I am nobody. I know that. I’m one red vote in the likely blue state of Pennsylvania. But just speaking for this one individual voter I can say there is no way I can support John McCain if he selects former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge as his Vice President.
And I don’t think I’m alone.
According to Newsmax, Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Wednesday floated the prospect of picking a running mate who supports abortion rights and cited former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge as someone worth considering.
“I think that the pro-life position is one of the important aspects or fundamentals of the Republican Party,” McCain said in an interview with The Weekly Standard.
“And also I feel that — and I’m not trying to equivocate here — that Americans want us to work together,” McCain added. “You know, Tom Ridge is one of the great leaders and he happens to be pro-choice. And I don’t think that that would necessarily would rule Tom Ridge out.”
Here’s the deal. Abortion is why I’m a Republican. Sure, I believe lower taxes brings more economic prosperity to everyone. I definitely believe in a strong national security. But for me, if I can’t count on Republicans to be pro-life, I’m out. I pick up my one vote and I go where I’m wanted.
If Ridge were selected I would not fear that the Republican Party would lose. I would fear that they would win. Voting a pro-choice Republican into the White House would send a message to the Party that the road to success is in “moderating” the party’s stance on abortion. And pro-lifers would, in the end, have to look to another party for representation.
I’ve been involved in politics for a while now. I covered politics as a reporter and more recently I’ve managed political campaigns. I know that there are two Republican parties which coexist with a friendly unease. I know that depending on which Republican committeeman I speak with I have to speak about different issues. And I don’t mix it up. Ever. Talking about abortion to a “fiscal conservative” is like speaking about cheeseburgers to a vegetarian.
The fiscal conservatives loudly whisper among themselves that if they could only shuttle away those nutty pro-lifers the Republican party would never lose. They often ask if the party put up a “moderate” candidate, where else could the pro-lifers go but the ballot box for a Republican. Their logic states that pro-lifers are certainly not going to vote for a Democrat. That’s true. But the truth is also that they’d stay home. Just like they did in 2006. Many simply wouldn’t vote.
When I went around looking for volunteers for walking door-to-door on Saturday mornings during campaign season, the fiscal conservatives would always “consider it.” They’d ask for my card. They’d put my cell phone number into their Blackberry. And they’d never show up. They’d never call. When we called for a donation they’d ask who else gave. If you had the right names on your donor list, they gave. If not, they asked for your card and put their number in their Blackberry.
So many of the pro-lifers are the dependable volunteers and donors of this party. Every local party official knows there’s a group of people who are willing to do the heavy lifting for the party and very often those folks are pro-lifers. The pro-life community is the lifeblood of the Republican Party. When you ask for a donation, they don’t ask who else gave. They want to know the candidate’s position on abortion.
If the party seeks to “moderate” it stance on abortion, they’ll get better press. There will be unanimity at all the Republican cocktail parties. The pro-lifers won’t be there.
If Tom Ridge is in the ticket, the Republican Party can take my card and put my number in their blackberry. I’ll get back to them.
August 15, 2008 at 4:39 am
Amen brother
August 15, 2008 at 5:43 am
Further infuriating the already-seething Republican right-wing base, John McCain is has been dropping the name of Tom Ridge as his vice presidential running mate. Tom Ridge? The abortion-rights supporting former ex-governor of reliably Democratic and blue collar Pennsylvania?
Let’s get a rundown on the guy who might inadvertently tip the scales for Barack Obama: http://www.236.com/news/2008/08/14/i_want_to_be_number_two_tom_ri_8288.php
August 15, 2008 at 8:52 am
Leave it to Republicans to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. You can never out liberal a liberal and expect to win. The only way liberals win is by hiding who they are to the American public. Conservatives win when they embrace their beliefs and energize their base.
McCain picks Ridge or Lieberman, I vote third party from here in my swing state.
August 15, 2008 at 1:34 pm
What about Ron Paul? I think if everyone who has doubts about McCain votes Ron Paul, it would be the “surge” we need to get him in. During the debates, I thought he was one of the few straight-shooters.
The FatMan
August 15, 2008 at 1:50 pm
pro lifers should vote third party or write in. Let’s see who McCain picks. Then, if we need to, we’ll figure out someone to write in. It would make more political sense for McCain to pick a Mitt Romney to appease the conservatives in the party, since McCain isn’t really all that conservative. We’ll see. Don’t underestimate the power of prayer for these folks running for office.
August 15, 2008 at 2:18 pm
And here I was about to vote for the “lesser of two evils”. Now I’m not sure which is lesser…
Agree with Anonymous. I think I’d probably vote for Paul if this happened. Better than not voting at all, right? It’s interesting how the Republicans managed to take such heavy losses in 2006 and still don’t get it. I just hope it will only take one Obama term to get them back on track.
August 15, 2008 at 2:18 pm
This comment has been removed by the author.
August 15, 2008 at 2:21 pm
I reluctantly could accept Joe Lieberman for a one term VP if he agreed to support Roberts/Scalia type judges.
I am reluctant to stay home and let Barack appoint Hillary and Devall Patrick type judges.
August 15, 2008 at 2:48 pm
I’m not voting for John McCain in the fall. Based on his stand in the past, I simply do not trust the man on abortion issues. That he is even considering choosing a pro-choice running mate is proof enough for me that he believes abortion is not a major issue in America. There is more at stake here than judges on the bench—my own soul. If more Republicans took this approach we might not be faced with John McCain at all. I will vote for the true pro-life candidate—whatever his party affiliation.
August 15, 2008 at 3:34 pm
I am as unhappy as anyone that McCain is the Republican nominee. But we are absolutely in a desparate situation. If Barack Obama is elected president with a Democratic congress, there will be untold damage done to this country. Let me count the ways: appointment of judges, ruining the economy with tax hikes, expanding government entitlements, a very weak presence in foreign affairs, etc. etc. We will never see Roe v. Wade overturned. This “I’ll just sit this one out” attitude is suicide. If you stay home or vote for a third party loser: you’ve voted for Obama. That wouldn’t sit well with my conscience. Kit
August 15, 2008 at 4:07 pm
http://www.catholicmediacoalition.org/catholic_activism.htm
How did Ridge fall from VP frontrunner status back to the relative obscurity where a pro abort Republican belongs? The story goes back to Ridge’s days as a little known US Congressman from Erie PA.
After an Erie area March for Life delegation met with a freshman Congressman Ridge in Washington on January 23, 1984, the March 1984 issue of the Erie Echo reports Ridge responded, “Does government have a right to force a woman to be an incubator for nine months for another individual?” Ridge served in the US Congress for twelve years during which time he was able to accumulate an almost perfect pro-abortion voting record.
While the remainder of the state had never heard of him, wealthy pro-abort Republicans, including Elsie Hillman, a wealthy pro-abort PAC contributor from Pittsburgh, tired of the pro-life Republican leadership of the 1980s, saw Ridge as a Catholic family man, veteran, and ruggedly good-looking candidate who could be quietly groomed, via the State Governor’s mansion, for eventual national leadership, putting an end to the control of the party by the pro-life right wing.
To this end, Ridge was pulled from his relative obscurity in Washington to become a front runner for the Governor’s position. Utilizing a campaign that emphasized his moderate to conservative positions, while minimalizing if not obscuring his pro-abort voting record, Ridge was elected Governor of Pennsylvania in 1994. Few Catholics, even pro-lifers, realized the depth of Ridge’s pro-abort sentiment. It was simply assumed that Ridge was pro-life and his campaign rhetoric, if anything, supported that misconception.
The outgoing Governor Bob Casey was a faithful pro-life Catholic even in the midst of the moral rot of his Democrat party. Governor of Pennsylvania from 1986 to 1994, Casey persevered through the 1992 Supreme Court Case, Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, which challenged the constitutionality of 1989’s Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act. The law required parental consent for minors, a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion, the filing of detailed reports about each abortion and distribution of information about alternatives to abortion, and was upheld by the Supreme Court.
In his campaign, Ridge pledged to uphold the victories hard won by Casey in defending the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act. His actions once in office belied his pro-abort stance and angered many Catholics who had voted for him. His complete failure to enforce the dictates of the Abortion Control Act proved Ridge’s 1994 promise to uphold it was “campaign rhetoric.”
It should have come as no surprise, however. While a Congressman, Ridge had initially supported Ronald Reagan’s Mexico City policy, preventing US funds from going to overseas agencies supporting abortion services, then subsequently reversed his position. Just as one of Bill Clinton’s first acts as President was to overturn the Mexico City policy of the previous administrations, one of Ridge’s first acts was to overturn the 14 year old policy of Pennsylvania regarding family planning services. According to The Newsletter of Planned Parenthood of the Susquehanna Valley:
“…Since 1981, Pennsylvania has been one of only a few states that did not invest funds in contraceptive health services. Governor Tom Ridge made good on his campaign pledge to support funding for comprehensive family planning services by including $2.03 million for ‘women’s medical services’ in his first budget…(legislators) inserted language that could have prohibited medical providers like Planned Parenthood from responding to patients’ requests for abortion information or referral…Governor Ridge removed the …’gag rule’ language before signing the final budget. Ridge noted that he was ‘expressly withholding (his) approval of that language’.”
In May of 1995, Ridge emphatically stated that Pope John Paul II’s new encyclical, Evangelium Vitae, would not cause him to reassess his position on the issue. In 1996, Governor Ridge joined other pro-abortion republican Governor in calling for removal of the pro-life plank from the Republican National Platform. Then during 1997, his Department of Health waived a requirement of the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act that requires an abortion clinic to obtain a written transfer agreement with a local hospital, allowing a new abortion clinic to open in State College. Newspapers quoted the clinic’s director as saying the waiver allowed the clinic to open early, and the first abortion clinic ever in the central Pennsylvania Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown was open for business.
On January 20, 1998, the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare mailed a Planned Parenthood brochure to all PA Medical Assistance recipients. According to the Pro Life Union Inc. of Southeastern Pennsylvania News Bulletin, Respect Life Sunday 98:
“State of PA Caught Marketing For Planned Parenthood: This past January, PA residents who receive medical assistance from the Pa. Dept. of Welfare (DPW) received a brochure in the mail promoting Planned Parenthood. It was titled, “We’re More Than You Think.” It listed the “services” offered and advised the recipient they could come to PP without a referral or insurance . . . Although the brochure arrived in an unmarked envelope, recipients recognized it as typical of mailings they receive from DPW. . . “
“On further investigation, it was learned that the postal meter numbers used for the mailing belonged to DPW. . . Finally, on April 10, a letter was written admitting that DPW had made an “arrangement” with PP of Chester County, whereby PP supplied the brochure, but DPW stuffed, addressed and paid the postage . . . Another interesting fact, not previously known, emerged in the newspaper accounts. Frances Sheehan, Exec. Director of PP of Chester County, stated that “the actual text of the brochure was reviewed and approved by the governor’s office prior to printing.”
In January 1998, Ridge was entering into his 1998 reelection campaign full swing, his greatest challenge coming from a pro-life Catholic independent, Peg Luksik. Already he was telling political allies and members of the press of his intention to be the Republican vice presidential candidate in 2000. It is against this clearly defined backdrop, of an ardently and publicly pro-abort, ambitious “Catholic” politician, that our tale of heroic Catholic activism develops.
August 15, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Anon #2,
I disagree. A single Obama term would be a short term loss. Even two McCain terms would be practically no gain at all.
August 15, 2008 at 4:58 pm
We need to pray and to be informed (thanks CMR for reporting this). And then, ensure our family/friends/network are informed as well. Finally, we need to tell McCain that what he’s doing isn’t a good idea…for him or for our nation. Blogging about this issue can only help. =)
August 15, 2008 at 4:58 pm
This comment has been removed by the author.
August 15, 2008 at 5:16 pm
McCain is basically in my view placating the pro-choice wing of the party. You have to show them a little attention so they will come out and vote for you and not get their feathers ruffled.
I also think Ridge is not viable because he is not MR Popularity.I think the Media thinks he has a huge following but does anyone glow and talk about Ridge when he was working for Bush I?
August 15, 2008 at 6:07 pm
For me, if we put a pro-choice Republican in the White House, the party will never put up a hardcore pro-lifer again. And pro-lifers could be split with many going to a third party while some continue to vote Republican because of other issues including wanting to avoid Presidents like Obama.
If pro-lifers lose hold of the Republican party we will cease being an effective political voice.
August 15, 2008 at 7:41 pm
No way, no how, will I vote for McCain if he panders to the prochoice faction of the GOP.
We answer for eternity for the actions we take in this short life.
August 15, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Well and truly said. One cannot compromise with mass murder.
Folks keep telling us that we have to choose the lesser of two evils. Well, we don’t. “Least weird” is no choice at all. I’ll pray for a write-in choice.
— Mack
August 15, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Why do we easily reject the “Seamless Garment” argument which gives Catholics moral cover to vote for pro-abort politicians, but when it comes to the same sort of argument involving Supreme Court nominations, we get week in the knees? In my mind, it is a clear evil to vote for a ticket that supports abortion. Who gets on the Supreme Court with Obama in charge, and what choices those justices might make is a big question mark (look at the “conservatives” Bush I appointed). That more babies will die if we have even a partially pro-abort White House is a fact.
In my mind, we should vote pro-life and thereby do not cooperate in evil, or don’t vote at all. Let God sort out the rest.
Kate
August 16, 2008 at 1:31 am
The SILENCE from the USCCB is DEAFENING