Commonweal Magazine- Fear of Freedom of Choice Act Passage Is Monkeyshines of Far Right Catholics

Tip of the hat to Michael Perry at Mirrors of Justice that for some reason thinks this article at the Catholic publication Commonweal is worthy of note.

Basically we are told don't worry about Obama passing The Freedom of Choice Act and all this is the fear is the product of those scary right wing Catholics (that seem to include a lot of high Pro-life Church Folks that don't strike me as right wing).

See The FOCA Phantom: What will pro-lifers do without it? Like a similar article I mentioned the other day at the America Catholic outfit the main theme seems to be bad ole GOP and conservative Catholics.

He seems to base this "Don't Worry" viewpoint on a article at of all places the National Catholic Report that also seems to have as theme oh those poor Conservative Catholics.

He says:
Lost in all this prophesying is any recognition that the people who would need to pass FOCA think it’s a bad idea and that it’d never pass, much less get to President Obama’s desk. NCR’s new publisher, Joe Feuerhard, has a solid take on the politics involved here, including the apt observation that Obama’s 2007 pledge to Planned Parenthood to sign FOCA was political “pandering.” Joe’s bottom line: “FOCA has as much chance of passage as the 0-10 Detroit Lions have of winning the next Super Bowl.” (Ouch.)

Well excuse me but I am not overwhelmed by this "solid take" and great political analysis of the situation.

The NCR dude notes:
Further, the House already has a strong coalition of both Republicans and Democrats who either oppose abortion rights or do not want to see them expanded. And even if the bill were to make it to the Senate floor (which it won’t), it’s hardly a 60-vote lock. First rule of lawmaking: Know how to count. The pro-FOCA forces simply don’t have the votes.

But didn’t Barack Obama pledge during the campaign that FOCA’s passage would be his top priority? And doesn’t that change the legislative calculus?

Indeed, in July 2007 candidate Obama pandered to the pro-choice lobby. In response to a question from the Planned Parenthood audience he declared that to protect abortion rights “the first thing I’d do as president” is sign FOCA. But that doesn’t change the fact -- back to Civics 101 -- that President Obama won’t have the opportunity to sign FOCA.

Still, Obama’s victory does change the equation: It actually makes it less likely that FOCA will receive genuine congressional consideration. If John McCain had won, FOCA would have been a much livelier issue because the Arizona senator was perceived as a threat to Roe. “With Roe v. Wade [in place] there is no practical need for the legislation, there is no crisis,” a Senate aide intimately familiar with the bill told me last week. “And Roe v. Wade is going nowhere soon,” he said.

See electing Obama makes it less LIKELY that such a bill will pass. Yeah right. Excuse me but the fact that NCR editor Dude ( I TALKED TO A SENATE AIDE DOES THAT NOT SOUND IMPRESSIVE LOOK I KNOW PEOPLE TRUST ME ) is a tad underwhelming to me as "solid take".

I view Obama putting in very pro-choice people as more of a signal of what could happen . Also the fact that Obama put in a radical Pro-Abortion person as communication director of the White House whose former employer thought Senator Landrieu was too moderate on abortion is troublesome for the future on this issue.

Despite what various people that wish to make boogieman of some Catholic in the public square are saying very huge big Catholics ( Cardinals the Vatican) have major concerns. The way to make sure FOCA does not happen is too launch a immediate offensive (which is happening now) against it. This has little to do with "not liking Obama" but is common sense politics. This is in fact how legislation is defeated in many ways. You make darn sure people know the costs of bringing it up!!