One of the funniest shows on television is “Veep,” an HBO production that stars Julia Louis Dreyfus as Vice President Selina Meyer. I was recently binge-watching the show and came across one that dealt with abortion. Meyer had just declared that she was running for President and during her campaign the current President came out to declare his support for making abortion illegal after 20 weeks. That put Meyer in a tough position because she was totally pro-choice but was uncomfortable butting heads with her President.
So, she and her aides sit down to try to craft a position on abortion that doesn’t go too awry from the President’s position but does not tick off the pro-choice groups. Staff starts throwing out different cut off dates. “How about 22 weeks?” says one aide. “That will keep you somewhat aligned with the Prez but you can tell the pro-choicers that you are more liberal on the issue.” She doesn’t buy it. Then they discuss 23 weeks, 24 weeks. Meyer keeps shaking her head, frustrated at the difficult and totally silly conversation.
She then suggests inviting lobbyists from both sides of the issue to try to craft something in the middle, hoping to assuage both Planned Parenthood and the local bishop. The efforts prove useless.
Finally, in exasperation, the VP screams out “I just want the fucking government to stay out of my snatch!!”
It was friggin hilarious and the episode captured some of the more ludicrous political situations that occur in the halls of Congress when the professionals start trying to craft positions on abortion. They try to cater to both sides and paddle right down the middle – and they always get creamed.
I’m reminded of my good friend, former Congressman Jim Moran. Jim was first elected here in Northern Virginia and his main campaign issue was that he was pro-choice. His team actually produced an award-winning commercial touting his pro-choice credentials. He won year after year in a landslide and became a leading spokesman for the pro-choice movement.
But Jim was also a good Irish Catholic boy from Boston and one day he called me to ask questions about something called “partial birth abortion.” He confided in me that he was horrified by the procedure and I had to candidly tell him that any abortion, especially one on a more developed fetus, was not pretty. He finally told me he would vote to ban the procedure.
It pained him to oppose his friends in the pro-choice movement but he at least had the courage to tell them up front what he was doing in advance and he gave a speech in the House of Representative explaining his position. After he voted with “the enemy,” the pro-choice shit hit the fan. Ultimately, the major groups decided to not contribute one dime to his next campaign (where they had maxed out in the past). Oh, Jim won his re-election handily but he lost some good friends who didn’t think he should have a conscience and was instead a traitor to the cause. It hurt him deeply and after he got over the pain, he felt anger.
The point is that anyone who seeks a middle ground on the abortion issue is going to tick off both sides. You can’t win. In retrospect, maybe Jim just should have issued a press release saying “the government should just stay out of women’s snatches.”

February 21, 2015 at 1:07 pm
Tell Selina that the government, by removing the resident’s right to keep from being murdered, is already in there.
LikeLike
February 22, 2015 at 10:41 am
Ah, c’mon Johnny. Is that the best ya got?
LikeLike
February 22, 2015 at 2:52 pm
WhadayathinkIam? Smart?
LikeLike
March 4, 2015 at 2:38 pm
What an idiot this Christian terrorist is!!
LikeLike
March 4, 2015 at 3:31 pm
Ah, c’mon Stenson. Is that the best ya got?
LikeLike
February 25, 2015 at 4:36 am
Even if partial birth abortion is not “pretty” as you described to him, still does not mean that it is not a needed option, see this is what I don’t understand about people who say they are “pro-choice”, when it comes right down to it they are cowards when things get ugly. Jim sounds like a coward to me and either you didn’t really explain to him what a partial birth abortion and when a woman may need one was or he was a just another fake “pro-choice” male politician, who really should be staying out of my snatch.
“Jim won his re-election handily but he lost some good friends who didn’t think he should have a conscience and was instead a traitor to the cause. It hurt him deeply and after he got over the pain, he felt anger…oh poor Jim. I as a woman should feel sorry for him? Please explain why you are saluting someone like this?
“good Irish Catholic boy from Boston” so that was his excuse for voting against partial birth abortions???
Once again we are allowing god-believer’s to use their belief in an imaginary being to make decisions that effect everyone, how are you okay with that Pat? God beliefs do not belong in government they belong in the church and they certainly do not belong anywhere near my body. If he is so against partial birth abortion then he should not have one, but he has no right to deny me access to a partial birth abortion procedure simply because of his belief in a sky daddy..
Under what health circumstances are D&X abortions performed?
There is currently no statistical information available on why “dilation and extraction” abortions are performed.
In a widely-publicized interview with The New York Times in 1997, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, estimated that in the majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother and healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along in development.
Yet the procedure is also performed in cases where the woman’s health is at risk, or when the fetus shows signs of serious abnormalities, some of which don’t become apparent until late in pregnancy.
Take, for example, cases in which the fetus develops hydrocephalus (commonly known as water on the brain). Often undetectable until well into the second three months of pregnancy, the condition causes enlargement of the skull up to two-and-a-half times its normal size. It not only results in severe brain damage to the fetus, it can also create severe health risks to the mother if she tries to deliver it vaginally.
See this is why he lost some good friends…he voted to keep me in harm’s way.
LikeLike
February 25, 2015 at 5:19 am
Your Jim Moran was our Mario Cuomo; nothing pisses us off like him.
LikeLike
February 26, 2015 at 8:37 am
Not sure where to respond, so many points you make. Re what Ron Fitzsimmons had to say…I know a little something about that. The pro-choice groups made a major mistake when they publicly said that that procedure was ONLY used in those rare circumstances. They also grossly underestimated the number of those procedures. It got to the point where pro-choice journalists and even the White House started to distrust what the groups were saying. So, Fitzsimmons – in an effort to maintain the credibility of his group – came out and told the truth about the procedure. But what you’re doing is what the groups did – you are “apologizing” for women who had the procedure, you’re emphasizing the tough cases. And Fitzsimmons did not think we should be apologizing. That’s how we perpetuate the stigma of abortion – we should not be emphasizing the tough cases!!! More on Moran in a seperate post.
LikeLike
March 1, 2015 at 7:45 am
Pat please address my point about Jim’s religion.
LikeLike
March 1, 2015 at 8:59 pm
I respect politicians and all persons who leave their personal religious teachings out of decisions of public policy.
There are many who would argue that the primary reason society cannot reach a middle ground on abortion (and other issues) is because of the constant insertion of religion info the discourse. If the primary debate about abortion was scientific, with one set of scientists saying that at the moment of conception, or even stricter at the moment sperm meets ova, there is independent human life, and another set of scientists promoting that, no, life is not independent until it can survive outside of and unattached to the womb, there would be two camps.
Abortion over the past 40+ years has been injected with personal judgments about individual women, religion in which selected speech from the Bible is used as other selected speech is disregarded, socio-economic divisions, race divisions, blatant lies, and political jockeying are used to define abortion as a medical procedure, a reproductive choice, a moral or religious crime, and more. So many people have tuned out all sides. This means that a lot of opinions on abortion are not developed from accurate information as much as from influences of friends, church, and other valued relationships. This is why politicians should stick with scientific fact put before them and, if sides exist, honestly decide which you support and why. Stop all this apology and innuendo.
John Dunkle, I expect you will have some “murder” something to add. That is fine if it makes you feel good. You cannot make decisions for others and you can’t expect claims without solid factual foundations to take your side too far. I respect your right to believe what you wish, but grow your numbers through verifiable, retestable fact.
LikeLike
March 4, 2015 at 2:40 pm
Finally a Voice of Reason!!
LikeLike
March 4, 2015 at 3:32 pm
How would you know.
LikeLike
March 2, 2015 at 8:04 am
You made a few points, Carrie. Lemme just say that the debate over the PBA was really the first time that Congress actually talked very seriously about ABORTION. Before that, it was all constitutional rights, taxpayer funding, etc. So, the pro-choice movement really blew it cause they didn’t know how to talk about abortion procedures. And they panicked. And they lost. Jim was not the only pro-choice congressman who voted against us and there were many others who stuck with us but were very, very nervous. Then when those same folks found out that the pro-choice groups were playing funny with the truth, they really got pissed. Including the White House.
LikeLike
February 25, 2015 at 1:16 pm
In JD’s reference to “the resident” the very first thought that hit me was “Resident Evil” (which is a horror film series of films from 2002 to 2012), and that seems like a perfect description of what JD is referring to.
LikeLike
February 25, 2015 at 1:36 pm
That’s it, that’s it! You guys think people are evil. We think the opposite.
LikeLike
February 25, 2015 at 3:15 pm
Loved how Alice kicked-butt and loved the Resident Evil Series, the movies not the games.
See what John doesn’t realize is that he is acting exactly how the Umbrella Corporation acted, which is why his comment reminded you of that.
“One of Umbrella’s subsidiaries is a private military contractor with a highly-trained security force capable of rescue, reconnaissance, and para-military operations. The corporation uses the FORCE to secure and protect its assets and high profile employees.”
Their motto is “Our business is life itself” and yet they created a deadly viruses the T-Virus, did nothing to stop the outbreak and destroyed life.
The back story of the Umbrella Corporation gives it as founded in 1968 by Lord Ozwell E. Spencer, Sir Edward Ashford and Dr. James Marcus at the corporation’s Raccoon City facilities while Spencer maintained control over the company for the next thirty years. Soon Umbrella had multiple research facilities and various research being done on various viruses – G-virus, T-virus, Nemesis parasite, etc. – but it was the Arklay Research Facility that became the most prominent together with nearby Arklayonnel and also contained a cutting-edge laboratory installation. However, it was noted by researcher Albert Wesker that the military potential of the T-virus would never make up for the cost of research and production, and that the Arklay facility seemed to be deliberately placed in an area where any leak would cause an uncontrollable outbreak.
Spencer eventually grew distrustful of Marcus, as he was worried that the scientist, who had recently started to make a comeback with his research project, might endanger his position as the Umbrella Corporation’s key figure. Spencer arranged for his assassination by Wesker and William Birkin in 1988. Birkin took over Marcus’ research soon after and was credited as the inventor of the T-virus.
I can see a lot of parallels between the Umbrella Corporation and anti-choicer nutters like John..
LikeLike
February 25, 2015 at 4:54 pm
What does this have to do with killing young people?
LikeLike
February 26, 2015 at 8:38 am
I’m with John, can you clarify what you’re saying?
LikeLike
March 1, 2015 at 7:48 am
Pat both you and John have obviously never seen Resident Evil or you would understand what I am saying, and unless you have seen Resident Evil clarifying the parallels between the Umbrella Corporation and anti-choicer nutters like John would be to time consuming. So we will move on.
LikeLike
March 1, 2015 at 8:54 am
Carrie, name-calling means your argument has no power.
LikeLike