"Change? Yes, but from what, to what?"

---Barbara Jordan, 1992 Democratic National Convention

"There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself."

--- Pat Buchanan, 1992 Republican National Convention

This weekend Sen. Hillary Clinton used an abortion mailer in New Hampshire to bring female voters home, just as Gov. Mike Huckabee used a last minute abortion ad in Iowa to rally social conservatives. Sen. Barack Obama is responding, but all candidates are failing to use either vision or experience to change the dialog. According the to Wall Street Journal:

The battle between Obama and Clinton is getting increasingly heated. A day after the Clinton campaign dropped a mailer attacking Obama’s record on abortion rights when he was in the state senate, Obama responded with a automated call accusing her of “last minute smears” that Clinton’s camp tonight charged with possible violations of state law.

Here’s the script of the call (click here to listen): “Hi this is Wendy Frosh, chair of the board of Planned Parenthood in Northern New England. As people have begun to rally around Barack Obama’s call for change, the false attacks have begun. He was a leader and activist in reproductive rights for more than 20 years, I know the facts. Barack has a 100% pro-choice record and has always been a champion for women’s rights. Hillary Clinton’s last minute smears won’t protect the right to choose. But as president, Barack Obama will. Please join me in supporting Barack Obama this Tuesday. Thank you. Paid for by Obama for America.”

Unfortunately Obama's retort does nothing to elevate the discussion.

With voters from all parts of the political spectrum demanding change in how politics is conducted, not just policies, candidates should resolve to discuss solutions with respect to sexual and reproductive health, not just use one medical procedure to inflame the passions of their base.

Anyone serious about creating change in America, based on the experience we've all shared with social issues for the past generation, should agree with this simple notion: Sexual and Reproductive Health is far too personal, private and fundamental to who we are as humans to relegate to last minute political manipulations and distortions.

James Dobson said he sees deeper meaning in Mike Huckabee's candidacy after Iowa, signaling an influx of money and support the hierarchy of the social conservative movement withheld from Huckabee. Dobson, as well as Huckabee's last minute ad in Iowa, also signal a return to politics that Huckabee's early campaign style suggested might be different. If he can spike a negative ad against Gov. Mitt Romney because its not good for our politics, why not use his unique candidacy to promote workable solutions to the abortion issue, instead of trivializing all reproductive health issues by using abortion simply to call base voters home.

That is the politics of division Americans are rejecting, especially in New Hampshire where Huckabee trails badly and isn't talking about social issues much at all.

Clinton, with her outstanding record of support, would do better touting her own experience fighting for common sense "prevention first" laws, than fabricating her opponent's record. Obama must do more than cry foul by demonstrating vision on these issues with genuine dialog, explaining why he took the positions he did.

An issue all candidates claim to care about deeply, regardless of political perspective, is demeaned by being used to generate more heat than light.

If social conservative candidates truly care about the unborn, and if progressive candidates genuinely want to advance education and health, then both should stop pandering on these most fundamental of human issues and frame a debate about them worthy of the American people.

Instead of promoting a record in sync with the majority of Americans on sexual and reproductive health, Mayor Rudy Giuliani is forced to run to the right. As a result his campaign is floundering; he isn't being true to his beliefs and Americans reject him. Gov. Mitt Romney's flip-flops on abortion similarly jeopardize his run, no one really trusts him as a result.

The change Americans are asking for in 2008 is not just about a shift on policy, but an end to the manipulation of issues so central to our lives.

There are important policy issues to discuss, but until the candidates are comfortable leading on sexual and reproductive health issues, discussing them with the care and concern they deserve, these issues will remain vulnerable to use as political tools to divide and misinform.

A genuine discussion candidates should engage in would look clearly and honestly at these simple questions:

1. What are the best ways to educate and protect teens, encouraging respect and wise decisions, with regard to sexual and reproductive health?
2. How would you educate and work to reduce unintended pregnancies, recognizing that prohibition has never been a successful path?
3. If you believe all people are created equal, what would you do to ensure every individual has the best information possible to make their own private and personal health care decisions, regardless of gender or orientation?

The answers will take only a little longer than thirty seconds for each, as they recognize the complexity of the human experience. But if candidates can discuss the complexities of war in debates, surely they can articulate a vision that brings an end to divisive social and cultural politics.

The answers to those questions will reflect core values and be as applicable to international policy as they are domestic. The candidates could demonstrate a world-view that speaks to our common humanity and reflect their experience leading, not dividing.

Strategically, each campaign should know from polling that there are common sense answers to each of those three questions supported by overwhelming numbers of Americans. The first candidate to use their experience to frame a solutions-oriented discussion of these issues will win big, not just on policy grounds, but because it would signal the beginning of the end of abortion-only manipulative politics.

Barbara Jordan's 1992 question cautioned against a politics that forgot our humanity, concerned for those on the margins of society, in favor of moneyed interests. Pat Buchanan's 1992 declaration of war legitimized and intensified the most vitriolic and divisive political strategies that continue to divide the nation.

In an election where candidates are being asked to use their experience and vision to resolve issues, not perpetuate them, we have an opportunity as voters to bring about a Culture Peace Pat Buchanan failed to imagine, while elevating a discussion of sexual and reproductive health inclusive of everyone that would make Barbara Jordan proud.

Most importantly, we could turn the page on the politics of 1992 and truly move into a 21st Century politics based on our common humanity.