Dean on the right track on abortion

From My DD:

In Utah, the 285-seat auditorium overflowed, filling two other rooms with more than 500 total:Dean drew some of his biggest applause by defining the Democratic position on abortion.

"I'm tired of Republicans telling us we're pro-abortion. I served on the board of Planned Parenthood for five years. I don't know anybody who's pro-abortion," he said. "Most people in this country would like to see the abortion rate go down. That includes Democrats and Republicans. The difference between the parties is that we believe a woman makes that decision about her health care -- and they believe Tom Delay makes it."

Now that's a position that the Dems should be trumpeting from the rafters every chance they get. Instead you have some groups like NARAL pushing the other way. They recently had a "Screw Abstinence" party in DC. My cousin writes intelligently about the suidicidal nature of a political message like that at his blog Jersey Perspective.

There are two ways to look at the separate messages coming out of the Democratic party on abortion. One is to say the split between the abortion activists and the party leaders is good. Another perspective would argue that that split is bad.

On the good side, it's always good to have fringe groups pushing the envelope to your left or more extreme. It makes your position on whatever issue seem more mainstream and palatable. We definitely have that on Cuba. With folks out there yammering about how great Cuba is and how Fidel is the best thing since mojitos, we are able to take a more balanced stance; "Cuba's neither heaven nor hell" and seem somewhat centrist. This is good when our underlying stance is respect for Cuba's sovereignty--an anathema to right-wingers who want to get rid of the Cuban government by any means necessary. Anyway, I'm digressing. All I'm saying is that Dean and people at the top look centrist and rational when NARAL is out there doing its thing.

On the other hand, being associated with 'extremists' can be damaging, as can seeming to want to straddle both sides of an issue. That's the downside of having two (or more) stances on abortion within the confines of a party. It's certainly easier to be a Republican and say "we're all against abortion" than to be a Democrat and say "We're against high abortion rates, but it should be legal, oh, and by the way, some of us seem to be for high abortion rates." Muddled messaging, and a problem for Dems because the rightwingers and MSM jump on it as proof that the Dems are "for abortion" and are 'wafflers.'

I think that getting NARAL to think more politically about their stances and messages is imperative. They basically forced pro-life Langevin (D) not to run in Rhode Island against pro-choice Lincoln Chafee (R), even though he was the only person who had the numbers to beat Chafee. The short-sightedness of this is breathtaking. Would they really rather have a Republican majority in the Senate, where the leadership is not senators like Chafee, but rather more along the lines of Santorum (see post below)? Keeping a Republican in office in a blue state simply because he's pro-choice is SO STUPID. Reid's pro-life and you don't see him leading the Dems to overturn Roe v. Wade. He knows the majority of Dems are pro-choice and so does Langevin. NARAL needs to think a little deeper and harder and take some more politically- savvy stances.

Meanwhile, Dean is on the right track with the outrage at being labelled "pro-abortion" by the right wing. Democrats are anything but that.