In defense of the Abortionist-in-Chief’s speech at Notre Dame, I read a lot of defenders saying, “He says we need to find common ground. Isn’t that reasonable?”
No, because he doesn’t mean it. “Common ground” is just a phrase that plays well in focus groups.
Does anyone believe that Chairman Zero, or any other pro-aborter, is really seeking common ground?
At a minimum, a compromise on abortion would reasonably include strict restrictions on partial birth abortions, protection of infants born alive, the encouragement of alternatives to abortion, and parental consent provisions.
I don’t see Obama or his crowd willing to give ground on *any* of those. In fact, his administration is moving precisely the opposite way, using taxpayer funds to not only perform abortions, but also to promote and encourage them through subsidies to Planned Parenthood.
“Common ground” and “respectful dialog” are meaningless. The abortion mills will continue full-tilt, unregulated, taxpayer-funded… and some lip-service will be paid acknowledging that some people find the practice horrific. Nothing more.