So I get asked, what will it take to convince me that Blouin is truly moderating his position on choice?
Something like this, maybe:
July 7, 2004: In a private memorandum, top Vatican prelate Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger told American bishops that Communion must be denied to Catholic politicians who support legal abortion.
While never mentioning Sen. John Kerry by name, the memo implicitly aims at the pro-choice Catholic Massachusetts senator and presidential candidate...
Perhaps such a highly placed source is unnecessary. Though the pro-Blouin pragmatists would probably note that Ratzinger's last campaign was more successful that Kerry's.
Don't get me wrong; I despise this sort of Spanish Inquisition attack...
but it sure leaves you with no doubt about Kerry's position.
Blouin is the one who sets the bar so high, not me. Because it was Blouin who revealed his true thoughts on the issue last summer, saying the issue was a matter of conscience for him. Now he's backpedaling a bit, realizing that his seamless garment stance is unpopular in a Democratic primary.
But still, he gets to have it both ways: telling liberals he's shifting while allowing a nudge and wink, he's one of us to the other side. And because of that, the bar is higher. He's the one who chose to play that game, and in order to convince me, he needs to take a strong enough pro-choice political stance that it costs him something on the other side.