Last week I blogged on NARAL's decision not to endorse a Dem pro-abortion candidate for VA guv because the guy isn't bloodthirsty enough.

An August 21 piece in dailypress.com draws on this to say neither pro-life nor pro-abort activists may any longer be persuaded by talk without walk. This is good - pressure is good. Make politicians commit, both verbally and by actions, either way. Says the columnist, McSweeney:

Every candidate is keenly aware of the disproportionate impact of single-issue voters in a competitive election. The accepted wisdom in modern politics is that a candidate should find a way to maximize the support of certain intense groups without stirring the passions of equally intense groups on the other side.

British commentators describe this political balancing act as "dog-whistle" campaigning. It involves delivering a message to voters on controversial issues in a manner likely to be heard only by supporters.

Often, "dog-whistle" campaigning uses direct mail or telephone contacts that can be targeted to voters previously identified as probable supporters. Or it uses code words that have special meaning to single-issue voters and ideally to only one side of that issue.

This kind of campaigning may not work in this year's gubernatorial race, at least with the abortion issue. The principal reason is that both sides of that issue have publicly demanded clarification by each candidate of their respective positions.

Arlen Spector has the "dog whistle" down to an artform. My dad thought he was prolife, because Spector was so good at using Newspeak when he got near the abortion issue!