Abortion law in the U.K. is much stricter than in the U.S., where there are essentially no limits at all on ending the life of an unborn child – even partial birth abortions have long been carried out here by the thousands each year. But in Britan, which is by most accounts more liberal and less religious than the U.S., it is illegal to obtain an abortion after 24 weeks gestation. Now, the government is proposing to push that limit back to 20 weeks. And they have substantial public support.
Meanwhile, the U.K. is also pushing for more counseling about newly acknowledged mental-health risks for women who have abortions. A recent news story told the story of Emma Beck, 30, a young artist, who commited suicide after suffering from severe regrets. She left the following note before killing herself.
“Living is hell for me. I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mum. I want to be with my babies; they need me, no one else does.”
The significance of the British parliament’s move is clear. It marks the first time that the British government has taken the position that the mental health risks associated with abortion may outweigh the mental strain of carrying an unwanted child to term. The U.K. is looking at the abortion issue with notable honesty and openness.
The U.S. is among the most conservative of all developed nations. Yet so complete is the grip of the radical abortion lobby on our government, that our abortion law remains far more liberal than that of the U.K. No Democratic politician can dare speak of placing any limits on abortion without risking serious damage to her political career.
Bill Clinton twice vetoed bans on partial birth abortion. Barack Obama voted against an Illinois law that would have prevented doctors from starving babies to death who survived abortions. What have we heard from Harry Reid, the supposedly pro-life Democratic leader of the Senate? – Nothing. Decades of cowering deference to the abortion extremists has scandalized the conscience of the Democratic party.
And we’re all the worse for it.
Yes, in keeping with their tradition of doling out grammys to prominent liberal politicians for their boring “audio books”. It’s one more little “take that” in the Obama v. Hillary battle.
And you thought losing Washington State by 70-30 was bad.
I wonder what it would have been like had Obama actually accepted the award in person? Can you imagine the Obama-walks-the-red-carpet segment on Entertainment Tonight? What a strange news story that would have made. But not altogether strange for the Dems. (They do love their Hollywood.)
Intriguingly, Obama and McCain appear to have won single percentage point victories in Missouri. This is obviously more crucial for McCain since the GOP has a winner take all system in place for their delegates.
Obama will score an important psychological victory in key swing state. All the more vital since he looks headed for a dissapointing finish in California. Looks like he didn’t do well with the Asian and Hispanic populations. He has Claire McCaskill to thank for his victory in the Show Me State.
But he’s dominated the Red States. That’s why he would be such a formidable candidate in the general election. Most of the base voters in the Democratic party don’t seem to get that fact.
McCain is ahead tonight, and probably will clinch the nomination if he wins California. But the GOP is divided.
Bill Clinton in Charleston, SC today:
“Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ’84 and ’88. Jackson ran a good campaign; and Obama ran a good campaign here.”
You can’t miss the ugly message behind that remark. The Clintons knew they were going to lose South Carolina. They’ve spent the last few weeks subtly injecting race into this campaign. Now Obama isn’t the Democrat who beat Hillary in SC. He’s the “black man” who beat her. In other states this white/black polarization will play to Hillary’s advantage.
I’ve never cared much for the Clintons. But the Machiavellian underhanded sleaze they are demonstrating continues to astonish me. They’ll do anything to win. And there is no principle that they won’t lay aside in order to do it. It’s sick.
As usual, Dick Morris exaggerates. But he’s on the mark about the Clintons’ race-baiting strategy.
Obama has done everything he possibly could to keep race out of this election. And the Clintons attracted national scorn when they tried to bring it back in by attempting to minimize the role Martin Luther King Jr. played in the civil rights movement. But here they have a way of appearing to seek the black vote, losing it, and getting their white backlash, all without any fingerprints showing. The more President Clinton begs black voters to back his wife, and the more they spurn her, the more the election becomes about race — and Obama ultimately loses.
Bill Clinton famously referred to himself as “the first black-president.” Now he’s exploiting race to get himself – oh yeah, and his wife too – back into the nation’s highest office. What kind of neurosis is causing Democrats to want to return this scandel-ridden duo back into the White House? Have they so quickly forgotten the naked interns in the Oval Office closet, the money scandals, and the general shame the Clintons brought on us all?
Interesting new national poll from Zogby shows Hillary and Obama essentially tied: 39-38%. Seems Hillary’s loss of support from black voters is really hurting her.
The story here.
It dismisses a potential Michael Bloomberg candidacy, citing that 60% said they were “very unlikely” to support a Bloomberg run. But I think the analysis is wrong. 19% said they were either “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to support him. And he hasn’t even decided to enter the race yet. Numbers like that will make Bloomberg more likely to enter. A few billion dollars later, he might have 30% of the vote – and then no one wins a majority in the electoral college and the House of Representatives gets to choose the next President, and… (deep breath)
Then again, New Hampshire taught us not to lend much credence to the polls. And the more Republicans find out about him the less they’re going to like him. But if more numbers like this keep coming, I predict that Bloomberg will be unable to resist. What a circus that would be.