ABOUT HARDBLOGGER

Hardblogger delivers opinions and analysis on the latest political news by MSNBC anchors, correspondents, analysts and contributors. Whenever news breaks, Hardblogger will break it down, so check in often.

Hardball with Chris Matthews airs weeknights on MSNBC.



Most repulsive moment

Posted: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:34 PM by Hardball

(By MSNBC's Tucker Carlson)

Most repulsive moment: Watching virtually the entire stage defend partial birth abortion. This is an act so cruel and brutal that few news accounts even describe it. It’s too disgusting. The vast majority of Americans, even those who are generally pro-choice, oppose it. Yet one by one, the Democratic candidates explained how upset they were by the recent Supreme Court ruling banning it.

Chris Dodd said he was “disappointed terribly.” Barack Obama tried to argue that partial birth abortions shouldn’t be prohibited because they account “for less than one percent of abortions that take place.” As if because they’re relatively rare, partial birth abortions somehow aren’t wrong. Obama can’t believe this. None of them can.

Maybe I’m giving them more credit than they deserve, but the Democrats struck me as uncomfortable when the subject came up. They’re in hock to the pro-abortion lobby, so they’ve got to support “a woman’s right to choose” even when it’s obviously killing. But they feel dirty when they do it. At least I hope they do.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Well said -- but who knows more about a woman's health but the woman herself. WE ARE NOT UNABLE TO THINK FOR OURSEVES. STOP TRYING TO CONTROL OUR LIVES.

Beci (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:39 PM)

When have you ever heard Tucker have a positive thing to say about any democratic candidate? His bias is blatantly evident on a daily basis. His opinion is moot to me.

Julie, Houston, TX (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:41 PM)

Tucker, please man... save your diatribes for your show. Can't you tell us what they're saying without bloviating about your own views? You have to liveblog and misrepresent opinion polls here too? Seriously man, keep your bias to yourself.. we'd like a report on what is being said!

J Bondy (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:41 PM)

Agreed. Most people oppose Partial-Birth Abortion, or Dilation and Extraction, whatever. Instead of alienating people who are opposed to this gruesome procedure, just say they support what the original Roe actually said, that the gov't has the right to regulate abortion in the third terms in interests of the viability of the unborn.

Dan, Providence, RI (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:44 PM)

The recent decision by the Supreme court fails women and all of America. Politicians should not make decisions regarding medical issues. Thanks to Tucker and his cohorts, a doctor can not perform a partial birth abortion even if it is the only way to save a woman. These pro lifers sure as hell dissappear when talk of the death penalty comes up.

Jay Tift, Chapel Hill, Tn. (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:47 PM)

I'm disappointed that the candidates didn't answer the questions...went over they limits and were, in some situations cut off without answering the question. Hillary & Obama got more time talking then most other candidates. When are we going to get a debate format that truely informs the public about candidates views. It didn't impress me!

Ben Tarver, Denver, CO (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:49 PM)

Yeah Tucker, why did you even bother blogging on this debate. Save the anti-Democratic comments for the Republican debates. You are so far right you're wrong. The reason for the fight on this issue is about - Give you an inch and you'll take a constitutional right. By "you" I mean your party.

Darlene, Cleveland (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:50 PM)

Right on. As long as every one of these candidates sees abortion as a "right", none of them can oppose any exercise of it. That would be condemning the choice as immoral. Not a good thing, huh?

Dennis E. Shean, New Kensington, PA (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:50 PM)

Tucker, No one was pro aborton, they are pro choice!! Do you have the same mentality of if you are not with us then you are supporting the terrorist group. Tucker please label yourself as a Bill O'Reily commentaor.

Jerry Newport Beach, CA (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:50 PM)

Truth of the matter, Tucker, is PBA is a rare situation, but nevertheless necessary in exceptional circumstances to save the life of the mother or to preserve the mother's future childbearing ability. Your failure to acknowledge that obvious fact and to ignore making intelligent intellectual distinctions regarding this difficult issue speaks volumes about your understanding, or lack thereof. The responses of all the Democrat candidates were right on the money, contrary to the SCOTUS majority opinion last week!

Larry Goodsite, Prague, Czech Republic (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:51 PM)

The best answer was Biden's who understands what the opinion was about -- it is about taking out the language of preserving the health of the woman. Tucker, the onerous procedure will still be allowed to save the life of the woman. I would have like to see a candidate tackle the most objectionable issue --that the law which was upheld allows legislatures to decide which medical procedures doctors may choose in a given medical situation. Remember, dismembering the fetus in womb is still allowed, just not partial birth. Let's leave the doctoring to the doctors.

michala, sterling, il (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:03 PM)

Tucker, spoken like a true republican. They were uncomfortable about this subject, because they believe it is a personal issue. How would you feel about the gov't making a decission about your health?

Hawley Gessner, Camp Hill, PA (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:07 PM)

there you go ,the whitest MAN in the room.next time you're in church,trying PRAYING for the WOMEN who have to choose this.you are so ignorant.

michele,va (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:08 PM)

Save it, Tucker. I knew a woman who had one of these, and she's NOT a monster. She had a desperately wanted baby, and a sonogram discovered very late in the pregnancy that the fetus had not developed any kidneys or any excretory system whatsoever. The condition was totally untreatable. This was the safest way to end the pregnancy, and she took it, rather than suffer the psychic AGONY of carrying a child for FOUR FULL MONTHS, knowing it would die in pain within days of its birth. I'm sorry if it offends your delicate sensibilities, but nature is cruel. Sometimes we have to make horrible choices that we never thought in a million years we'd face. And, frankly, it's not up to you to decide which horror this poor woman should suffer--the horror of carrying this doomed child, or the horror of ending a much-wanted pregnancy. The only decent thing for the rest of us to do is to shut up, get off our high horses, and let this poor woman decide which cross she's going to bear. She went on to have three more children, incidentally.

anonymous (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:12 PM)

Tucker, Larry from Prague is correct, PBA is so rare. I am a Nurse and one person that received a PBA was my best friend, she would have died without it. She had to be transfer to the non-Catholic hospital prior to the procedure, which was life threatening in itself. If it means saving a woman's life, one who probably has other children, a husband, siblings: well you may not want to see it, but believe me there are many things that medical personal do routinely that you don't want to see. And they are all legal.

Sister Emily (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:20 PM)

Tucker, you state "They’re in hock to the pro-abortion lobby" in speaking of Democrats. You are in hock to your Wall Street sponsors. Mike Gravel was awesome. He made his presence known.

John Evans St. Robert Missouri (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 10:50 PM)

Too bad Tucker's motehr didn't exercise her right to choose; or perhaps she did and it didn't take!

Row V. Wade (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 10:51 PM)

Tucker, you and your clear partisan bias is more suited to Faux News. Why don't you return to the Mother Ship, where their idea of "fair and balanced" is in concert with yours. Moreover, most reasonable thoughtful people are tired of your verbose right wing diatribes. Bye bye now....

Deborah, Walnut Creek, CA (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 10:54 PM)

What a bore, can you ever move past abortion?

Kerry Johnson (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:01 PM)

I was disappointed that no one explained that this type of abortion is rarely by choice. After 8 months, a baby is named, the nursery decorated, and dreams, hopes, aspirations are in place. This type abortion is usually an emergency situation--like the baby is dead inside the mom, or, it has hydroencephalitis causing it's head to be the size of your computer monitor. No woman can give birth safely in such a situation.

LV (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:05 PM)

The language "partial birth abortion" seems misleading. It seems insinuate something closer to infanticide. Abortion is not infanticide. But those who control the language, I suppose, control the argument. The Democrats struck you as uncomfortable when the subject came up because abortion is a difficult subject that typically makes people uncomfortable. Yet not one candidate had difficulty saying they are prochoice. And please explain how it is dirty to support a woman's right to choose.

Amanda, Colorado Springs, CO (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:23 PM)

Don't be so hard on Tucker--his failed thinking reveals himself to be the product of a failed abortion!

Ronald (Sent Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:35 PM)

Tucker, you have an amazing penchant for moving the spotlight from center stage to a peripheral issue that allows you to distort and belittle all the candidates -- typical Tucker, a prick all the way.

jim, Thousand oaks, CA (Sent Friday, April 27, 2007 12:23 AM)

Joe Biden has said that he agrees with the federal law banning partial-birth abortions, but said that the supreme court's decision gave "intellectually dishonest rationale for an honest justification for upholding the ban." The justification included that "the court could consider the impact on the mother and keeping her from making a mistake," which Biden opposes because he believes they are using that rationale to try to undo Roe v. Wade in the future. This was all on Meet the Press on April 29th.

Dennis, Ann Arbor, Mich. (Sent Friday, May 04, 2007 2:58 PM)



SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

 Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=170528


The Essentials

More Hardblogger

Recent Posts:

Archives:

Authors:

Syndicate This Site

Add Hardblogger to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google

MSNBC Weblogs