Kagan Helped Craft Clinton Strategy for Blocking Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

www.cnsnews.com...

www.cnsnews.com

(CNSNews.com) - Solicitor General Elena Kagan, President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court, helped craft President Bill Clinton’s political strategy for sustaining his veto of the partial-birth abortion ban in 1997. As a result of Clinton’s successful veto that year, the ban was not enacted until 2003, when it was signed by President George Bush

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.clintonlibrary.gov
www.cbsnews.com
blogs.wsj.com

[edit on 17-5-2010 by Libertygal]

Well, everyone was saying they needed more information before they could make a decision on Kagan. Looks like it is coming out in dribs and drabs for now, but at least this article goes a long way towards answering what her position is on the heated topic of partial birth abortion.

As more and more documents get released, more and more information will be coming out, which is necessary. We know about as much about this person who was nominated for a lifetime appointment as we did about the president.



www.cnsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 17-5-2010 by Libertygal]

so is that a bad thing or what??

I have four questions.

Yeah? And? So? What?

Abortion, along with guns and gay marriage are "hot-button" topics used to distract us from the real issues. Abortion is ALWAYS going to be legal. The second Amendment will ALWAYS stand and gay marriage is coming slowly, but surely. Any time I see these subjects come up in political circles, I feel pretty sure that they are being USED to rile the people to feel one way or another.

This is THE reason Republicans have chosen to practice their patent obstructionism. They have found their reason... they've been desperately searching for it and now they have it. She's "pro-abortion"!

I refuse to be riled, especially by the way someone feels about abortion. So, I will join PatesHatriots and ask, So what? Everyone has an opinion on abortion. The fact that she has one as well means nothing.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I think I'll choose to echo this sentiment. My stance on the abortion issue is that it isn't an issue and shouldn't be an issue.

All abortion is about is to use rhetoric to persuade people to vote for you. Abortion was developed into a strongly emotional issue and people one BOTH sides of the aisle used it to their advantage.

This issue is a non-issue as much as gay marriage is an issue.

Originally posted by SpectreDC
This issue is a non-issue as much as gay marriage is an issue.

Well, see, we disagree. I think gay marriage is right up there with abortion and firearm ownership. Emotional hot-button topics that bring the voters out of the woodwork.

This was not about "abortion".

This was the blockage of a ban on "partial birth abortions".

This is a whole different issue than what people would call a "normal abortion".

As you may or may not know, abortions are performed during the first trimester, at no more than 12 weeks.

Partial birth abortions were performed in the second trimester, from 15-26 weeks, and some even later.

I will not go into great detail, but to say only one thing about partial birth abortions, and that is, the fetus would be forceably delivered alive, until the baby's head was showing. The contents of the skull would be removed to cause death, and the rest of the baby would then be delivered. There were variations on this, but that is the basics of it.

I am sure if you are truly interested in finding out more about partial birth abortions, you can google it.

The youngest baby to be delivered and to survive is 22 weeks. 26 week premature births happen. My daughter delivered her first child at 26 weeks, and she is thriving and doing perfectly fine.

Needless to say, I was extremely happy when partial birth abortions were outlawed. It was barbaric beyond description.

I think knowing someones stance on the topics that are important in this country is important, of course I do.

And yes, abortion is a "hot topic", but the issue being discussed was "partial birth abortions".

This was what some could call extreme abortions, and if you choose to speak about the issue and whether or not it is important, you should know what you're speaking about first.

When you are talking about putting someone in an office for the rest of their life, knowing their stance on these topics is extremely important.

There are more topics than this, but this was one of the leading questions the country wanted to know, "What is yourr stance on abortion?"

This article simply gives light to that question, does it not?

If you cannot understand the importance behind that, there is nothing more that I can say.

Originally posted by Libertygal
This was the blockage of a ban on "partial birth abortions".

Yes, I know. She advised Clinton to support Daschle's bill, which prohibited post-viability abortions with exceptions for grievous injury to the mother.

Memo

Note that this doesn't say that Kagan supports post-viability abortions. She was simply giving Clinton political advice on how to avoid a veto override on his bill.

We don't know HOW she views late term abortion.

Republicans Likely Won't Filibuster Pro-Abortion Kagan

[edit on 5/17/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

A partial birth abortion is where a child is carried to term, partially born and then they stick a suction cup on their cranium and suck their brains out before the baby is completely out of the womb.

Literally...

In the U.S., a federal statute defines "partial-birth abortion" as any abortion in which the fetus is extracted "past the navel [of the fetus]... outside the body of the mother," or "in the case of head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother," in order to cause death of the fetus.

Source

Even someone who is pro-choice can see the barbarism in that.

[edit on 17-5-2010 by DaMod]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


FTA:

urging Clinton to support two Democratic amendments that were being offered as substitutes for the partial-birth abortion ban and that were designed to give cover to Democrats who wanted to vote against the ban but be on record as in some way opposing late-term abortions.

“The memo was not a serious exercise in lawmaking but a political strategy to prevent the enactment of a ban on partial birth abortion,” Douglas Johnson told CNSNews.com. “It was not a debate between hardliners and moderates. It was a political strategy among hardliners.”

I think those two paragraphs speak for themselves. You cannot take the memo at face value without understanding what else was going on during the argument, and understanding what their intent was.

And I am aware of the Republicans stance, what does that have to do with anything?

This is very clearly about her stance, and the information that the people want to know, and have a right to know. Do I think the Republicans should act on it? Who am I to say?

Would you support something that you did not believe in? Namely, performing a political maneuver to block banning partial birth abortions?

Please note I am not asking your stance on abortion, I am asking why you would think her supporting this maneuver does not speak volumes on *her* stance, because as I pointed out above, the memo alone cannot be taken at face value. The obejctive it accomplished, however, can.

Originally posted by Libertygal
I am asking why you would think her supporting this maneuver does not speak volumes on *her* stance...

I don't think this information DOES reveal her stance on late term abortion. I read the OP source. I agree it was a political strategy. I think that supports my view that what she did doesn't reveal *her* view on late term abortion. What it reveals is she was helping Clinton to get *HIS* agenda passed. She was Clinton's advisor. She advised him on how to get his agenda passed. Just because she gave him this political advice doesn't mean she supports his view.

news.yahoo.com...

Democrat calls Kagan abortion memo 'troubling'

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 1 min ago
WASHINGTON – A senior House Democrat says senators should fully question Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan to make sure she supports abortion rights.

New York Rep. Louis Slaughter leads the House Pro-Choice Caucus. Slaughter views as "troubling" — her word — a 1997 memo Kagan wrote urging then- President Bill Clinton to back a ban on late-term abortions.