There’s been quite a bit of buzz about Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D), and the likelihood that she would be considered for Barack Obama’s shortlist of running mates. As a rule, I think Sebelius would make a fine choice. Not perfect, of course, but her positives easily outweigh her negatives.
One of the catches, though, is that Sebelius, as a successful and popular governor or a “red state,” hasn’t been able to do too much to bolster his progressive bona fides. She’s perceived as a very moderate Dem in large part because she’s governed as a very moderate Dem. It may not be a recipe for generating excitement within the Democratic base.
Robert Novak, therefore, did Sebelius an enormous favor today by devoting an entire column to blasting the Kansas governor for supporting abortion rights.
She is allied with the aggressive Kansas branch of Planned Parenthood in a bitter struggle with antiabortion activist District Attorney Phill Kline. There is substantial evidence she has been involved in what pro-life advocates term “laundering” abortion industry money for distribution to Kansas Democrats. Kansas is the fiercest state battleground in the abortion wars, making Kathleen Sebelius the national pro-choice poster girl.
The Almanac of American Politics talks of a “moderate image” for Sebelius, daughter of former Ohio governor John Gilligan. She picked up substantial Republican support in an easy win in the 2002 governor’s race and, after naming a former GOP state chairman as her running mate, was reelected in 2006 in a landslide. Chosen this year to deliver the Democratic response to President Bush’s State of the Union address, she told the nation, “In this time normally reserved for the partisan response, I hope to offer you something more: an American response.” She gave the impression of reaching out across party lines in what was widely regarded as an audition for vice president as a Democrat able to carry a red state.
Novak proceeded to go after Sebelius for “laundering … abortion industry money.” I’ll spare you the details — they’re odd and unpersuasive — but Novak weaved an elaborate theory about “a complicated Kansas financing system” at which “Sebelius sits at the apex.”
I suspect Sebelius will find the attack annoying, but the reality is that Novak has done her a huge favor.
As the WaPo’s Chris Cillizza explained:
From a purely political perspective, being attacked by Novak — a journalist and columnist who makes no bones about his conservative views — does two things: First, it raises her national profile, and second, it affirms her Democratic bona fides to party activists who might otherwise be concerned about the possibility of Barack Obama picking the governor of Kansas (a ruby red state at the presidential level) as his running mate.
Being attacked by a national columnist may be a new experience for Sebelius, but as a leading member of the veepstakes list she’ll need to get used to it.
True enough.
By the way, wrapping up his column, Novak — ever the cheap-shot artist — went on to write:
Obama, while asserting that “nobody is pro-abortion,” has said that if his two daughters “make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” Would Sebelius, an avowed Catholic, change her running mate’s view that a baby is a punishment?
I predicted a while back that we’d be hearing quite a bit about the “punished with a baby” line as the campaign season progressed. It’s pretty foolish, but then again, so are most of the leading far-right voices.