ABC News Chief Political Analyst Matthew Dowd hasn’t blocked us yet, so for now we’re still treated to the pearls of wisdom he’s finding since he left the beaten path of the two-party system and opted to become an Independent.

It’s a curious pattern for a political analyst, yet it’s becoming awfully familiar. First, float a generic platitude that a fortune cookie company might have turned down for not being edgy enough; second, give it a name like “compassionate common good capitalism” but offer no means of implementing or paying for it; and third, immediately set straight the poor fool who accuses you of being a Democrat/Republican.

On Saturday, Dowd showed how a pro touches that third-rail of abortion and lives to tell about it:

That’s nice, although it doesn’t specify who’s taking care of the vulnerable, nor does it reflect any pro-lifer we’ve ever encountered, ever. Rather, it just seems like a nicer way of putting what is so often the pro-choice straw man argument, e.g., you pro-lifers only care about the baby until it’s born. Again, if someone can point to a book or column or tweet where a conservative endorses that view, we’d be interested to see it.

Here’s the denial bit:

Way to set her straight about Republicans and … hey, wait a minute. All he did was declare himself an independent and disavow the rest. Hmm …

Surprise! A lot of conservatives agree with that as well. However, does Planned Parenthood need half-a-billion in tax money so that people have “access” to birth control? We’re pretty sure that $735,000 the organization burned on behalf of Jon Ossoff didn’t go toward condoms for his victory party.

Dang, there sure is a lot of familiar pro-choice rhetoric in these replies? Is Dowd sure he’s not a Democrat? Because if he’s trying to win converts from both sides of the aisle to his third way based on the common good, some support for pro-lifers (who do care for the vulnerable) would go a long ways here.

* * *