WHY, Graham brings it up as a NATIONAL issue is beyond me...... after previously arguing it was a States Rights issue....
Listen to that Federalist episode; they talk about what they theorize as either the strategy behind the move, or at least a good way to use it to the advantage of those Reps with the cojones to stand for something.
They suggest that Graham is giving Rep candidates the chance to call out Dems, whose “abortion anytime anywhere for any reason” stance is far out of step with the American public. By offering this olive branch he is effectively saying, “you want to protect a woman’s ‘right to choose’ at the Federal level and we’ll do so in a way that reflects the current sensibilities of the electorate and, lest you think us draconian in the restriction, brings us in line with European standards which you’re always touting as more civilized.”
Thus they’re forced to alienate their base by settling to (GASP) limit a mothers ability to kill her children, or they can side against the general electorate by accepting Graham’s olive branch, limits included, which they really can’t do, and will therefore be shown to be the extremists they are.
Aside from my disgust over playing politics with lives of children, it seems a good strategy to me IF Reps will show the intestinal fortitude to put that ammunition to use.
And I doubt they will. Protecting the lives of unborn children is too controversial for them. They feel better talking about inflation.
What the hell has our country come to that we place economics over condemning murder?
