Pro-Corporate Trumps Pro-Life

The Nation: Thompson Endorsement By National Right To Life Shows Abortion Isn't Its Priority

(The Nation)  This column was written by John Nichols.

---

The most cynical group currently operating on the American political stage, the National Right to Life Committee has endorsed the most cynical man to seek the presidency in recent memory, Fred Thompson, for the Republican nomination.

It is a perfect match, although not one that can be said to have been "made in Heaven." After all, what brings the National Right to Life Committee and Fred Thompson together is the fact that both the interest group and the candidate have sold their souls to the highest bidder.

National Right to Life gave its blessing to Thompson despite the fact that he has been open during the course of the current campaign about the fact that he does not support what has historically been the highest stated priority of the organization: enactment of a constitutional amendment to ban abortion.

Thompson's an advocate for leaving the issue to the states, which would create a patchwork quilt model where some parts of the country would respect the right of women to make decisions regarding their own bodies while others would not. That's a dramatically more liberal stance than had been traditionally tolerated by anti-abortion activists, and that is supported by a number of Thompson's fellow contenders for the 2008 Republican nod.

This begs the question: Why Thompson?

It is true that the National Right to Life Committee was not going to endorse former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who historically has been every bit as pro-choice as Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton. It is equally true that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, while he may now oppose abortion, used to be an even more articulate advocate for the pro-choice position than Giuliani or Clinton. And is surely true that, while Arizona Senator John McCain may have a 100-percent record of opposing abortion, has had his fights with the group over campaign-finance issues and electoral tactics.

But why didn't National Right to Life endorse former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, a rising star in the Republican race who has been a consistent social conservative and who is actually running stronger than Thompson in a number of early primary and caucus states? After all, while Thompson rejects the constitutional amendment, Huckabee declares at the top of his campaign website: "I support and have always supported passage of a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life. My convictions regarding the sanctity of life have always been clear and consistent, without equivocation or wavering. I believe that Roe v. Wade should be over-turned."

There is an answer, but it has nothing to do with the abortion debate.

The National Right to Life Committee is no longer best known in Washington as a social-issue group. Rather, the committee is best known as an organization that is in the forefront of opposing campaign finance reform and other moves that might limit the its ability and the ability of organizations like it to use corporate special-interest money for political purposes -- and, of course, to maintain lavish offices in the tonier sections of Washington.

With aggressive lobbying on Capitol Hill, lawsuits at the federal and state levels and grassroots organizing around the country to oppose campaign finance reforms, the National Right to Life Committee has made itself the primary defender of corporate influence in politics.

As such, Mike Huckabee was unacceptable as a contender for the National Right to Life Committee endorsement.

Huckabee is a social conservative, but he's an economic populist. A relatively honest player who is sincere in his beliefs, the former governor of Arkansas argues that it is impossible to talk about "family values" without addressing the threat to American families posed by economic and trade policies that leave working people entirely at the mercy of multinational corporations.

While he's no Ralph Nader, Huckabee's arguments on behalf of corporate responsibility have earned him some surprising support. For instance, the Machinists union has endorsed his candidacy for the Republican nomination.

But it has also earned Huckabee some powerful enemies. The corporation-linked Club for Growth has been attacking the one Republican candidate who might reasonably be described as Reaganesque.

In contrast, Fred Thompson is taking no hits from business-linked interests.

While Thompson may have had lobbying ties to Planned Parenthood, which advocates for abortion rights and in some regions actually provides access to the procedure, the former senator from Tennessee is a 100 percenter when it comes to serving the interests of major corporations. And that's what concerns National Right to Life these days. The group is part of a Washington-based alliance to advance corporate interests by using social-issue appeals to convince working-class voters to oppose their economic interests.

Thus, Fred Thompson got the National Right to Life endorsement instead of the more consistently socially-conservative Mike Huckabee because Thompson is the more consistently pro-corporate candidate.

[dfcstech]

Candide777 at 07:45 PM : Nov 15, 2007 - Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabe IS for the policies that you mentioned here, despite that he has drawn some criticism for pointing out the failure of some of the leadership of those who are pro life to properly demonstrate that important aspect. They claim that he would have to raise taxes to enact policy that is useful in these areas, but he wouldn''t. To see him speak to this issue, please watch this short video:
http://www.hucksarmy.com/video.php?video=huckabee_moral_life_abortion
Thank you for pointing out this great need!

[dfcstech]

MyIDonCBS at 05:27 PM : Nov 14, 2007 - Your comments about *** education sound like those of Bill Clinton and his Attorney General, Joycelyn Elders. Thankfully, after they left the state and Gov. Mike Huckabee took the reins, he was able to enact some policy that brought the unwed teen pregnancy rate in Arkansas down significantly; that''s good for all citizens whether liberal, conservative, or anywhere in between.
Regarding, "gelatinous blob of parasitic cells constitutes a human being", we should at least be for the protection of the lives of preborn who have faces, arms, legs, hands, feet, fingers, toes, pulse, and reaction to outside stimuli. Clearly these beings are living. Clearly they are human. At the very least, we shouldn''t condone the snuffing out those who are partially born; even Patrick Moynihan called that infanticide. It was a completely barbaric procedure, by the standards of any reasonable adult. So, we definately have a history of having drawn the line at a place that is completely unacceptable.
Very interesting article! That could possibly explain a lot that has been mysterious to many regarding this absurd endorsement. Huckabee supporters were told by NRLC that this was "a pragmatic decision", but that made no sense, because Huckabee is rising strong in the polls, outpolls Thompson, and Thompson is in freefall status.

[candide777]

When the Christian right starts funding healthcare and education for the fetuses who make it out alive, I''ll start believing they are "pro-life."

[williaml8]

Interesting article - I was also wondering why Thompson not Huckabee; it didn''t make sense to me. The article doesn''t speak very well unfortunately of the National Right to Life Committee, but puts Mike Huckabee in a very favorable light, as an honest, principled man. Maybe it also explains his lack of big bucks.

[quatrops]

Sorry about that! ENJOY, not ebjoy. Poor proof-reading, but twits like mbcsmith really get me ticked off!

[quatrops]

Random_radar @ 2:05: Glad you enjoyed this excellent article. Nation magazine is about as anti-establishment as you can get. Treat yourself to a copy on your next newsstand visit. But be ready to suscribe . . . after one issue, you''ll be hooked! Ebjoy!

As for mbcsmith @ 3:10: Do you have any sense of the disservice you do to the anti-abortion cause with your cerebrally-challenged, Christo-fascist "commentary"? It is not uncommon for fetus- defenders to play word games, but generally they do it with considerably more panache than you appear capable of.

Sad but appropriate oxymorons seem to lend themselves to the word games anti-abortionists play . . . gems such as "death-penalty-favoring-right-to-lifer".

[harp1963]

GOP is "right to life?"

Well, let''s examine some of the Republicans "works" during the first 6 years of the "worst president in the history of our nation." With a majority of Republican appointees on the Supreme Court and an overwhelming majority of Republicans in the House and Senate we get the "plan your abortion b-4 the sixth month," Partial Birth Ban. The Republican House and Senate draw up a free trade bill with China, the abortion capital of the world, which George immediately signs, but the "Praise the Lord and convulse guys" leave out any human rights requirements to continue the free trade regarding abortion. It wasn''t about the money billionaires were going to make off of China''s slave labor.

The Republicans are the moral party?

[gkc99]

The *********** is run by *********** like NRTL and Pat Robertson. They *** for the highest bidder.

[enriquecaliente]

The true terrorist are the multinational corporations.

They are the true evil doers and will ravage this nation.

[logicanada]

My1doncbs. . . well said.
These are the same people who applaud killing in the name of the lord in the middle east... yet claim to adhere to the literal word of a bible in which god states ''thou shall not kill''.
I guess they believe in god but as to following his commands or walking in the path of Jesus they are a little more flexible.
War in the name of god. Hmmmm...isn''t that intifada.

[myidoncbs]

I hate to burst your bubble, mbcsmith, but support for a woman''s right to control her own body is NOT a lib vs. con issue. It''s more of an issue of rational human beings vs. religious nutcases.

Rational human beings do not all agree that "human life" begins at conception. They aren''t "baby killers"; they just don''t think parasites should always get their way. Religious nutcases, on the other hand, are fixated on the idea that a gelatinous blob of parasitic cells constitutes a human being, because "God told them so", and so they go around yelling "baby killers! baby killers!" (Note: In the Christian Bible, God actually orders someone to give his woman poison to cause an abortion in order to find out who''s the father!)

There''s not much room for agreement between sane people and religious fanatics, except you should understand that the USA is NOT a "Christian nation", and we can not allow one single group of religious fanatics to determine the laws of the land. If you don''t like abortions, quit denying s/3x education to children, ''cause they are NOT going to abstain, no matter what you tell them.

[logicanada]

Thompson said in a recent interview that he has played the role of Ulysses S. Grant but drew the line at playing General Sherman.
''General Sherman'' is the largest tree in the world. It stands large and alone in Sequoia National Park. Seems to me he could pull that off with no effort at all!
All that''s required is to stand tall among your peers while people circle you in awe... as your limbs fall off. And who cares about a writers strike? There would be no lines to remember.

[Razzl]

Whatever speculation may be correct, the choice of Thompson is so peculiar for this group that there can''t be any doubt about some other agenda being in play. An organization like this either supports Giuliani for pragmatic reasons (electability) or supports a candidate who''s with them on the issue, there really isn''t a middle ground...

[mbcsmith]

The LIBS just don''t get it. LIBS kill babies and say "what''s wrong with that?"

[random_radar]

Nice article. I didn''t think establishment media was allowed to publish anti-corporate muck raking articles anymore. Hopefully no careers were harmed in producing this article :)