but I am going to "Just Say No" to Kaine or any other "Anti-Choice" (pro-life) Democrat. ... Unless... it is our only choice.  ugh.

Progressive Blue

Being personally opposed to abortion does not mean pushing to ban it. He made his feelings clear in 2005 but also made it clear that he recognizes a woman's right to choose.

This is why I loathe NARAL and other groups as much as I do. Does a candidate have to throw a confetti party to celebrate abortion? And just because one has an X and a Y chromosome, does it mean he is not allowed to have an opinion about the procedure in general?

Kaine does NOT support legal restrictions on abortion.

He is pro-choice.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here.  Earlier in the day, I noted that I personally would never burn the American flag, but that I would never vote to ban flag burning.  Is Kaine's position any different?  Who really cares what he believes if he has no desire to legislate his beliefs?

Anyway, criticizing someone because they are endorsed by a group you dislike is a logical fallacy.  That's like attacking Obama because Farrakhan has said good things about him.

   the slap in the face bullshit.

  You guys would seriously claim anything as a slap in the face. if a study came out that said women liked laptop computers more than desktops...and then it turned out that Obama used only desktops, you would cite that as proof that Obama hates women.

  seriously, give it up. Kaine is not a slap in the face to anyone. He sure aint the best...but HE HASN'T BEEN PICKED YET for God's sake!! grow up!!!

What I find ironic, is some of the loudest anti-Kaine screamers (based on this issue) will be the folks who supported Hillary while she was making her play to the very same pro-life Cathlics that Kaine appeals to.

Name one single politician in the entire country who you think Obama should pick for Vice President who isn't Hillary Clinton.

I can assure you, BTW, that whoever you name, I can find an issue where they're not progressive enough.  Check Dennis Kucinich's not-entirely-clear record on flag burning and abortion, for example; or Russ Feingold's vote to confirm John Roberts to SCOTUS.

But hey, let's go ahead and play the game.  One single name.  One person who would satisfy you who isn't Hillary Clinton.

Don't pretend it's about the issues when it's about the individual.

Personally, I don't think any candidate is perfect. After all, no one agrees with me on everything!

So I'm forced to take my imperfect self to the voting booth to vote for an imperfect candidate.

If you all hate Kaine that much, you can always vote for John McCain. I'm sure he'll protect Roe v. Wade, or at least that's what PUMA's think.

and Pro-Choice.  Why can't I be personally opposed to abortion but also believe that the government has no right to interfere in what is an extremely personal decision?

Although I didn't want Kaine as a veep, I can understand, from a tactical viewpoint, why they chose him.  It's the Rust Belt catholics.  I did expect, and said so many times, that Obama would pick a catholic.  I thought it would be Clark or Webb, both strengthening his national security credibility and possibly enhancing his appeal to Catholics, although both had some downsides as well.

But with Kaine, he has chosen a "moderate" Democrat, moderate, in this case, meanining squishy on pro-choice and gay issues.  Kaine is a Catholic from an important swing state, Virginia.

Recall the demographics where Obama was weak during the primary season.  It was moderate Catholics.

http://www.politicalbase.com/news/cathol ic-vote-critical-for-dems-in-pa/60360/

Scranton is the hometown of the late Gov. Robert P. Casey, a feisty Catholic politician who stood up to the Democratic Party over abortion. Pennsylvania's version of the so-called "Reagan Democrat" willing to buck the party on such issues are called "Casey Democrats," and they are a critical voting bloc in Pennsylvania.

"Those so-called Casey Democrats will be looking for a broad agenda on social justice, economic justice and a recognition by the candidate, by our nominee that he or she will be someone who can talk about their faith, but more important than that, can listen to them, listen to what their concerns are and also listen to them about their faith and their point of view," said Bob Casey Jr., Pennsylvania's junior senator and the son of the former governor. He has not endorsed in the primary.

I'm disappointed by Kaine, but not that much, really, because I doubt he would ever appoint to the Supreme Court the same kind of fascist automatons that conservatives wanted.  Remember, they were rarely satisfied with their own selections!  And Kaine would never be in a position to appoint somebody anyway unless, God forbid, Obama is killed.

No matter who he picks, there is going to be a lot of bitching and moaning in coming days about this group or that group which was dissed by his choice.  Supporters will feel screwed because he owes them something, while primary opponent supporters will feel that they are being ignored and disrespected.

There are certain principles liberals and progressives hold on to and this is strongly a women's rights issue.

Senator Obama is free to chose an anti choice person like Tim Kaine as his VP, I don't have to support his choice.

...politicians, both in governorships, and in the House and Senate, that claim that middle ground of being "personally" anti-abortion. Historically, it's been one of the biggest fence-sitting positions in all of "issue-dom."

My personal position, as far as supporting or not supporting a given candidate (FYI, I'm pro-choice without equivocation, except for some but not many reservations about third-trimester abortions) is that if they acknowledge it's NOT a particular matter over which they'll have a practical effect upon actual legislation, I'm really not too concerned about the matter.

That being said, when you're one step away from being the final decision-maker as to who is or is not going to be sitting on the Supreme Court, then IMHO, the dialgue's just shifted 180 degrees, and it's a totally different matter altogether.

So, one could say: Yes, I have some significant issues with supporting an anti-abortion Vice President or President. Definitely.

I'm definitely not a Tim Kaine fan, but let's not go nuts on his lack of liberal credentials.  I think Kaine is privately more liberal than superstar centrist Mark Warner, but like Warner, he ran for and won an office in a traditionally Republican state.  He's quite milquetoasty on the abortion issue (personally against it, unwilling to do anything politically to outlaw it), but then again this is the reasoning a lot of  Democratic politicians attempt to frame their position on when campaigning in conservative states.  On the other hand, he's one of maybe a handful of Democratic politicians left who are outspoken against the death penalty, which I consider courageous in Virginia, even if he promised to and indeed continued it's practice.

Faint praise, I know -I honestly think he's a pretty weak VP choice, but certainly not the weakest in what seems like a field of very weak conventional wisdom VP choices, from what I've seen.  He's wishy-washy and defensive, the antithesis of Obama's attempt to take the mantle on foreign and economic policy away from the Republicans.  But assuming Obama's not going to pick Feingold (yeah, I know, of course we're going to need him in the Senate), I'm at a loss as to figure who would be a perfect pick.

" For one thing, I really, really don't want to see anyone on the ticket who is less than 100% committed to choice. Kaine says he is personally pro-life, and that this position is "faith-based." Fine. But he also doesn't seem terribly committed to the principle of women's bodily autonomy. The most he's said is that he'd enforce the law on abortion, but what if the Supreme Court overturns Roe and leaves abortion up to the states? I've looked and I haven't found him saying anything affirmatively pro-choice like "I strongly support a women's right to choose." Or even "abortion should be safe, legal, and rare." And his views on abortion have been described as "roughly in line with those of George W. Bush."

Kaine is on the record as strongly supporting a ban on so-called "partial birth abortions" and strongly favoring government funding for that anti-scientific boondoggle known as "abstinence-only" sex education. And how much of an anti-choice wingnut do you have to be to oppose state funding for stem cell research?"

http://thegspot.typepad.com/blog/2008/07 /tim-kaine-hell.html

Can't say it better..

Thank you!!! I said the same thing yesterday and some wierdos kept saying pro life over and over again. By the end, I thought I was talking to a Republican.

to find out what Kaine has actually DONE as governor to take away anyone's reproductive rights?

Records mean more than words and I can't find a thing he's done but talk about it.

I am pro-life and pro-choice.

To me life is a sacred value. And I think that women should have the right to choose whether to give birth to a child or not. I also think that at one stage the embryo grows into a baby inside the womb, and then I consider abortion should no longer be a legal option. When that change takes place is difficult to fathom and therefore the law has to set a somewhat arbitrary time limit.

The French law (as, I think, is the law in most European countries) is in agreement with my convictions, and we have a wide consensus about this.

I'm still waiting for evidence that Kaine is not on the same side as I am on this question.

I just read at another site that Kaine opposes embryonic stem cell research?  Can anybody confirm if that's true?   It's bad enough that he doesn't support a woman's right to choose but against stem cell research as well!?  As a future physician and someone who knows several people who suffer from diseases that emrbyonic stem cell research shows hope of curing, I will be deeply disappointed if Kaine is chosen.  The guy might as well be a Repub.