Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » WesDem » Read entry Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
WesDem
Posted by WesDem in General Discussion: Presidential
Mon Jun 23rd 2008, 01:13 PM

Feminists for McCain? Not So Much

-snip

How antichoice is John McCain? Let's leave the psychological tea leaves out of it and look at his record. In his four years in the House, from 1983 to 1986, he cast eleven votes on reproductive issues. Ten were antichoice. Of 119 such votes in the Senate, 115 were antichoice, including votes for the ban on so-called partial-birth abortions and for the "gag rule," which refuses funds to clinics abroad that so much as mention abortion. In 1999, the year he said he opposed repeal of Roe on health grounds, he voted against a bill that would have permitted servicewomen overseas, where safe, legal abortion is often unavailable, to pay out of their own pockets for abortions in military hospitals.

His record on contraception and sex education is just as bad. He voted against a 2005 budget amendment, sponsored by Senator Hillary Clinton, that would have allotted $100 million to reduce teen pregnancy by means of education and birth control. He voted to require parental consent for birth control for teenage girls and to abolish Title X, which funds birth control and gynecological care for the poor. He voted against requiring insurance companies to pay for prescription contraception, when they pay for other prescription drugs--like, um, Viagra. The beat goes on, and on. With a handful of minor exceptions (he voted to confirm prochoice Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher after voting against prochoice Dr. Joycelyn Elders), he has a just about perfect antichoice record, including votes to confirm the Supreme Court nominations of Thomas, Roberts and Alito.

As for his 1999 pro-Roe remark, he has retracted it many, many times. Here he is on Meet the Press, May 13, 2007:

-snip

Q: But if Roe v. Wade was overturned during a McCain presidency, and individual states chose to ban abortion, would you be concerned that, as you said, X number of women in America would undergo illegal and dangerous operations?

A: No, I would hope that X women in America would bring those children into birth and into life in this world.


If that's not clear enough for you, how about this: "I do not support Roe v. Wade, period. It should be overturned" (Associated Press, February 18, 2007). Or this, from his campaign website: "Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned."

As the Bush years have shown, the President has a tremendous amount of power; Supreme Court nominations don't begin to describe it. He nominates all the federal judges (302 since Bush took office). He appoints the heads of dozens of regulatory agencies, many of which (HHS, FDA, National Institutes of Health) directly affect women's lives. He submits legislation and the budget to Congress. He has a veto. Bush, we all know, has filled the government with right-wing Christian hacks and family-values fanatics, with room left over for incompetent cronies. He has done just about nothing good for women. McCain's record suggests he would not be any different. His opposition to the Ledbetter Act, which would have overturned the Supreme Court's restrictions on women's right to sue for paycheck discrimination, tells you everything you need to know about where he stands on economic justice for women.

The media can call John McCain a moderate all they want. No matter how aggrieved women are by Clinton's loss, I'm betting that the ones who care about women's rights are too smart to fall for it.


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080707/poll...


Discuss (4 comments) | Recommend ( votes)
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Profile Information
Profile Picture
WesDem
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your ignore list
DU Donor DU Donor
24157 posts
Member since Wed Feb 11th 2004
Mexico
I was "Jersey" on DU, Summer 2003-February 2004. I'm a writer and a Democrat. I believe more than ever that America needs Wes Clark. And Barack Obama.

Thanks to the lovely incapsulated for the Clark graphics.
Random Journal
Random Journal
photo by kevin spidel
wes clark says


I don't believe that America is run by politicians in Washington. I believe it's run by people like us, in places like this. -Tulsa OK, January 29, 2004


We must assure investments in the technology infrastructure — the broadband and wireless access improved and modernized highway, air, and rail transportation systems, and the access to affordable, reliable sustainable energy essential to continuing economic development. We must have a real plan to achieve energy independence. And we need to do so without further damaging our fragile environment. In fact, sustainable energy and so-called green engineering provide major growth opportunities for American ingenuity, and we must move in that direction. - "Real State Of The Union," January 30, 2006


We need to really get to the bottom of the Abramoff scandal, we should have a special prosecutor appointed for that, we really need a congressional investigation of the whole business of the NSA wiretapping and how far that goes, there's been a lot of squirreling around the edges; we've never completed the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had - the evidence seems pretty clear to me, I've seen that for a long time. I think Americans are best served by a strong 2-party system and that's been out of whack and what I can do in 2006 is try to help the right Democrats get into office and that's what I'm going to do. - "This Week," March 5, 2006




stand tall



2004 primary, how'd he do?



Clark entered the primary race a year or two after everybody else was running. He was a novice candidate who ran in a field that was 80% elected officials or former elected officials; experienced campaigners, in other words. The only other candidate without an election history had been a preacher-political activist since childhood, a very, very experienced campaigner.

So how did Clark do?

In a four-month long campaign, before withdrawing on 2/11/04 and endorsing Kerry, Clark competed in 13 states. He won Oklahoma over experienced campaigners. He came in second in Arizona, New Mexico and North Dakota ahead of experienced campaigners. Third in New Hampshire, Tennessee and Virginia ahead of experienced campaigners. Fourth in Missouri and South Carolina ahead of experienced campaigners. Fifth in Delaware, Maine, Michigan, and Washington ahead of experienced campaigners.

Since the day he dropped out in February 2004 and began campaigning non-stop for John Kerry, he's been campaigning for Democratic candidates all over the country. He's now a very experienced campaigner in his own right.

GO WES!!!!



The Necessary Language
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.