Democrats eye softer image on abortion

From The Boston Globe. But what does it mean? Merely that even the most ardent apologists for abortion-on-demand-and-without-apology are actually realizing that the Democrats' hard-line stance on abortion is costing them votes. So how do they propose to fix the problem? By encouraging their relative moderates on this issue to run for leadership positions in the Democratic National Committee.

But I've got news for them: they will never solve the problem until they junk their abortion-on-demand-and-without-apology platform plank. That is a sure loser for them, and in twoways:

1. That position makes clear how hostile they are to family values, and
2. By having that plank in place, they are encouraging their own base to abort away the next generation of voters. And haven't I told you this before? Of course I have.

Why Nancy Pelosi and others are talking in such terms now, rather than right after the election, is still an open question. I wonder--mightn't the now-building criminal case of Kansas v. Montgomery have a little bit to do with their wanting to appear to be changing their hearts without actually doing so?

I'll tell you what, all you Democrats out there: Keep right on trying to window-dress your platform. But it won't do you any good. My fellow bloggers and I will simply break the window, just as Charles Johnson, John Hinderaker and his buddies, and others broke Dan Rather's window for him.

UPDATE: That criminal case citation is wrong--it should read US v. Montgomery. That's right--it's a Federal case. That last link is to the FBI affidavit on the case, courtesy of FindLaw. For everyone's information, kidnap has been a federal offense ever since J. Edgar Hoover declared war on what was then the most common form of domestic terrorism: the kidnapping of the wives, children, or other relatives of the rich and the holding of those persons for ransom. This is especially true when any kidnapper transports his or her victim--in this case, a one-month-premature baby--across State lines. J. Edgar Hoover, requiescat in pace, is no longer with us--but those old federal anti-kidnap statutes still are. And nobody is better qualified to investigate kidnap or to at least try to rescue its victims than the FBI. All that to say this: I'm just waiting for the first national Democrat to be foolish enough to put his or her foot in his mouth about this case--as a friend of mine now tells me that some other commentators did on the Sunday "morning shows." (I wouldn't know--I was on my way to church when the alleged comments, if any, were made, and I've seen no transcripts.)