Supreme Court Abortion Ruling Bad News For Democrats

Partial birth abortion is a
grisly and revolting procedure.

An unborn baby is brought
halfway out of the birth canal, then has scissors rammed
into its skull and its brains sucked out for easier
passage.

Sen. Pat Moynihan
called it "infanticide."
Seventeen Senate Democrats defied the

feminist fanatics
to vote to outlaw it.

Now the Supreme Court, five
to four, agrees that outlawing this barbaric method of
aborting an unborn child does not interfere with what
has been for 34 years a woman`s constitutional right to
rid herself of an unwanted child.

This is being hailed as a
victory for President Bush and the pro-life community.
And it is, though outlawing the procedure only means
that if a woman, late in her pregnancy, wishes to be rid
of her unborn baby, she and her

abortionist
now have to find a nicer way to kill it.

The partial birth abortion
ban is a little like the state outlawing the

beheading
of innocent people, while approving of
their execution by more humane means. While the ban is
most welcome, it remains but a limited victory for those
who believe in the sanctity of all human life.

Politically, however, the
court decision is portentous, and bad news for Democrats
in 2008. For several reasons.

As Robert Novak reports, a
2006 Fox News poll found that the nation, by 61 percent
to 28 percent, favored outlawing partial birth
abortion.[

Partial Pro-Life Democrats
] Yet not only did
all the leading Democratic candidates for president vote
to keep the horrific procedure legal, all denounced the
Supreme Court for upholding the law that bans it. To
pander to the social
radicals
who vote in Democratic primaries, Hillary,
Barack Obama and John Edwards all paddled far outside
the American mainstream.

Consider the latest poll in
the pro-choice vs. pro-life debate.

According to Sunday`s New
York Times,
[Public
Opinion On Abortion
] 23 percent of Americans
want all abortions outlawed. Another 41 percent believe
there should be greater restrictions on abortion. Thus,
64 percent of all Americans, almost two-thirds, feel
abortion laws are too liberal already and want more
restrictive laws.

Among young voters 18 to 29,
20 percent want abortion outlawed. Fifty percent want
greater restrictions. Thus, 70 percent of young people
want more protections for the unborn, while

Hillary
,

Barack
and Edwards all want none.

Look for Right to Life
groups to run ads linking the Democratic nominee to this
barbaric and now criminal procedure, which even the high
court agrees can be treated as a felony, justifying two
years in the penitentiary for any abortionist who
performs it.

If the Democratic
presidential nominee can be credibly portrayed—in Iowa,
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio or Pennsylvania—as seeking
the return of this pagan practice, it could be decisive.

Also, the five-to-four
decision, with Justice Anthony Kennedy in the majority,
indicates the "health of the mother" no longer
trumps all other arguments in the debate. Even more
crucial, it puts the

Right to Life
movement within one vote of
overturning Roe.

While neither of the Bush II
justices, John Roberts or Sam Alito, has specified
whether he would vote to overturn Roe, most observers
believe that, given the right case, they will drop Roe
into the same dumpster with

Dred Scott
.

With Sandra Day O`Connor
gone, the four-to-four liberal-conservative split on the
court, with Kennedy as the decider, also means the
composition of the court will again be a major issue in
2008.

And, again, this is to the
advantage of the Republicans. For when the issue is
framed as to whether voters prefer justices to be strict
constructionists of the Constitution or liberal
activists, Republicans win. Antonin Scalia gets you more
votes than Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

The court decision aids
Republicans in another way. While the party is
increasingly divided on Iraq, free trade and
immigration, on the issue of new justices in the
tradition of Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts, there is
unanimity. It was not the Democratic left but the
Republican right that reunited to

sink Harriet Miers
.

The Republican candidate
least served by the Supreme Court decision, though he
welcomed it, is Giuliani. Until lately, Rudy has been
100 percent pro-choice on abortion, even opposing the
ban on partial birth.

While he is committed now to
appointing Justices like Scalia, he will be hard pressed
on whether he wishes to see Roe overturned and whether
he would use tax dollars to fund abortion.

Moreover, as a pro-choice
Catholic, Rudy faces possible censure by the hierarchy
of his church, as did

John Kerry
. And this time, the

indulgent Cardinal McCarrick
is gone from
Washington, and

Cardinal Egan
may be gone from New York by November
2008.

With last week`s decision,
the

Roberts court
has put the life issue front and
center in the politics of 2008, and it is hard to see
how this is not bad news for the Democrats.

The only worse news would be
for George Bush to

get the chance
to name a third justice—to fill one
of the four liberal seats.

That would set the cat down
among the pigeons.

COPYRIGHT

CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC
.



Patrick J. Buchanan
needs


no introduction
to VDARE.COM
readers; his book


State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and
Conquest of America
,

can be ordered from
Amazon.com.