How about explaining what George Allen meant when he said:
"I’ve always had a position of reasonable moderation on this very difficult issue. There are those that are for abortion for no reason whatsoever. And there are others that would stop abortion from the point of conception on. I think those are good medical ways of looking or scientific ways of looking when has the unborn child or fetus developed to such a stage where there's a quality of life or development or where there is a compelling interest on the part of the government, the state government to protect that unborn child or fetus. "Reason I look at it that way is that I looked legally in my own heart and also emotionally in my own heart and mind of what makes sense. We look at the end of life when people don't have a beating heart. They're brain dead. They're not sensitive to shock and touch.
"It seemed to me it would be a good criteria when there would be a compelling end. Now when 24 would occur there are those that will say it is eight weeks and a few days and maybe ten weeks and a few days. That's not the point. It is not a time. It is a quality of development of life that I think that if the state so desired they could protect that unborn child."
You all have a problem if you think George Allen can appeal to pro-lifers with such rhetoric. He might fool enough for the nomination, because of a few pro-life votes in the Senate, but word will get out in time to cost him the general election.
Swell.
Worse than a Bob Dole candidacy.
