GOP and Women

From my recent article at Kendall County YR:

The May 10th editorial by Tony Scott in the Kendall County Record claims that the GOP needs to stop alienating women with backwards social issues like abortion and birth control. Scott goes so far as to claim that “most Republican candidates support limits on… birth control.” This is made up. It’s false. Scott wants the uninformed to assume that these dangerous Republicans are coming to ban sex and make women wear burkas. In fact, the issue of birth control has only been brought up by Democrats recently, in attempts to force religious institutions to provide free contraception for their employees. Even the staunch social conservative Rick Santorum stated that, though he morally disagreed with contraception, he had no interest in restricting anyone’s access to it. If you remember all the way back to January of this year, when the issue was first artificially injected into the campaign by former Democratic advisor George Stephanopoulos at a debate, every single Republican on stage was variously bemused and/or annoyed at the waste of time. Stephanopoulos spent over four minutes repeatedly asking each candidate, in so many words, come on… you want to ban the pill, right? Tell me you want to ban the pill.

The Republican audience got so fed up with the absurdity of the line of questioning that they started to yell and boo. Romney summed up the general sentiment: “George, I — I don’t know whether a state has a right to ban contraception. No state wants to. I mean, the idea of you putting forward things that states might want to do that no — no state wants to do and asking me whether they could do it or not is kind of a silly thing, I think.”

Scott correctly reports that 77% of those recently polled thought birth control “should not be part of the national political debate.” Republicans agree. They’re not interested in it either, despite attempts to characterize the GOP as the party of “extremism and gender inequity.”

Also brought up is the issue of abortion. Republicans need to back off abortion, goes the claim, because 53% of Americans support it! Polls on abortion are tricky. They change. A lot. Constantly. Pew did report last month that 53% of those polled were in favor of keeping it mostly legal, but that number, in its pendulous swings over the past few decades, keeps slowly swinging in a pro-life direction. And swing it does. Between October 2008 and April 2009, support swung from 57% to 46%—eleven points in eight months. There was a three point change between two polls conducted in the same month in 2008. Even six months ago, only 51% of those polled supported abortion. This number moves a lot, but the big picture is a trend towards protecting the lives of our unborn children.

Here’s the bigger picture still. These social issues make for good press and loud arguments, but when asked what issues will determine their vote this November, people list abortion, contraception, and gay marriage low on the list (39%, 34%, and 28%, respectively, answer these issues are “very important”). The top of the list? The economy (86%) and jobs (84%). Our current President is running on a failed record on those issues, against a man who’s spent his life demonstrating a spectacular ability to turn financial failures into successes, in both the public and private spheres. Which of those two men do you think Americans should trust with our economy?


, , , , ,

  1. #1 by Howieee on May 18, 2012 - 5:06 pm

    “The economy (86%) and jobs (84%). Our current President is running on a failed record on those issues…”

    Not taking into account the early months of his presidency before any of his policies could take effect, can you elaborate on how his record has “failed”?

    • #2 by basicconservative on May 18, 2012 - 6:06 pm

      Can you point out where he has succeeded? Not taking into account the early months of his presidency, he’s still been there three and a half years now, and for the first two years he had super-majorities in both houses of Congress. He could have passed just about anything he wanted, and did. Yet we’ve gone three years now without a budget, unemployment is still above 8%, or, if you count people who gave up looking for a job, over 14%. What accomplishment in his record would you point to where he has succeeded in helping the economy or job situation?

  2. #3 by Howieeee on May 21, 2012 - 2:06 pm

    I guess it’s a matter of semantics. By “failed” you mean “didn’t completely turn around the major recession in place when he took office, but improved it and stopped it from becoming a depression through a stimulus that is actually working (though not spectacularly) to fund much-needed construction projects and jobs, etc.”

    Your point may not be to be objective, and that’s fine, but it’s simply not a true statement to say “Our current President is running on a failed record on those issues.” That’s as much a distortion of the facts as liberals saying the right wants to ban birth control or conservatives saying the left wants to take away their guns.

    • #4 by basicconservative on May 21, 2012 - 8:45 pm

      Deficits sitting between 1-3% of GDP for around 50 years, then in 2009 jumping to 10%, 9%, 8%. Claims that unemployment would NEVER break 8% if we’d only pass this huge stimulus bill–and unemployment cruised past 10% and still hasn’t dropped below 8 yet, despite the stimulus. And that’s not even including the full unemployment picture, real unemployment is still over 14%. It’s just semantics to call all that a failure?

      How about a failure of leadership? Really, three years without a Constitutionally-mandated budget? Even for the two years the Democrats had total control? That’s not a failure, that’s just semantics? It’s no coincidence that the deficit exploded when we stopped budgeting. Without a budget, Congress becomes even less accountable than they already were.

      Those facts aren’t distorted. The fact is, stimulus doesn’t work as advertised. I read Krugman too, I know the left says we just need more. Spending $900 billion of our grandkids’ money over the last couple of years wasn’t enough, $15 trillion in debt isn’t enough, we need to spend more, more more more. That’s Obama’s proposed solution. Lots of Presidents have inherited recessions. Obama, W, Reagan, Ford, Truman, Roosevelt. Obama has tried some of the same things that FDR tried, and they’re having the same effects of inhibiting recovery. Is it really that unreasonable to say, hey, if we want people to have jobs and the economy to improve, maybe can we try NOT doing things to scare businesses away and make it harder for them to grow and hire?

    • #5 by basicconservative on May 22, 2012 - 1:20 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: