An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Palin on “Troopergate” and Abortion

palin.jpgWe’re not even eight hours into the era of the McCain – Palin ticket, but I am quickly becoming more and more convinced that John McCain had previously decided upon T-Paw or Romney but hit the panic button and selected Sarah Palin after Obama’s Mile High Stadium speech without full vetting. Two items have already jumped to the front page. The first, of course, is what is quickly being dubbed with the overdrawn nickname of “troopergate.” During our radio show today, I was told by a good friend that “if this is the best they can find…” but it seems the best may indeed have some legs. We live in the Internet Age, and it’s amazing that McCain’s team didn’t realize that the news reports from Channel 11 in Anchorage would be available on this story. Apparently, in a period of only a few weeks, Governor Palin completely reversed herself on her story about the firing of her brother-in-law.

This might not fit well in the whole “straight talk express” line. But what is more interesting may be Palin’s stance on abortion. While still a divisive issue in the country, poll after poll has shown that voters are only willing to go just so far in support of pro-life movements. Palin has apparently shown herself to be just about as far out on the far right fringe as one could be on this issue, going so far as to say that abortion should be banned even in the cases of rape or incest.

Keenan is upset because Palin also opposes abortions in very rare cases of rape or incest and she complained that “Palin is also a member of the anti-choice group Feminists for Life.”

No matter how conservative you are, you don’t win elections these days on that kind of platform. No word yet on whether or not Palin supports letting a mother die in an effort to save a four-month gestation fetus, but then we’ve only had six hours to dig. The point is, it just doesn’t sell in large portions of the country, particularly with women who can empathize with their sisters who may have been placed in such a horrific condition. I don’t know if we’ll ever know the truth on this one, but I am becoming more and more convinced that this was a panic move on McCain’s part and Governor Palin was simply not fully-vetted before being thrust on the ticket.

I’m still no fan of Barack Obama, but he may be the luckiest man on the face of the planet today.

  • DLS
    You need to realize that the public is _not_ overwhelmingly in favor of legal abortion in _all_ instances. As many of us have already known, only the fringe insists on this. (As well as on 100% unrestricted government provision of abortion, which is parasitic as well as extremist and frequently pathological.)
  • pacatrue
    I agree, DLS, but at the same time, most of the public is not overwhelmingly in favor of making abortion illegal in_all_instances. Jazz was saying that Palin is on the other extreme.

    Anyway, I'm taking a wait and see attitude to these issues.
  • Palin as it turns out is the wingnut's wingnut. She is as anti-science as the nuttiest of them.
    http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2008/08/palin-t...
  • kritt11
    Ron that makes her perfect for the GOP, LOL-- no stem cell research, creationism taught in schools, anti choice for women---uh, I doubt the Hillaryites will buy in to what she's selling!
  • GeorgeSorwell
    I think everyone's being a little too excitable.

    It's not possible to judge how mush she helps or hurts in a few hours.

    And I doubt this choice was made precipitously.
  • Rambie
    We'll see Kritt, some people I thought would be smart enough to see past this bluff are gushing over the chance of a "woman VP".

    Never underestimate a voter to vote against their own self interest.
  • Jeebus, George, you'd disagree with me if I said you were a nice guy. :-)
  • CitizenKang
    Serious question here.

    The vast majority of the analysis I've seen on the tube and around the web deals with Palin's effect on shoring up the hard-core social conservatives and the disgruntled Hillaryites.

    Any thoughts on how her nomination will play with lunchpail dads?

    No snark, I'm really curious.
  • denisedh
    If McCain felt he had to pick a woman, is she the best the GOP has to offer? What about Hutchinson for TX or Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins or Condelezza Rice,,,these are 3 I can name off the top of my head, I'm sure there are more.
  • casualobserver
    Jazz, and here you had me thinking you had a critical mind. Quoting a dedicated pro-abortionist's anecdotal memory to make a point against a pro-lifer........what's next, quoting Shaun Mullen to report the entirety of America's perspective on the Bush administration?
  • Casual, if it turns out to be wrong, I'll definitely do a new post on it. But it certainly looks, from many sources, that she based her run for the governor's mansion in part of being as "pro life as you can get" so this isn't surprising to me. If you have any links to show that Palin does NOT oppose abortion in the case of incest and rape, please put it in here and I'll update the post.
  • Good catch Ron. It is high time to return to a pro-science position that gives us a shot in the modern world that reveres science and technology. The GOP, believing that scholars will never support them, have demonized "liberal elite academics" and placed anti-science ideologues atop what need to be science-based agencies.

    DLS, 2/3 of Americans support Roe v Wade. McCain would appoint judges to overturn it, Obama to leave it intact. In a democracy, the majority gets to decide. Plus, this is not a black or white issue. On the anti-abortion side, it's not homogeneous as the faux term "pro-life" would indicate, but runs the gamut from pro-sperm (anti-contraception, which is FAR from the mainstream American viewpoint), to pro-zygote (against an anti-implantation drug like RU486), to pro-fetus (favoring contraceptive choices but against abortion), to anti-late-term-abortion (restricting only "partial birth" procedures).

    Plus, Palin doesn't support equal pay for women? Good luck with that anti-woman woman on the ticket. Clinton supporters are sure to flock to her, right?
  • vicb
    So they say the VP is one heartbeat from being president. Take it to the next level. Can you see voting for Biden to be president? Sure. Can you see voting for Palin to be president? End of story.
  • Mike_P
    Apparently, McCain met with her only once. And it sounds like she has not even been fully vetted by his staff. If that's true, it certainly was a bold pick by McCain!
  • Neocon
    They picked Palin and hoped that the democrats would go after her over this silly story.

    They have. That gives them license to go after Biden.

    The democrats never cease to amaze me when it comes to the presidential election.

    Already their is a story floating in which Biden helped his lobbyist son get money for his firm. In fact there is a whole host of smut going around on Biden and his son and the democrats fell right into the goose and gander smut slinging.

    Palin has one troopergate item in a couple years..........Bidens got 33 years worth of smut floating around him. i wonder whose going to look the worst in about 6 weeks.
  • lmarten
    Before you 'take it to the next level', the first question is can you see voting for Obama to be President? End of Story!
  • joegandelman
    I don't usually go into comments, but remember that what clearly happens in campaigns is that each side will go after the weak point in the other and defend to the death someone on their side in most cases -- tossing out something they would go haywire over if it was on the other side. They alternatively are defense attorneys and prosecutors and behave in the same way . No matter what, I expect many Republican partisans will defend her on anything negative that is out there just as they will not let anything pass that could be used against Obama or Biden. They key is (I will explore this in a later post) whether Hillary Clinton's staunchest supporters who have been insisting repeatedly that it was crucial to get a Democrat in the White House due to the need for a conservative judge to safeguard abortion will discard this key and central articulated value. I'm not saying that as someone who supports or opposes abortion. It's whether those earlier assertions, stated so passionately, meant anything. If the number one priority is to break the glass ceiling, so be it. And Mccain is counting on them breaking their commitment to a policy to what some woman consider a right to shatter the ceiling.
    Conservatives are ecstatic. I'll post a well-written guest voice soon from one who calls the pick perfect. I keep wondering: did all the passion and talk from Hillary Clinton supporters about the Supreme Court mean anything? Again, if people are pro-life FINE. I have a problem believing anyone who says they are pro-choice then saying they're going to vote for a pro-life candidate....unless the issue has now diminished in importance. If it has, then why was it such a passionate issue during the primaries about how vital it was to get Hillary in the White House to protect the modern abortion right? Was all that just standard political blather? We'll soon see.
  • Olympia Snowe makes much more sense to me...
  • casualobserver
    OK, Jazz, fair enough...I'm sure it will be a topic that moves front and center in the next few weeks.

    In the interim, I will dedicate myself to the same degree of critical investigative journalism as you expended and post this link that shows Palin speaking at a woman's reproductive rights organization meeting.......go figure

    http://alaskaprochoice.org/
  • joegandelman
    I think I fixed typos. If not, sorry!
  • joegandelman
    NOTE TO ALL: Discus just wiped out my long comment. I'll do a post on this later
  • CitizenKang
    Hey Joe, good to see you in comments.

    You might want too be sure to wipe your shoes when you leave though.

    ;-)
  • pacatrue
    I think it's still there, Joe, but discus will move things around in a way I haven't figured out yet. Anyway, you have a long comment up above.
  • JSpencer
    As usual Joe makes balanced and coherent points. I know this is stating the obvious, but the pick of Palin was designed to rock the R base and counter the Obama phenomenon. It seems to be succeeding to some degree, but the whole thing is very much in the flush of youth. There is something about her I suspect will make the late night comedians happy, but I can't quite put my finger on it yet. If nothing else her emergence on the scene will make life a bit more interesting for we political junkies. :-)
  • ElZagna
    RE: Palin's position on abortion

    Let me state at the outset that I am strongly pro-choice. So with that out of the way...

    Palin's opposition to abortions "even in the case of rape or incest" is often seen as some extreme right wing position that reasonable people would reject. Even many who are pro-life / anti-abortion run from such a position, however it seems to me to be the only reasonable position to take if you are pro-life.

    Those who are pro-life almost always base their position on the assumption that life begins at conception and that aborting a fetus is therefore taking the life of an innocent human being. While I don't agree with the assumption, understand the position. But here's where I have a problem: How is the life of an unborn child conceived by rape or incest any less innocent than the life of an unborn child conceived in any other way?

    I realize that this is a bit off topic, but I would really like to hear what moderates think about this. I like to think that moderates are more inclined to think through a position than to rely on their group's talking points.
  • onleyone
    if anyone's still reading, here's a link to the NARAL website where they keep track of such issues as politician's public statements and voting records on the topic of abortion:

    http://www.naral.org/elections/election-pr/pr08...

    ElZagna:

    i believe life began 4 billion years ago, and hasn't stopped since. conception is merely a continuation of the process. personally, i have little objection to abortion in the first two to three months, and grow more concerned further on as the central nervous system develops and response to the outside world increases. you're right about the pro-life 'exception' for rape/incest: if you follow their argument, then the conceptus is as "human" as any other embryo/fetus. i see it, basically, as a "health of the mother" issue (with the possible emotional/physical trauma involved in such situations), though i don't know what a die-hard pro-lifer would say.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC