( - promoted by Carnacki)
I think Jane Hamsher hits on something about Republican presidential candidate Rudy Guiliani's supporters that is also true of U.S. Rep. Shelley Moore Capito's.
From Jane:
There is a central misconception at play wherein people believe that because the social conservatives make so much noise about abortion, it's something they actually care about. It isn't. It's an abstraction. If you think they really give a happy hootie about innocent fetuses, you're living in a fool's paradise. George Bush could say the war on terror will be won tomorrow by stringing up Islamofascist blastulae and torturing them at Guantanamo Bay and nobody would make a peep. Not a one. Being anti-abortion is an article of faith, a calling card, a way of saying you are a member of the tribe. It's Michelle Malkin showing up in a white hood to the Klan meeting. The "unborn child" is what they profess to care about because what they really care about are self-determined urban women with lives of their own who take their jobs away and have sex and don't bake quite enough pies, and they hate 'em. But that's not okay to say so we get yet another chorus of "Every Sperm is Sacred."
Mike Callaghan ran as the Democratic candidate against Capito in 2006 by saying that he too, like Capito, was pro-choice and thought abortion should be safe, legal and rare.
He tried to frame the debate in a way to make it a non-issue for the voters of West Virginia's 2nd District.
In a sense, this also bought into the faux idea that Capito is a "moderate" -- which is how she has marketed herself to the voters even though her voting record is much different.
Now Capito has touted herself as "pro-choice" although she claims she is personally opposed to abortion and is even a member of the pro-choice Republican group The Wish List.
But her voting record shows she is on par with the extremists in the Republican Party. Her pro-choice stance is largely a myth:
2005-2006 Representative Capito supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 50 percent in 2005-2006.
2005 Representative Capito supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 25 percent in 2005.
2004 Representative Capito supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 35 percent in 2004.
2003-2004 Representative Capito supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 73 percent in 2003-2004.
2003 Representative Capito supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 30 percent in 2003.
2001-2002 Representative Capito supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 75 percent in 2001-2002.
snip
1995-2004 On the votes that the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Assocation considered to be the most important in 1995-2004, Representative Capito voted their preferred position 38 percent of the time.
Where I disagree with Jane is that not all those opposed to abortion do so for tribal identification. There are some who have sincere qualms on the issue because of their religious teaching. The way to tell whether someone is opposed to abortion out of a sincere interpretation of the Bible or whether it is simply to be part of "The Tribe" is to look at their views on poverty.
The Bible mentions helping the poor in more than 3,000 verses.
When you look at the voting records of West Virginia's Democratic representatives Alan Mollohan and Nick Rahall, you see they are opposed to abortion but that they have been strong advocates at helping the needy throughout their careers.
A Martinsburg businessman I know told me he votes Republican to protect the "unborn" and as he said it he laughed cynically because he and I both knew all he cared about was tax cuts for his high income bracket. He told me as long as it brought in the votes for his party, he was perfectly willing to pretend to care about abortion as a political issue.
He got what he wanted -- tax cuts. But those who claim to care about abortion as a political issue, what have they gotten out of it?
The Republicans dominated the White House, the Supreme Court and both the House and Senate for years and they never did anything about the issue. Those in power, like my cynical businessman friend, would never give up a "wedge" issue that they use for tribal identification.
With Capito, abortion is just yet another issue where she talks out of both sides of her mouth. She tells voters she's personally opposed to abortion, but that she is a pro-choice moderate. Capito does that because she knows that the majority of Americans are in favor of keeping abortion legal. Only 29 percent of Americans in a recent survey want to see Roe v. Wade overturned while 62 percent do not. The vast majority of Americans do not want to see women locked up if they had an abortion. Yet that is the extremist right-wing view that the Capitos in Congress would allow to happen if they thought it would bring in more campaign dollars than their current pretense of caring about the issue does now.
One of the (many) places Callaghan erred in his campaign was by telling voters he and Capito were both pro-choice.
What Callaghan should have done -- and what the next Democratic candidate in WV-02 should do -- is let the voters know that Capito has a voting record that is mostly anti-abortion while at the same time she endorses Republican economic policies that actually drive up the demand for abortions.
Studies have shown that the leading factor in deciding whether a woman has an abortion is economic.
As a friend pointed out to me, the hard-core "anti-abortion" crowd is really the same extremist crowd that is anti-union, anti-equal pay and rights for women. When Democratic House and Senate leaders proposed funding programs to cut down on unplanned pregnancies to eliminate the need for abortions, the vast majority of Republicans opposed the plan. The Republicans and the majority of their wingnut voters have proven time after time that "anti-abortion" doesn't mean they oppose abortion. It means they oppose women controlling their own lives.
Through her votes, Capito supports that extremist view of women that would criminalize them for doing what they thought best for their families.
Capito's support of the GOP budget priorities means less sex education and birth control, as well as less pre-natal care and less opportunities for meaningful jobs. (Anyone remember the twisted logical contortions Capito went through on her employee choice vote? She said one thing, voted the opposite, and acted as if she could fool all of the voters all of the time -- which considering how poor of a job the Martinsburg Journal does at covering her votes and statements has worked for her in the past.)
Meanwhile Democrats like Rahall and Mollohan -- as well as her Democratic challenger -- were far more consistent. Rahall and Mollohan oppose abortion -- and support economic policies to help cut down on the need for them.
Callaghan didn't state the differences between himself and Capito enough on the issue of reproductive rights because he thought the difference would scare off potential voters.
He was wrong. As many so-called "anti-abortion" voters have shown time after time, they don't really care about the issue. It's just part of the total extremist, ideological package. Callaghan could have been the most anti-abortion candidate in the world and Capito willing to perform abortions in front of crowds, and the wing nuts would have still voted for Capito because she is a reliable Republican Rubber Stamp for their other issues.
The next Democratic candidate should emphasis that. The Republicans don't really care about the "unborn child" so there is absolutely no reason to try to appeal to them as if they did. Instead of trying to appeal to the Republican base, the next Democratic candidate in WV-02 should appeal to the Democratic base and the independent voters who want abortion safe and legal.
|
