2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton tweaks her 'safe, legal and rare' abortion mantra
Is Hillary Clinton recalibrating her position on abortion as she seeks the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination?
It sure looks that way. In her last presidential run in 2008, Clinton said that she thought abortion should be safe, legal and rare, and by rare, I mean rare. She added that abortion should not in any way be diminished as a moral issue, and portrayed the choice to have an abortion as a wrenching one for a young woman, her family, her physician and [her] pastor.
But questioned on Sunday on ABCs This Week about a claim by Sen. Marco Rubio that she believes that all abortions should be legal, even on the due date of that unborn child, Clinton replied: You know, Ive been on record for many years about where I stand on abortion, how it should be safe and legal and I have the same position that Ive had for a very long time.
So what happened to rare?
<snip>
It's likely that Clintons sharpening of her pro-choice stance will help her in the Democratic primaries. It might not be such an asset in a general election in which (assuming shes the nominee) she might rediscover rare.
<snip>
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-hillaryclinton-abortion-campaign-20160209-story.html
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)No longer.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)She also pandered to anti-abortion zealots, supported a ban on late term abortions and promoted abstinence-only education. Her tune will change again if she wins the nomination.
She is a weathervane.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Why are you applying a double standard to Hillary Clinton?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And why are you giving her a pass on it?
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)That falls in line with the rare safe and legal argument. I support plan b and other contraceptives.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)and abstinence-only education?
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)How does that work exactly?
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)How does asking you a question lead to a hidden post?
And coming from someone who admits they alert constantly and posts the results don't you think such false accusations are a tad bit hypocritical?
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Why do you think answering the above questions will lead to a hide?
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Since I don't know why your post was alerted or hidden I can't speculate. Perhaps they thought you were making things too personal.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)one_voice
(20,043 posts)ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)one_voice
(20,043 posts)Some have really left me scratching my head.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)one_voice
(20,043 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I thought I'd add a little perspective.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)results on that hide. Questioning one hide doesn't imply someone is being targeted.
If that were the case I'd have implied half of DU was being targeted at some point.
My perspective is fine, thank you.
kath
(10,565 posts)Will make your head spin.
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)I'm pro-choice, but even I think third trimester, you're encroaching upon shaky ground without good reason. Hm.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)A third trimester wouldn't be done without good reason...why don't you trust women?
Hillary will bring back the rare when it suits her.
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)Wasn't the best way to phrase that thought, I suppose. No doubt you're right about the third-trimesters, just trying to make sense of why drop it when she's been saying it so long.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)It's all good...thanks for fleshing out your thoughts!
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)Specially on what feels like essentially "second Monday". Thanks for not jumping down my throat about it, though
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Awfully narrow
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)Im an atheist. Thats bullshit. And pastor my ass.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Or that she mentioned that some would consult with a religious figure at all?
Bryant
arcane1
(38,613 posts)I imagine it can be a tough situation for other religions as well.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)He went there. And is motivating many people not through any exalted views on justice, but by money.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts).... at least in front of certain audiences. In a recent speech before members of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Sanders said:
'I know that there are differences in this room on abortion, on gay marriage, on guns, whatever it may be. Fine, lets have our differences. But when it comes to whether or not our kids can go to college, whether or not were going to make it easier for workers to join unions, whether or not were going to have a trade policy which creates jobs in this country or whether it creates jobs in China, whether or not college is affordable, whether or not all Americans are entitled to health care as a right, let us stand together and not be divided.'"
the whole article is really good.
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/06/03/matters-bernie-sanders-doesnt-talk-race-gender/
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)differences not so much with Hillary
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)minimizing that concern is fucking beyond the pale. money does not trump civil rights issues in my book, never will.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)the rest is your own rather hyperbolic spin
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)you do realize your link was from last June?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)ALBANY, Jan. 24 - Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said on Monday that the opposing sides in the divisive debate over abortion should find "common ground" to prevent unwanted pregnancies and ultimately reduce abortions, which she called a "sad, even tragic choice to many, many women."
In a speech to about 1,000 abortion rights supporters near the New York State Capitol, Mrs. Clinton firmly restated her support for the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion nationwide in 1973. But then she quickly shifted gears, offering warm words to opponents of legalized abortion and praising the influence of "religious and moral values" on delaying teenage girls from becoming sexually active.
"There is an opportunity for people of good faith to find common ground in this debate -- we should be able to agree that we want every child born in this country to be wanted, cherished and loved," Mrs. Clinton said.
Mrs. Clinton's remarks were generally well received, though the audience was silent during most of her overtures to anti-abortion groups. Afterward, leaders of those groups were skeptical, given Mrs. Clinton's outspoken support for abortion rights over the years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/25/nyregion/clinton-seeking-shared-ground-over-abortions.html
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)even that is a contentious idea among the RW. She is actually working pro-abortion there, and not gutlessly shoving the issue aside, as if it lacked importance? It ain't easy in our political climate- and it is tempting to take the easy way out and ask to table it.
I will guess you don't have half the concerns about the supreme court that I do either.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And that wasn't the only time:
Reaffirming her support for what used to be called teen celibacy Hillary reminded us that the point is to find out if it works. This is how Senator Clinton put it, in a paragraph I never saw quoted in the press.
"Research shows that the primary reason that teenage girls abstain is because of their religious and moral values. We should embrace this--and support programs that reinforce the idea that abstinence at a young age is not just the smart thing to do, it is the right thing to do. But we should also recognize what works and what doesn't work, and to be fair, the jury is still out on the effectiveness of abstinence-only programs. I don't think this debate should be about ideology, it should be about facts and evidence--we have to deal with the choices young people make, not just the choice we wish they would make."
Source: The Case for Hillary Clinton, by Susan Estrich, p. 55 , Oct 17, 2005
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Families_+_Children.htm
The day you have more cred on abortion rights than me is the day you can question my dedication.
Bernie is better on this issue, he never supported bans on late term abortions or abstinence-only education. He trusts women - period.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)" I don't think this debate should be about ideology, it should be about facts and evidence--we have to deal with the choices young people make, not just the choice we wish they would make."
She is trying to talk sense into religious zealots who are firmly anti- abortion. That is politics. She has tirelessly and vocally advocated for expanding women's reproductive health care.
When Bernie tells Firemen no one should worry their little heads about women's civil rights- it is in a whole other context. He did not have to set aside the fight for women's civil rights like that.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Those programs lead to pregnancies, stds and shame young women for being human.
How anyone can defend them is beyond me.
frylock
(34,825 posts)and share her wisdom on abstinence-only.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Unfortunately unintended pregnancies aren't the worst thing that Will happen to kids who don't practice safe sex, AIDS and cervical cancer will kill many.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Don't all Dems do that?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)And that is a problem.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)When did he ever not support women's rights?
Obama asked Republicans to support him, he called them Obamacans, did he not make "your" civil rights a priority too?
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)And I take politicians to task who use it.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)kath
(10,565 posts)Nomination?
Her "stance" on issues is always highly variable, depending on whom she is addressing.
Weathervane to the max.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)riversedge
(70,273 posts)Republicans.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Q: Are there circumstances when the government should limit choice?
LAZIO: I had a pro-choice record in the House, and I believe in a womans right to choose. I support a ban on partial-birth abortions. Senator Moynihan called it infanticide. Even former mayor Ed Koch agreed that this was too extreme a procedure. This is an area where I disagree with my opponent. My opponent opposes a ban on partial-birth abortions.
CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. Ive met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course its a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a womans choice.
Source: Senate debate in Manhattan , Oct 8, 2000
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm
Fyi "partial birth abortion" is a right wing term.
cali
(114,904 posts)about her position and how what she is choosing to emphasize has changed.
I am not questioning anything. Shameful of you to put words in my mouth.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)Clinton's words conjure up an image of a Rockwell-esque America, where young women can discuss such matters with their family, and actually have either a regular physician or pastor. Certainly that is often not the case.
Apart from that, if the choice is "a wrenching one" for not just her, but for "her family, her physician and pastor", then what happened to "the woman's choice, period, end of sentence."?
Furthermore, it artfully leaves out any reference to the father, be it a boyfriend, husband, or other less savory possibilities. Well maybe that is how it should be, legally, if our principle is that it is the woman's choice, period.
But the carefully chosen words are effective -- they paint a picture of a secure America, a place where young women are wrapped in the bosom of a caring and orderly family and society that will take care of them, pat pat, there there, rock-a-bye baby... and don't forget the end of that dark lullaby...