<...> I've long expected the Republican Party to resolve this conflict in its social vision by moderating its stance on abortion. Politically, pro-life absolutism has never made much sense. A significant element within the GOP--libertarians, economic conservatives, Barbara Bush--favor leaving Roe v. Wade alone. A majority of the country agrees. Meanwhile, the percentage of people on either side of the debate who say they'll vote only for a candidate who shares their views on the subject has been steadily shrinking. Since Lee Atwater's heyday, pragmatic Republicans have been trying to figure out how the party can become a "big tent," making room for a pro-choice as well as a pro-life faction. Until recently, the modernizers included John McCain himself, who in 1999 said, "Certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations." That was only one of several attempts on his part to evolve his position. If Roe ever were repealed, there would follow a fight in every state about whether to ban abortion by statute. Politically, this could be the best thing to happen to liberals since the New Deal.

But renewed evangelical dominance of the Republican Party in the George W. Bush years has pushed McCain in just the opposite direction--to the point of letting Phyllis Schlafly revise the abortion plank in the party's 2008 platform, which eliminates language "rejecting punitive action against women who have an abortion." It explains how McCain ended up with a wildly underqualified running mate in Sarah Palin, instead of his preferred pro-choice veep picks, Joe Lieberman and Tom Ridge.