Critical Mass

By Guy Benson 

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in the matter of Gonzales v. Carhart, which upholds the federal ban on partial-birth abortion, is undoubtedly a victory for pro-lifers and unborn Americans.  More than three decades after the Court invented the right to abortion in Roe v. Wade, its newest members have begun the process of restoring the difficult question of abortion to the American people and their elected representatives.  Granted, this recent ruling only shows modest deference to the voting public, but it’s a step in the right direction.  

While much is being made of the legal implications of the high court’s ruling and the future of abortion-related jurisprudence, one of the most fascinating elements about the decision is the reaction it has evoked.  The activists on both extremes registered entirely predictable responses: Pro-lifers claimed a huge win for their cause, and boldly predicted the impending demise of Roe.  Abortion rights activists decried the ruling, and despaired over the impending demise of Roe.  I’m inclined to share the anti-abortion side’s enthusiasm over the decision, but I’m skeptical that the entire regime of court-imposed legalized abortion will tumble any time soon.

More interesting, still, are the varying comments offered from politicians on both sides of the isle, particularly those running for president.  I believe that the leading Democrats have committed a major political blunder in the wake of the Gonzalez decision, and Republicans ought to make them pay.  Let’s first address the GOP field:

The current (but perhaps fading) frontrunner, Rudy Giuliani, announced that he “agreed with” the Supremes’ decision, thus departing from his earlier opposition to a ban on the gruesome procedure.  “America’s Mayor” has come under intense fire from social conservatives recently, after appearing on CNN and reaffirming his support for taxpayer-funded abortions—a position that many Democrats won’t even dare to adopt.  His weak endorsement of this decision shows he is attempting to reach out to the Right, but it seems doubtful that he’s fooling anyone into mistaking him for a pro-life candidate.  This issue is going to continue to hamper his candidacy throughout the campaign.  

The pleasure expressed by the other leading Republicans, Senator John McCain and Governor Mitt Romney, appeared to be more genuine.  Romney hailed the decision as “a step forward,” with McCain adding that it was a “great victory” that made him “very happy.”  McCain was probably doubly happy because the ruling handed him a golden chance to reassert his pro-life credentials, which are the strongest of the “big three.”  This is a major asset for McCain; the more GOP primary voters hear about abortion, the less likely they are to pull the lever for Rudy Giuliani.

The greatest gift of all, however, came courtesy of the Democrats.  Senators Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards all decried the ruling in no uncertain terms.  Clinton called it “an erosion of constitutional rights,” with Obama and Edwards both shouting about their “strong disagreement” with the five concurring justices.   Let’s hope the RNC had its in-house TiVo fired up.

    What, exactly, do these Democrats oppose regarding the Supreme Court’s decision?  After all, it merely upheld a federal law—passed by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority in Congress—that bans a ghastly procedure.  This form of late term abortion kills the unborn child by vacuuming out his brain from an incision in the skull, just as he is being delivered from his mother’s womb.  Is this really a procedure that the Democratic Party is willing to defend?  Is outlawing this act such an abomination?  The vast majority of the American public doesn’t think so.  Public opinion polls reveal strong support for ending not only this particular procedure, but almost all late term abortions.  Heeding the voice of the people, many Democrats voted for the legislation in question, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.  The late, great Democratic dean, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, was appalled by partial-birth abortion, famously referring to it as “infanticide.”

    This posturing by the Democrats once again highlights their party’s unwavering obeisance to the far-left, pro-abortion lobby.  The “new look” Democrats are trying desperately to convince Americans that they’re not really out of touch with mainstream America on a host of social issues, but their leaders’ reactions to this abortion ruling belies their true intentions and loyalties.  They are beholden to the abortion-rights crowd for financial support and grassroots activism.  Because of this unholy alliance, they are forced to oppose, in the most reactionary sense, anything that might “chip away” at the holy shrine of Roe.  They tie themselves in knots explaining opposition to parental notification laws, 24-hour waiting period legislation, and worst of all, bans on horrific, inhumane abortion techniques like partial-birth abortion.

Democrats consistently try to paint Republicans as the out-of-step bogeymen on the issue of abortion, conjuring images of aging, white men in business suits locking up women and throwing away the key.  In reality it is the Democrats who take up the more extreme position on the issue, and now that the leading Democratic candidates for President in 2008 have taken an unambiguous stand in support of partial-birth abortion, Republicans would be well served to remind the American public of their opponents’ far-left convictions as often as possible.