A two-faced politician? NO! Not in the GOP!
I think the R's are strained from all of W's "pulling rightward" and wanted to pass something to please the core constituency. But to pass it they had to water it down. They apparently haven't considered the long-term implications of having this legislation in place: it will be in the way if they ever try to do something real.
They just wanted to be able to walk around saying "We banned this atrocity!" But in the crafting of the bill for passage, they generated one of these absurdities that are common in our law, where a centimeter's difference in protrusion makes the legal difference between an atrocious crime and a constitutionally protected medical "right."
They are blowing it. They think they will get the best of both worlds -- pro-lifers will say "Yay! We banned PBA!" and Libs will say "Yay! Roe v. Wade is affirmed and the law has no practical teeth!" But just the opposite will happen, the worst of both worlds. Pro-lifers will see the wording and the absence of practical teeth, and scream "Betrayal!" and Libs will see "partial birth ABORTION BAN!? I'll vote 3 times next year!"
I could be wrong, I've been wrong before, I'm out of the mainstream, I don't watch TV, all that... but it really looks like the R's are programmed to self-destruct.
Not that I care, as I already intended to vote Libertarian as a protest vote directed at both parties, whom I believe to be equally fraudulent, differing only in image and rhetoric.
Bush refuses to sign it, then spins it through this place and elsewhere that it was because the bill was too weak.
Libs will be pulled even further rightward by the perception of W as being pro-choice, contrary to the will of his core constiuency...