On the new litmus test: the grooming of anti-choice Democrats


7 comments posted
faux democrats are better than real republicans

i am a pro-choice democrat, and i'm tired of losing elections. i'm tired of a republican majority in both houses of congress. i feel that an electable democrat -- any electable democrat -- is better than a republican.

in a democrat-controlled senate -- even one with anti-choice democrats in it -- reproductive rights will be safe. the same cannot be said of a republican-controlled senate.

jessica's picture
Posted by jessica (not verified) on 5 January 2006 - 10:32am
You've been swallowing

party propaganda for way too long. You know what you get with "democrats" who have Republican values? You get a bunch of guys who cross the aisle to vote against you, as they did with the "Defense of Marriage Act", "Partial Birth" Abortion ban, Bankruptcy "Reform", CAFTA, NAFTA and on and on and on and on.

All this strategy does is help the Republicans cement the "gains" they've made turning this country into a backwards nation.

Madman in the Marketplace's picture
Posted by Madman in the M... on 5 January 2006 - 10:50am
So, in other words, you don't believe them

...when they say they're "pro-life" and against a woman's right to an abortion. You think that just because they have a "D" after their names, they'll vote against their publicly stated beliefs and go against their perceived mandate?

If the Democrats are not pro-choice, then you cannot expect the Democratic Party to be pro-choice. Garbage in, garbage out.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 5 January 2006 - 11:09am
Yeah right...

Oh yeah... Casey, Taylor, Landreiu Nelson will protect shit...

get your freaking FACTS straight.

Parker's picture
Posted by Parker (not verified) on 5 January 2006 - 11:21am
What on earth do you mean...?

We are only living in a time of UNPRECEDENTED attacks of women's reproductive and civil rights... and our fellow "Brothers in arms" can't be bothered with those issues...

I geuss some one forgot to tell them that the ONLY MAJORITY in the Democratic party are women (60%) and Harry Reid LLC can ignore this FACT at the parties peril.

Litmus test... take a look at this agenda for the Las Vegas Bloggers4Hire convention:

* Failure of Modern Conservatism

* The Iraq War

* Polls and Political Strategy

* The Economy

* The Traditional Media: Problems and Solutions

* The Republican War on Science

* Religion

* Framing

* Civil Liberties

* Labor in the 21st Century

* Veterans Issues

* An Energy Policy for the Future

I guess some one forgot to tell these people that if Roe goes and the Voting Rights Act does not get renewed...we can just kiss the Democratic Party goodbye forever... that means no more cash from BlogAds and fat consulting contracts for the "NEW dEM" blog whores...that ought to wake them up... but my gut tells me that these people would feel right at home working alongside their best friends at Redstate.

It is freaking pathetic no mention of the renewal of the Voting Rights Act... foolsit ain't just a Black thang... All the GOP needs to do is shave off 5% of the Black vote and dEMS will never see the light of day again as majority party.

The GOP so far has TWO AFRICAN AMERICANS RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR AND ONE SENATOR while the dEMS shove an endless stream of fucking white gun toting anti woman recently converted "FIGHTING dEMS" males in our faces... at the same time trying to cripple Mfume's campaign... oh I guess Black folks will have to do with...Ford... yeah right... pull my other leg.

Can this party be more assbackwards....

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out the plan... but what do we expect when our leadership is paid off by the GOP... I guess the "winning plan" is for the Dems to look more regressive and ignorant than the GOP... Gee...Harry you can pay for this shit yourself.

Alas, let's promote more so called "FIGHTING dEMS" (ie GOPERS in Dem clothing)... because winning is everything...even if Democrats elect Republicans.


hmmm.. isn't this the same strategerie used in Iran, Iraq, Afghanstan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen.... etc....just saying... I thought WE were suppose to be the "progressive" ones.

Parker's picture
Posted by Parker (not verified) on 5 January 2006 - 11:17am
Interesting article MG - and a VERY good find...

DemocracyNOW! March 10, 2004, a segment called:

Is the Democratic Party turning to Anti Choice Candidates to Attract Conservative Voters?

A conversation between Phil Singer Communications Dir. of the DSCC and Kim Gandy of NOW:

Let's begin with Phil Singer. Can you talk about this approach of the Democratic Party, what many are calling a really new approach to the issue of abortion in recruiting anti-choice candidates?

PHIL SINGER: Sure. First of all, I think there's been a myth that's been going around that the Senate Democrats are recruiting pro-life candidates because they're pro-life and if there's some sea change in our strategy or approach. That is absolutely false. There is no strategy to recruit pro-life candidates. The idea behind what we are doing this cycle is to recruit the best candidates who can win; because there's a fundamental, you know, fact that we're facing here. Which is that the more Democrats we have in the Senate, even if some of them are pro-life, the better equipped we will be to protect a woman's right to choose. A Senate with 51 Democrats some of whom are pro-life will be infinitely better than a Senate with 44 Democrats or fewer who are all pro-choice. So this idea that there's a sea-change in the approach that we're taking with regard to recruiting pro-life candidates, per se, is just not – is not accurate. You know, our goal is to get the best candidates in the races so that we can win seats in November ’06 so that we are better equipped to protect Roe.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Kim Gandy, your response to Phil Singer?

KIM GANDY: Well, it's very clear to us that there is an intentional strategy at work here. Barbara Hafer was literally forced out of the race by leading Democrats, including Phil's boss, Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and Ed Rendell, the Governor of Pennsylvania, whom Barbara Hafer had supported when he ran for governor against Casey, who lost. This is a candidate who just lost to Ed Rendell for governor, and he is now the one who is being promoted, despite the fact that he opposes a core principle, a basic, fundamental value of the Democratic Party. I see women candidates and women's rights issues being thrown overboard by the Democratic Party. It's the wrong strategy for the party.

and again later in the conversation:

KIM GANDY: There was a meeting. I wasn't at the meeting, but I heard lots of reports out of it that Senator Kerry said that what the Democratic Party needed to do was recruit and elect more pro-life candidates. And I – there was a collective gasp in the room. Because, one of the issues, one of the primary issues that energized the Democratic base was the issue of Roe v. Wade, the issue of the Supreme Court. It's what brought millions and millions of people to the polls. One point one five million of them came to Washington, D.C. last April to march for women's rights, and women's lives and reproductive freedom. That energized the Democratic base all over the country; and now the leadership of the party is slapping all of those people in the face and saying,

‘You know what? We don't really care about your rights. We're willing to throw your rights overboard so that – so that for what reason? I don't even understand. I really can't understand. Barbara Hafer clearly has a better chance to knock off Rick Santorum than Bob Casey does.

it is very clear what is happening, and if anyone spends time reviewing voting in the House and Senate, with but a handful of exceptions, RedState and pro life "Democrats" (who are really Trojan Horses and Republicrats) vote with the Republicans.

Elevating a Pro lifer to the Leader position was a big mistake. That was clear at the time. Schumer Rahm Reid Clintons etc... heading right and red. They are pretty happy about it too... LOL.

Marisacat's picture
Posted by Marisacat on 5 January 2006 - 11:19am
PA's US Senate Candidates not yet Chosen

It appears to be a little known fact that the Democratic or Republican candidates for US Senate in PA have not yet been chosen. Voters will be able to choose their candidate on May 16th. The media addresses these two candidates as though they were the only ones running and they in fact are not. Republican voters have a choice right now between Rick Santorum and John Featherman. John Featherman is a pro-choice, pro gay rights, fiscally conservative Republican. Casey has two opponents in his race in Chuck Pennacchio, and Alan Sandals. Perhaps the media is just trying to make it easier for Pennsylvania residents by deciding the election for us. Just because Santorum and Casey have been endorsed by their state parties does not mean they have won their respective primaries or the support of the voters.

Traci Browne, Campaign Manager for John Featherman for US Senate

Traci Browne's picture
Posted by Traci Browne (not verified) on 6 January 2006 - 8:17am