but i have to say, even 75 percent pro-choice is better than the alternative, wouldn’t you say????

1. Gratuitous pandering makes a candidate look dishonest and often loses the race: Because he has had a 100% prochoice voting record, there was no reason for him to make those pandering statements about abortion and sex education except an attempt to obfuscate his position to mollify an audience. That’s dishonest. PLus it won’t work. The conservative evangelicals aren’t going to vote for him in November no matter what he says though. And his base of prochoice women, whom he needs not just to get votes from but also enthusiastic support, need to hear him speak in those lofty terms he uses so well about how reproductive rights are human rights–not that he is going to demean women by implying they have abortions late in pregnancy because they “feel blue”. So over all he made himself look like a flip flopper even if he isn’t, and that is devastating to a candidate

2.He either didn’t know his facts or he didn’t know how to explain his own positions: The man is a constitutional lawyer, and a sponsor of the Freedom of Choice Act, so why does he not know that the legislation in question does not just outlaw abortions in the third trimester, but applies any time during pregnancy that a variety of ill-defined abortion techniques are performed and could seriously make it difficult for women to get abortions as early as 12 week?. If he wanted to say he supports outlawing abortion in the third trimester except to preserve the life or health of the woman, he should have said so. That’s what Roe allows already and what most states do, and Obama should have simply have pointed this out if he wanted to find an area of agreement with his audience. Instead, he chose to rather deviously try to dance the two step, to curry their favor by twisting his words to make it sound like he was moving toward them on abortion. Then he compounded this by saying he favored abstinence education. Well, again his audience isn’t stupid. They know he sponsored the Prevention First Act. So he was either being deliberately dishonest because he didn’t disclose he supports comprehensive sex education that of course includes abstinence, or he is being dishonest when he tells us he supports comprehensive. Either of these reflects poorly on him.

3. It is not enough to merely support or oppose legislation that come to him if he becomes president. Reproductive rights and justice are so threatened right now that a proactive agenda is necessary. He is cosponsoring two of the most important pieces of legislation for the prochoice community. He should say that proudly in any setting. He should be shoring up the party platform. He should be talking about the Supreme Court. He should elevate the conversation from privacy to human rights and equality for his daughters. He should be a champion for these issues not an apologist.

In sum, we who are prochoice and care about the broader spectrum of women’s equality need to use this moment not to give Obama a pass but to let him know we expect him to continue and strengthen his policy stances on reproductive rights, health, and justice.

I, personally, was confused at the freak out over that statement. Perhaps because I took it in context of his record, etc.

I felt like he was saying “look, no one is advocating ‘oh, yeah, I just can’t do this anymore I guess’ as a valid exception for late-term abortions. But there ARE valid exceptions.”

If anything, I think this statement goes a long way in dispelling the myth that so many people have about pro-choice advocates, which is that we are all Pro Abortion As A Means Of Birth Control.

I hope people do the same investigating you did Erin. And come to the same conclusion.

Leslie Poston, @geechee_girl
UptownUncorked.com Social Media Consulting, Bringing People Together
Profy.com Social Media News and Reviews
Blorge.com Blog Network, Technology With Attitude
SmokeRingsAndCoffeeStains.com Personal Blog