion rights, though Dean later clarified that there were “degrees of pro-life” and that he wouldn’t want to contribute to candidates who “oppose all abortion rights.”

To be very, very clear:

#1. Dean was simply pretending to backtrack ever so slightly without taking back a word. This is SOP for Dean and other current and former Democratic officials who are reassuring NARAL and EMILY’s List and Planned Parenthood to not worry for a second. What a coincidence. In the same Hill story, we read “Senior DCCC officials have met with groups like EMILY’s List and NARAL, both to maintain relations and to coordinate on the party’s ‘Better Deal’ platform.”

Cecile Richards

Cecile Richards

#2. Democrats are quite comfortable talking about a candidate’s position on abortion in a manner eerily similar to those who talk about privatizing religious faith. You can be “personally pro-life” in your private life so long as you toe the party line in the public sphere without the slightest exception.

#3. The usual suspects immediately denounced Lujan, part of the choreographed dance Democratic officials and Cecile Richards go through each time the party feigns a hint of moderation.

Never, ever be taken in, even for a second. Richards and the rest of the pro-abortion feminist establishment own the Democratic Party lock, stock and barrel.

Send to Kindle