Please visit the new home of Majikthise at bigthink.com/blogs/focal-point.

« Smithfield packers back on the job | Main | Corporate graffiti: Illegal scaffold ads in New York City »

November 19, 2006

McCain wants a constitutional ban on abortion


SADNESS, originally uploaded by solidgoldpants.

John McCain now says he supports a constitutional amendment banning abortion.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask one question about abortion. Then I want to turn to Iraq. You're for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.

MCCAIN: Rape, incest and the life of the mother. Yes. [ABC]

McCain used to say that Roe should be overturned and the issue of abortion "returned to the states"--which would be functionally equivalent to an abortion ban for most women. Now he says he favors a South Dakota-style abortion ban for the entire country.

John McCain is not principled and not moderate. He's a power-grubbing old man who sees his last chance to be president slipping away.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c61e653ef00d834c74b8b53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference McCain wants a constitutional ban on abortion:

Comments

I used to give McCain the benefit of the doubt, as far as his ethics were concerned. No more.

In 2000, John McCain said he didn't want Roe overturned:
===============================
Aug. 20 San Francisco Chronicle in which McCain says, "I'd love to see a point where (Roe vs. Wade) is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to (undergo) illegal and dangerous operations."
===============================

I used to give McCain the benefit of the doubt, as far as his ethics were concerned.

Why?

What's a few illegal and dangerous operations next to my getting to be President?

Unless I misunderstood McCain, he didn't want a constitutional ban, but rather wanted to return the issue to the states, which is to say end the current situation of abortion being a constituionally guaranteed right.

I can imagine that's small comfort for most pro-choice advocates, but I'd say that it is a fairly important distinction.

I know I haven't given McCain any room for the last three years, and he hasn't disappointed. I don't know what his game is, and I think he's way off base on his reading of the American people. Likewise with John Kerry. I don't know what Kerry is thinking in pondering a presidential run again.

I talked to a woman the other day about abortion. I seriously doubt if I would ever have an abortion. I know I would never advise another woman on what to do unless asked, and even then, would not decline my support in any way, because her decision would be totally up to her. I see it as a privacy issue. It's none of anyone fuckin' business what I or any other woman choose. It my choice; it her choice. She said she didn't view it in "political terms" but in "Christian terms." Then we got into this entire thing about the consistency of life thing that people who say they are "prolife" but support the death penalty. I also got the impression that somehow due to the manner in which she viewed abortion as a "values issue" her values or her argument (maybe that's it) somehow trumped mine.

TW:

Unless I misunderstood McCain, he didn't want a constitutional ban, but rather wanted to return the issue to the states, which is to say end the current situation of abortion being a constituionally guaranteed right.

Ending the current situation of abortion being a "constitutionally guaranteed right" would not provide a constitutional ban?

Unless I misunderstood McCain, he didn't want a constitutional ban, but rather wanted to return the issue to the states, which is to say end the current situation of abortion being a constituionally guaranteed right.

Exactly which part of "Constitutional Amemdment banning abortion" do you fail to understand? Perhaps McCain favors returing the questions of rape, incest, and life of the mother to the states without federal intervention, which would, in many cases, have the effect of banning abortion entirely, a la El Salvador or Nicuaragua.

Wow, the Republicans really *do* want a banana republic.

Ending the current situation of abortion being a "constitutionally guaranteed right" would not provide a constitutional ban?

No, individual states would be free to restrict or allow abortion as the voters in those states see fit. In some states (the blue ones), I'd expect that overturning Roe vs. Wade would have almost no effect.

Even in South Dakota, a (blatantly unconstitutional) bill which would have banned abortion didn't pass.

Scott: Maybe because he profited the least out of the Keating 5. Or the most. I forget.

Exactly which part of "Constitutional Amemdment banning abortion" do you fail to understand? Perhaps McCain favors returing the questions of rape, incest, and life of the mother to the states without federal intervention, which would, in many cases, have the effect of banning abortion entirely, a la El Salvador or Nicuaragua.

You're right, I completely missed this. I saw part of the interview with Stephanopolous and only heard the discussion about overturning Roe vs. Wade.

I'm surprised that McCain would go so far as to advocate an amendment to ban abortion. That's really disappointing.

Wow, the Republicans really *do* want a banana republic

I'm no kind of Republican.

McCain: "I'd love to see a point where (Roe vs. Wade) is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary."

Well, we'd all like to see that point, wouldn't we? But I think it's a fantasy. How exactly does McCain think that abortion will become "no longer necessary"? Mandatory 100% effective birth control for everyone who doesn't feel like having kids?

Allow me to make a very confident prediction: John McCain will never be President, no matter how many crazies he tries to appeal to.

Luke, remember - if McCain doesn't win, Giuliani will.

Alon, I don't think so. Neither McCain nor Giuliani will win the primary. The base hates them both.

Who do you think will win the Republican primary, then?

John, your "Senator Integrity" costume is getting a bit threadbare, if fact, it’s starting to look more like a clown get-up.

When the uterofascists finally do make abortion illegal, the ban won’t be completely air tight, they’ll take care to write in escape hatches for their pregnant mistresses.

Giuliani's chances of winning the primary are roughly the same as Al Sharpton's.

It's too early to tell who will win the Republican primary. The base likes neither McCain nor Giuliani and they'll split the sane vote between them. Maybe Huckabee has a shot.

I still think McCain has a better than 50% chance. Certainly, some Republicans dislike him, but I think that's a pretty small group - the RedState.com type folks. They speak for the frothing, chips-on-their-shoulders dramaticos, but I don't think that's really such a powerful group.

If not McCain, it'll be Romney.

Whatever you think of Guiliani and McCain's chances of winning the primary, their chances are that much lower if they both run, splitting the "People who vote for people the base doesn't trust" vote.

McCain used to say that Roe should be overturned and the issue of abortion "returned to the states"

See, this illustrates the confusion that TW Andrews experienced. McCain didn't just used to say this; he said it today, immediately after expressing his support for a federal amendment that would strip states of their right to decide. He was able to display his trademark two faces without so much as drawing breath in between. Of course, Steph attacked this flagrant hypocrisy with the same vigor he did McCain's earlier assertion that the budget desperately needs to be balanced to avoid crushing debt on future generations, and the Bush tax cuts must all be made permanent.

See a tongue-in-cheek visual of John McCain's move to be all things to all people...here:

www.thoughttheater.com

A repeal of the 17th amendment would be a good thing. Those who oppose abortion call it murder, and murder is a state, not federal issue. Let it go back to the states to make these calls. Let people live in states that they want to live in, with the lifestyle and morals that they choose (within limits). The feds shold have a much smaller impact on our lives.

McCain is a asshat. Finance reform was a clear assault on free speech, and he supports some gun control beyond what we have already.

Romney, don't know much about him, but having lived in Utah, and having seen what an asshat Orrin Hatch is (as far as being sold out to the church, making crazy deals with democrats), I would not want a president who is beholden to any big organized church. I prefer non-denominational christians, even devout ones.

Other contenders? I don't see any serious conservatives now. Have to see if Cheney steps down, who would fill the spot.

As far as the dangerous and illegal operations thing goes, everyone involved on the "Rowe" side admit they lied their asses off about the numbers and the commonality of it.

But hey, if we had state by state abortion laws, if you live somewhere it isn't allowe, don't be a slut. Easy. Or is this about a constitutional right to be a slut and not pay the very natural consequences of it?

A repeal of the 17th amendment would be a good thing.

What do you have against direct election of Senators?

Other contenders? I don't see any serious conservatives now. Have to see if Cheney steps down, who would fill the spot.

No, there aren't any... the only heavyweights this cycle are McCain and Giuliani (I don't know what you think about Giuliani, but apparently we agree on McCain).

The comments to this entry are closed.