President Obama has just nominated Elena Kagan to be the next justice on the U.S. Supreme Court and the proverbial poop is already hitting the fan. Aside from the usual Republican “just say no” mantra, it seems that some pro-choice groups are a little nervous about her. That’s because in 1997, she co-authored a memo to President Clinton that recommended he sign legislation that would have banned the “partial birth abortion” procedure. If it were me, I would have advised the same thing.
As originally drafted, the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act” would have outlawed that procedure in all cases except when the woman’s life was endangered. From the beginning, however, there were a number of pro-choice Senators who were very concerned about the political impact of this bill and they knew that the longer the discussion went on about this procedure, the more support they would lose amongst the general public. After all, who the hell could defend this gruesome procedure?
So, looking for a way out, Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota floated a “compromise.” He suggested that the Congress not only ban that particular procedure but ban ALL third trimester abortions. The catch was he left an exception for when the woman’s life and health was endangered. That “health” exception, however, always raises a red flag for the anti-abortion crowd because they allege that that exception can be stretched in many ways. Indeed, one late term abortion doctor was quoted during this time as saying he would certify the “health” exception in every case presented to him. Yeah, that one really helped!
Still, Daschle and others floated this idea, arguing that their proposal would not just ban the notorious partial birth abortion but any other late term abortion procedures. And that’s when Kagan chimed in and suggested that President Clinton support that approach.
In retrospect, that was good advice. The fact is that when the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act” was introduced, the pro-choice groups were caught with their pants down. They found it difficult to defend the procedure so they came up with a lame defense that it wasn’t used very often, a defense that ultimately blew up in their face. Meanwhile, the polls showed that the vast majority of Americans opposed any late term abortions. Recognizing the great place they were in, anti-abortion legislators gave speech after speech every day describing the lurid details of the procedure. I was in the middle of that debate and I swear that the antis orchestrated the speeches to begin at 5:30 p.m. every day so channel surfers waiting for dinner could see the gross pictures depicting the procedure.
It was a brilliant strategy from a public relations point of view. And the irony was that the anti-abortion movement knew that if the bill ultimately became law, it would not have stopped one abortion. Even certain anti-abortion leaders publicly acknowledged the same. What was important to them was that the issue not go away. If the bill were signed into law, the issue would be gone.
During that time, a one pro-choice voice argued that the movement should let this legislation pass without a fight. Let everyone vote for it, don’t fight it, let it become law, no doctor would be affected and the issue would have disappeared. Instead, the pro-choice movement fought the bill with disastrous consequences.
Ultimately, the anti-abortion movement would not accept the Daschle compromise because, well, they just did not want to compromise. And the pro-choice movement opposed him. But Kagan was smart enough to realize what was going on and gave him some good political advice. The pro-choice groups should not hold that against her.

May 16, 2010 at 9:08 am
“Armchair Philosopher”! — can’t wait to tell my wife that. She thinks I’m stoopid.
You’re right, though, JK. I don’t do much (although I’m about to head to a killer’s house with my “A Killer Lives Here” sign). But you seem to think one has to be a hero, or at least really, really good; otherwise, he has to be a killer. Is that what you think?
LikeLike
May 16, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Ah, the delights of stalking! Isn’t it nice to know you’re perfectly safe from her? She’s not going to retaliate by killing you in your kitchen or planting a bomb in your car, or shooting you as you step out for your morning paper. . . she’s going to respect your rights as an American and as a human being, unlike the way you and yours treat her and hers.
LikeLike
May 16, 2010 at 3:42 pm
James K, for the full explanation of why so-called “pro-lifers” are the way they are, follow the link to the aborticentrism site that my name provides.
LikeLike
May 17, 2010 at 12:03 pm
How does your wife feel about all the stuff you do, John?
LikeLike
May 17, 2010 at 2:28 pm
Scared to death because she refuses to realize I am the coward I am.
LikeLike
May 18, 2010 at 7:18 am
This is really interesting, John, and pardon me if I am getting too personal. But why do you say you are a “coward?” I mean, I totally disagree with what you do but at least you’re standing up for something, right? Most people in this country simply go with the flow, which bothers the hell out of me….
LikeLike
May 18, 2010 at 8:04 am
If I were not a coward, I would either be dead (like Paul Hill) or jailed (like Shelley Shannon).
LikeLike
May 18, 2010 at 10:54 am
The aborticentric has a need to be a hero; it is for this reason that prudence is called cowardice.
Back in the late Eighties, the so-called “pro-lifers” in this state used stage their protests from a former Catholic orphanage just a block and a half away from the Planned Parenthood clinic. The one time I showed up there to recruit them for membership in RESPONSIBLE Right to Life, it occurred to me that crawling under half a dozen of the cars parked on the lawn, puncturing the gas tanks and lighting a match would at least interrupt their theater, if not discourage them. Prudence prevailed, largely because I knew doing so wouldn’t make me a hero….
The orphanage acquired notoriety a few years later when 50 ex-orphans sued the nuns who used to run it for physical and sexual child abuse.
LikeLike
May 18, 2010 at 12:20 pm
Well, John, I’m glad you’re a coward. But what if you got drunk one night? Do you think you could do it? You know, a little liquid courage?
LikeLike
May 18, 2010 at 2:31 pm
No, booze makes me even more cowardly than I am. (Ask Charles what one needs to puncture a gas tank.)
LikeLike
May 18, 2010 at 3:16 pm
Okay, I’ll bite: Charles, what is he talking about??
LikeLike
May 18, 2010 at 4:22 pm
John’s just trying to put my dog in this fight, I think. To puncture a gas tank you need imprudence first and foremost. The presence of a sharp tool is secondary to the consequences. The real Nathan Hales of the so-called “pro-life” movement (“I regret that I have but one life to give for those who haven’t got one”) are people like Griffin, HIil, Kopp and of course Eric Rudolph– people whom you would not trust alone with your pre-schooler.
The awareness of death as being so final is so overpowering to those people that they react in the way the powerless always react when they have the chance– way over the top, in essence and in deed so overwhelmingly inappropriate that it gets them arrested and jailed.
It indicates the gross inadequacy of their attempts to deal with their terror of death in their own way.
Although John has to live with the shame of being a “coward” by aborticentric standards, and even though he might wish he had the courage to go beyond the level of mere bullying and stalking, he has too firm a grip on reality to yield to the impulse to demonstrate his power over Death by killing a real human being.
He has not yet reached the stage of convincing himself that he would be carrying out God’s justice. If he keeps hanging around with the truest of the believers, they’ll get him there.
LikeLike
May 19, 2010 at 10:10 am
I like your “Nathan Hale” quote!
OK, lemme ask a question. Should I be writing a blog a day or is that too much?
LikeLike
May 19, 2010 at 11:58 am
A question no true writer would ask of others! As long as you have another insight, you should keep writing, even though you cast pearls before swine. If you don’t feel you should, then you shouldn’t. If you feel that what you impart is ignored, welcome to the club, but don’t let it slow you down.
LikeLike