Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senator Clinton Speaks of 'Common Ground' on Abortion (Hillary Alert)
New York Times ^ | 1/24/05 | PATRICK D. HEALY

Posted on 01/24/2005 5:30:54 PM PST by nj26

Proposing new political language about abortion rights for the Democratic Party, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said today that friends and foes on the issue should come together on "common ground" to reduce the number of "unwanted pregnancies" and ultimately abortions, which she called a "sad, even tragic choice to many, many women."

Mrs. Clinton, in a speech to about 1,000 abortion rights supporters at the state Capitol, firmly restated her support for the Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion nationwide, Roe v. Wade. But then she quickly shifted gears, offering warm words to opponents of abortion - particularly members of religious groups - asserting that there was "common ground" to be found after three decades of emotional and political warfare over abortion.

Mrs. Clinton is widely seen as a possible candidate for the party's presidential nomination in 2008, and her remarks signaled that she could be recalibrating her strong identification with the abortion-rights movement as the Democratic Party engages in its own re-examination of its handling of the issue in the wake of Senator John Kerry's loss in the 2004 presidential race.

Ms. Clinton has been a visible and very public defender of abortion rights, appearing at a huge rally in Washington last spring and denouncing what she called Republican efforts to demonize the abortion rights movement.

While she acknowledged in her address today that Americans have "deeply held differences" over abortion rights, Mrs. Clinton told the annual conference of the Family Planning Advocates of New York State, "I for one respect those who believe with all their heart and conscience that there are no circumstances under which abortion should be available."

In addition to her description of abortion as a "tragic choice" for many," Mrs. Clinton said that faith and organized religion were the "primary" reasons that teenagers abstain from sexual relations, and reminded the audience that during the 1990's, she promoted "teen celibacy" as a way to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.

"The fact is, the best way to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies in the first place," Mrs. Clinton said.

Mrs. Clinton also called today for the Bush administration, religious groups, supporters and opponents of abortion rights and others to look beyond the abortion rights divide and form a broad alliance on other issues that she suggested as less incendiary: sex-education programs for teenagers that included abstinence education, emergency contraception for women who have recently had unprotected intercourse, and family planning.

The speech was also notable for a stream of statistics and data that, Mrs. Clinton's aides said afterward, were included to underscore her view that the reduction of "unwanted pregnancies" could be a unifying issue for supporters and opponents of abortion rights.

At one point, for instance, she drew gasps from some in the audience by mentioning that 7 percent of American women who do not use contraception account for 53 percent of all unintended pregnancies.

Several women in the audience reacted positively to Mrs. Clinton, whose remarks were interrupted by applause several times and ended with a standing ovation. But they also said her language and themes seemed politically calculated to deal with the abortion "freak-out" among Democrats, as one audience member put it, and reach out to independent and conservative voters in hopes of broadening her base of support for a possible 2008 presidential run.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; commonground; hillaryclinton; righttolife; roevwade
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 last
To: Next_Time_NJ
Next, I see no way that Hillary is NOT nominated. The Dems decide that, not us; and, there is no close second.

Hillary might even pretend that she's not sure that she wants it and as if by magic, you'll see MSM dutifully reporting throngs of worried people begging her to run.

Hillary gets the nod, the only question is whether Obama or a military general gets the VEEP.

81 posted on 01/24/2005 9:54:54 PM PST by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Seaplaner

First off there are things you need to understand. Do the democrats want to risk a women front runner? Is the country ready for a women president.. reguardless of party.. That in itself is a hude wedge issue. With that said, all the dirty laundry that they are going to dig up now that she is running from president? Also if Hillary goes to the center is she going to split her base and open a huge gap for a more libral 3rd party candidate (i.e Like Ross did to Bush Sr taking 15% of the vote away from him). There are so many angles that the republicans can attack her on, she wouldnt get 40 electoral votes.


82 posted on 01/24/2005 10:18:13 PM PST by Next_Time_NJ (NJ demorat exterminator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: nj26

She can practically declare herself a conservative and the radical left will still follow and vote for her.
It is her attempt to fool a big block of voters.

She has already said and done too much to successfully run, and I do hope Rudy runs in 2006 to remove Clinton.


83 posted on 01/24/2005 10:24:52 PM PST by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seaplaner

"Hillary might even pretend that she's not sure that she wants it and as if by magic, you'll see MSM dutifully reporting throngs of worried people begging her to run."

Don't give her any ideas. That's a good one. The last thing we need is a "Draft Hillary" campaign.


84 posted on 01/24/2005 10:33:17 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Next_Time_NJ
Respectfully, my friend, I disagree.

Look at the situation through the lens of a liberal.

1. Dems revere Hillary as a larger-than-life saint.

2. Dirty laundry? Senator Kerry had a swift boat full of dirty laundry, and what little got reported via MSM was countered and parried by some impressively expensive whoppers.

3. Split base? Not by much, because the lefties know the triangulation drill. It's a wink and a nod, eh? Hillary starts talking family values and God, and the Dems nudge each other and chuckle.

4. Third party candidate? You can bet that it's already in the works. It'll be a disenfranchised Republican (my early money is on McCain). A third party lunatic named Perot won the election for the Clintons in 92 and 96. This lesson is not lost on the Clintons for 08.

5. Throw into the mix a successful (so far) experiment in election theft from Washington state. True, palpable election fraud, with no MSM repercussions. This lesson is not lost in the clintons for 08.

Hillary will sweep the Dem primaries, on this you can rely.

Complacency is our worst enemy regarding this woman who still wants to separate us from our family doctors.

85 posted on 01/24/2005 10:40:14 PM PST by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Big Guy and Rusty 99

"Doesn't she know we're on to her and there is no way in H-E-Double Two Sticks that we would ever vote for her."

I felt the same way about her husband in 1996. We know how that ended. We can't underestimate the Clintons.

Unfortunately, many voters aren't very informed, and Bill and Hillary take advantage of that.


86 posted on 01/24/2005 10:42:06 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: nj26
NJ, actually, the Clintons already know the drill to build an artificial suspense.

Quick Story.

Back in the 90's, during the Women's World Cup soccer tournament, there were a series of televised commercials in which actors (I think Travolta was one of them, if memory serves) implored something like "please Mr. President, please be at the women's championship game".

I wondered who would be insipid enough to fall for a promotion obviously produced by the Clintons and allies. Then, a (well educated) woman at work mentioned to me that she was hoping that President Clinton would go to the final match. It worked. Another Big Con by the Clintons to drum up suspense for their presence.

This same Hollywood tactic is sure to appear in Hillary's pre-campaign.

87 posted on 01/24/2005 10:53:15 PM PST by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Seaplaner

"NJ, actually, the Clintons already know the drill to build an artificial suspense."

I know, unfortunately.

They remind me of "Chicago" (the movie), when Richard Gere does his "razzle dazzle" song and dance. (I know I'm just asking for a Catherine Zeta-Jones picture here.) Unfortunately, in our modern culture, that nonsense works with many people.

And, for her artificial suspense in 2008, she'll probably be "too busy with her efforts to strengthen the military and secure the border" in the Senate. Or she won't want to "subject her family or our nation to the vicious smear campaign that the right is plotting."

It's so predictable to a careful observer, but it seems to work with the average voter.


88 posted on 01/24/2005 10:59:23 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: nj26
Mrs. Clinton, in a speech to about 1,000 abortion rights supporters at the state Capitol, firmly restated her support for the Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion nationwide, Roe v. Wade.

That's interesting. Here I always thought that the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade made abortion a Constitutional right. I sure am glad that a high quality newspaper like the New York Times is around to straighten things out for me.

89 posted on 01/24/2005 11:05:57 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker
"Senator Clinton? If abortion had been illegal, how many step children would you have?"

At least one. Gennifer Flowers said that she aborted Bill's child in 1977, and he paid for it to be done.

90 posted on 01/24/2005 11:12:04 PM PST by Artist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
91 posted on 01/24/2005 11:27:06 PM PST by Antioch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Seaplaner

1. Dems revere Hillary as a larger-than-life saint.

A: There I agree with you. no doubt.. however..... This is a new game on new turf.

2. Dirty laundry? Senator Kerry had a swift boat full of dirty laundry, and what little got reported via MSM was countered and parried by some impressively expensive whoppers.

A: She has been never been a candidate for president. Trust, me. if she is.. the MSM needs lots to talk about.. They will dig up tax forms from 1970 to make a headline.


3. Split base? Not by much, because the lefties know the triangulation drill. It's a wink and a nod, eh? Hillary starts talking family values and God, and the Dems nudge each other and chuckle.

A: Your standard middle of the road lefty will stick with Hillary, however.. The utlra left wing (a good 10%) will move to a 3rd party candidate. Look for Cobb (The greenparty) to make an strong appearance in 2008. A little payback for his help with the Tinfoil hat theory that Ohio was stolen. When Hillary tries to become more centerist - to be more electable.. she will lose some of the fringe base. This will be enough to defeat her.

4. Third party candidate? You can bet that it's already in the works. It'll be a disenfranchised Republican (my early money is on McCain). A third party lunatic named Perot won the election for the Clintons in 92 and 96. This lesson is not lost on the Clintons for 08.

A: Cobb and the greens will expect payback in 2008. They got so much support from the left wing wack jobs. If they take 1-2% of the vote in 2008 that is enough to swing the election in 2008. Hillary has no say. The pissed off democrats that think the election was stolen have already moved to the greens, because in there eyes.. they were the only people "on there side".

5. Throw into the mix a successful (so far) experiment in election theft from Washington state. True, palpable election fraud, with no MSM repercussions. This lesson is not lost in the clintons for 08.

A: I never did buy election theft. Yes they might have stole one county.. thus the election because of it, however.. When it comes to a general election.. Karl Rove isnt going anywhere. Im sure he will be there for us next time around. Would it not be a lovely sight to see.. The Karl Rove Machine vs the Clinton Machine... Ill bet Karl Rove ANYDAY....

Lets see how 2006 works out.. If we lose major ground.. worry.. if we dont.. we have 2008 in the bag.


92 posted on 01/24/2005 11:42:03 PM PST by Next_Time_NJ (NJ demorat exterminator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Antioch

93 posted on 01/25/2005 12:20:51 AM PST by Bon mots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: All

Hillary doesn't realize how transparent she is. She thinks if she make a few speeches voters will believe she is a "centrist". Votes see through that phoniness. Ask Kerry.


94 posted on 01/25/2005 1:05:21 AM PST by dano1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: nj26

oh yeah, i believe she's sincere. not.


95 posted on 01/25/2005 2:23:17 AM PST by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

Yes, Hillary is pandering, the NY Times campaign for her is moving forward with great hopes, and she *cannot* be trusted.

But I am frankly very gratified that the Dems are starting to publicly budge on their hard-line rhetoric. Hopefully, some day a real pro-lifer will emerge among the Dems.

-- Joe


96 posted on 01/25/2005 5:47:45 AM PST by Joe Republc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nj26

She's oozing toward the center. 'I'm really a middle American at heart, I bake cookies every weekend and stand by my man.' The MSM will be over the moon the minute she announces.


97 posted on 01/25/2005 5:59:36 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newfrpr04

She took speech lessons last spring. We're in for the full court press.


98 posted on 01/25/2005 6:01:33 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy

It will be harder, but the MSM will bury negative reactions to Hill, as they did for Kerry and Edwards...appearing before empty rooms, having to bus in and feed people posing as supporters. The demonstrations and signs, shouts and boos. Effective camera angles (shoot from the floor up...ten feet in front of Hill), and you'll never know she was talking to herself ala Carol Mostly Fraud announcing her candidacy.


99 posted on 01/25/2005 6:06:38 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson