By Dave Andrusko
I think my favorite aphorism may be, “Be careful what you wish for,” meaning unanticipated consequences may reign supreme if what you wanted actually comes to pass.
Let me illustrate with just a few words about the impeachment proceedings as they relate to the 2020 elections. When even Democrat hacks like MSNBC’s Chuck Todd concede (in a backhanded way) that the Democrats’ attempted slash-and-burn effort is floundering, you know they are in trouble.
Consider this as just one of many pieces of evidence: an Emerson poll of 1,092 registered voters.
A new Emerson poll finds President Trump’s approval has increased in the last month with 48% approval and 47% disapproval, a bounce from 43% approval in the last Emerson National poll in October. Support for impeachment has flipped since October from 48% support with 44% opposing to now 45% opposed and 43% in support. The biggest swing is among Independents, who oppose impeachment now 49% to 34%, which is a reversal from October where they supported impeachment 48% to 39%. *
As I’m sure you’ve read or heard at nauseam, supposedly all the major Democrat presidential wannabes would torch President Trump. Well…., according to Emerson, “Trump’s head to head matchups in the General Election against the top Democratic candidates have also tightened since October, now trailing Sanders by 1 point and leading his other three potential opponents.” The three are former Vice President Joe Biden, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (although, the chart seems to have them tied at 50%).
Another illustration is this week’s debate among ten Democrats, held in Atlanta. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow tried to get Sen. Warren to say flatly there is no room for pro-life Democrats. Warren danced around the question. She then evaded a follow-up question that used the example of Gov. John Bel Edwards in Louisiana. Edwards “is an anti-abortion governor who has signed abortion restrictions in Louisiana. Is there room for him in the Democratic Party with those politics?”
Lauretta Brown offered an amusing (and accurate) take on Warren’s response: “Elizabeth Warren: Pro-Life Dems Should Be Safe, Legal — And Rare,” a play on the long since discarded Democrat evasive answer that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
One other be careful what you wish for. Planned Parenthood hired Dr. Leana Wen as its president because of the cache of having a physician heading an organization that touts itself as serving women’s “health needs.” They bounced her after less than a year because, while very, very “pro-choice,” Wen actually wanted to provide health ‘services’ besides abortion. Ever since her ouster, Wen has been a burr under PPFA’s saddle, as we wrote about here, here, and here.
Following the debate, Wen wrote a piece for the Washington Post, just as she had after the fourth debate. The headline read, “The one health-care word I wish Democrats would say during debates.” The word was prevention.
Wednesday, the candidates spoke passionately about how they will protect and expand access to safe, legal abortion. If abortion care is regarded as the medical care that it is, then prevention needs to be part of the policy discussion too. A goal of cardiac care is to prevent heart attacks by managing blood pressure, diabetes and other chronic conditions. Reproductive care should similarly aim to prevent unintended pregnancies and the need for abortions through sex education and birth control.
Unfortunately, abortion-rights advocates have condemned the prevention-first language as stigmatizing to women who have abortions. They argue that the focus should be on removing restrictions and improving access. But access and prevention are not in conflict with each other. The patient with a heart attack should receive the treatment he needs, but that shouldn’t stop his providers from working with him to prevent the next one. And it certainly shouldn’t stop policymakers from enacting policies that reduce chronic diseases and promote health.
What is Dr. Wen talking about? The new mantra of the ultra-proabortion movement, which includes the Democrat Party, is that to even suggest that it might be a good idea not to be in a position where you are contemplating an abortion is to “stigmatize” abortion.
The new posture is that to even intimate that abortion may not be a 100% blessing is to give in to the “anti-choicers.” It doesn’t matter why women have abortions; it doesn’t matter how many abortions a woman may have; and it surely doesn’t require a justification.
Abortion is just a “rite of passage.” In fact, pro-abortionists tell us, having an abortion is a pit stop on the way to maturity. Ugh!
That cavalier, morally and ethically tone-deaf position is wildly at odds with how a majority of the American people feel about the taking of unborn life. Which is why it was so striking that pro-abortion Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar told Maddow that
And what we have to remember is that the people are with us. And I predict this will be a big issue in the general election. And I just can’t wait to stand across from Donald Trump and say this to him: “You know what? The people are with us.”
They aren’t, and this is going to be clearer than ever before when pro-life President Trump goes up against whichever pro-abortionist the Democrats select in 2020.
*Something you rarely read. At a comparable period in Barack Obama’s presidency, his approval number was 46%, his disapproval was 49%.