Don’t Kid Yourself, McCain Is No Moderate

April 14th, 2008, 12:21 PM EDT

Certainly not on abortion, gun control gay rights, and judicial appointments.

h/t Think Progress.

Posted in Liberaland by Alan

Responses to this post...

  1. Didn’t McCain say, at some point, that he would not vote to put a muslim in the White House?

    Posted by RC from Smithtown
    April 14th, 2008 at 1:07 pm

  2. From the linked article:

    “McCain’s record is not spotless on abortion: He said once, in 1999, that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned.

    But that was an aberration in an otherwise unbroken record of opposing abortion rights for women. McCain voted repeatedly to ban federal funding for abortion; he once voted against Medicaid funds for abortion even in cases of rape or incest.

    He voted to require parental consent for abortion and voted to criminalize anyone but a parent crossing state lines with a minor to help get an abortion. McCain also supported a ban preventing women in the military from getting abortions with their own money at overseas military hospitals.”

    From reading this, I have to seriously wonder what you all would consider a “moderate” on abortion. Do liberals truly want an America where kids have to have permission to get their ears pierced, but no persmission (and even the state overtaking a parent’s rights) in order to allow a kid to get an abortion??! Does that not seem completely insane to anyone?

    Is the liberal stance that parents shouldn’t be the ultimate arbiter’s of their children? Is it the mainstream liberal stance that the government should somehow supercede that relationship? Have any of you EVER known a situation where the state is a better parent than an actual parent? How then does this mean McCain isn’t moderate in this arena?

    Finally- can someone PLEASE explain to me what “abortion rights for women” means? Where are these rights found in the Constitution? Can we agree that the founders would have never imagined such rights, and surely would have never supported such ‘rights’? How do these “rights” supercede the rights of the unborn child? Would the founders give the rights to the woman or the unborn child who has no say in the matter?

    Posted by Josh
    April 14th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

  3. You’ve got to love the article author’s first name.

    Posted by W F G
    April 14th, 2008 at 4:23 pm

  4. Also against freedom of speech 8-(

    Posted by Mr. Sardanicus
    April 14th, 2008 at 5:14 pm

  5. I just read where John once called his lovely wife a trollop and a c**t … in public … with witnesses.

    Ah, another family values candidate.

    Posted by anonymouse
    April 16th, 2008 at 6:11 pm