Reply #70: Keep the blinders on if you wish. [View All]

[ChiefJoseph]

His position on abortion was a case study in incoherence. Note the Boston Globe article:

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/clark/articles/2004/01/23/clark_is_cautious_when_asked_his_stance_on_abortion/

The approach Clark used yesterday was strikingly different from the less guarded way he addressed the issue earlier this month, in an interview with the conservative-leaning editorial board of the Union Leader of Manchester.

At that time, Clark got into a far more detailed exchange with publisher Joseph W. McQuaid.

The Union Leader later printed a transcript of the interview, which was circulated by the Republican National Committee.

"Let's take an issue -- abortion. Are there any limits on it in your mind?" McQuaid asked Clark.

"I don't think you should get the law involved in abortion," Clark said at the time.

"Late-term abortions? No limits?" McQuaid asked.

"Nope," Clark said.

"Anything up to the head coming out of the womb?" McQuaid asked.

"I say that it's up to the woman and her doctor, her conscience, and the law -- not the law," Clark said.

Clark has also given different answers, in the past, about whether he would appoint only judges who back abortion rights.

Earlier this month, according to the Union Leader, he told a reporter for that newspaper that he had no litmus tests for judges, but then called the reporter back to clarify that he was "not going to be appointing judges who are pro-life."

Simmons said yesterday that Clark would only appoint judges who followed established legal precedents regarding abortions.