By Dave Andrusko
By the end of the day, we may know whom pro-abortion Hillary Clinton has selected to be her running mate. The only question will be whether the individual proudly touts his or her pro-abortion credentials or mutes them ever-so-slightly on the theory that an ostensibly less zealot proponent of abortion will help the ticket foist the lie on the American public that Democrats are “moderate” on abortion.
Donald Trump accepted his party’s presidential nomination last night and in the process addressed the issue probably of most concern to pro-lifers: the future composition of the Supreme Court, in general, the replacement for the late Justice Antonin Scalia, in particular.
The replacement of our beloved Justice Scalia will be a person of similar views, principles and judicial philosophies. Very important. This will be one of the most important issues decided by this election.
He is absolutely correct that the future of the High Court will be “one of the most important issues decided by this election.”
Mrs. Clinton is equally clear on who she will appoint to the High Court. Judges in the vein of the appointments made by pro-abortion President Barack: Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan who both voted to strike provisions of the pro-life 2013 Texas law, HB 2.
As they say, the contrast could not be more stark.
Two quick points, looking forward to next week’s Democratic National Convention. She and her party have moved so far left, including on abortion, that even her minions in “prestige newspapers” and the networks have trouble pretending otherwise.
Will there be the slightest acknowledgement that for the platform to explicitly call for the end of the Hyde Amendment is a position that is completely at odds with the American public’s staunch resistance to taxpayer funded abortions? (I would never expect recognition that the Hyde Amendment, a provision attached to the annual appropriations bill that covers many federal health programs, including Medicaid, has saved the lives of well over 1 million people.)
Will the MSNBCs and CNNs and the three major networks acknowledge that even many self-identified “pro-choicers” will be uncomfortable with such a militant, push-the-envelope platform plank ? Or will they take the tact adopted by USA Today story– “However, a Pew Research poll showed 70% of Democrats say abortion should be legal in most cases”–which conflated support for abortion with support for tax-payer funding.
Note that respondents were given only two polar oppositions: Illegal in all or most cases or legal in all or most cases. When respondents are given more nuanced categories, such as Gallup provides, not only does the number of Democrats supporting abortion go down, the truth comes out that a majority of the population does not support abortion for the reasons 90+ % of abortions are performed.
Back to tax-payer funding. Resistance has always been no less than nearly 60%.
A poll conducted by The Marist Institute for Public Opinion for the Knights of Columbus and released by the KOC in January 2016 found “nearly 7 in 10 Americans (68 percent), including 69 percent of women, oppose taxpayer funding of abortion,” according to the summary of the Marist Institute poll. “This includes 51 percent of those who consider themselves pro-choice. Fewer than 3 in 10 Americans (29 percent) support it.”
Second, will there be the kind of relentless and HIGHLY personal (to put it mildly) attack on Clinton and her Vice President that we saw all week against Donald Trump and Indiana Gov. Mike Pence? Or will the media treat Clinton as though she is bubble-wrapped and not to be disturbed until after the November election?
We will keep you up to date.