Michael Steele is not pro-life. And he must be replaced as the Chairman of the GOP as quickly as possible.
Steele just did an interview with GQ which is quoted in The Politico.
The key part of the conversation is this. It’s shocking and I trust you’ll agree that Michael Steele’s days as GOP Chairman are numbered:
Steele: The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.
GQ: Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Steele: Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.
GQ: You do?
Steele: Yeah. Absolutely.
Now, you can rant and rave how poor Michael has been taken out of context once again and how the media has manipulated him again. I don’t want to hear it anymore. I don’t want a GOP Chairman who makes headlines weekly with his flubs.
And if he meant what he said then I want him out as well.
This is not the first time Steele has referred to his pro-choice credentials. CMR raised this issue months ago and we were told by many that we didn’t understand, it was a nuanced position, the media took him out of context and even that Steele was a good Catholic.
Remember this little conversation with Tim Russert on Meet The Press when Steele was running for Senate.
MR. RUSSERT: …Mr. Steele, if you’re United States Senator, would you vote for a constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion?
LT. GOV. STEELE: I don’t — vote for a constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion? I think we’d have to have that get to the Supreme Court, wouldn’t we? I haven’t seen that bill proposed. I don’t think…
MR. RUSSERT: That’s been introduced in the Senate.
LT. GOV. STEELE: I don’t think anyone’s going to propose that this day.
MR. RUSSERT: So you wouldn’t do that?
LT. GOV. STEELE: No.
MR. RUSSERT: Would, would you encourage — would you hope the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade?
LT. GOV. STEELE: I think that that’s a matter that’s going to rightly belong to the courts to decide ultimately whether or not that, that issue should be addressed. The, the Court has taken a position, which I agree, stare decisis, which means that the law is as it is and, and so this is a matter that’s ultimately going to be adjudicated at the states. We’re seeing that. The states are beginning to decide for themselves on, on this and a host of other issues. And the Supreme Court would ultimately decide that.
MR. RUSSERT: But you hope that the Court keeps Roe v. Wade in place?
LT. GOV. STEELE: I think the Court will evaluate the law as society progresses, as the Court is supposed to do.
MR. RUSSERT: But what’s your position? Do you want them to sustain it or overturn it?
LT. GOV. STEELE: Well, I think, I think, I think Roe vs. Wade, Roe vs. Wade is a, is a matter that should’ve been left to the states to decide, ultimately. But it, it is where it is today, and the courts will ultimately decide whether or not this, this gets addressed by the states, goes back to the states in some form or they overturn it outright.
MR. RUSSERT: Is is your desire to keep it in place?
LT. GOV. STEELE: My desire is that we follow what stare decisis is at this point, yes.
I’m done. Michael Steele cannot lead the Republican Party. I don’t want a leader who attacks conservative leaders. I don’t want a leader who smiles and agrees when Republicans are called Nazis. I don’t want a leader who waffles on abortion every time he’s asked about it. That’s not good enough. If this party wants the support of pro-lifers then Michael Steele must go.
UPDATE: Steele clarifies his statment. Ed Morrissey of HotAir has it but adds he still doesn’t know what Steele believes. “The two statements cannot be reconciled with each other. They are mutually exclusive. And Steele has offered both as his views in two successive days.” More at Hot Air.
UpdateII: Fallout is already occuring from some heavy hitters among social conservatives. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins released a statement on this issue:
“I read the article last night so I am familiar not only with his comments about the life issue but also about theefforts to redefine marriage and ‘mucking’ up the constitution. I expressed my concerns to the chairman earlier this week about previous statements that were very similar in nature. He assured me as chairman his views didnot matter and that he would be upholding and promoting theParty platform, which is very clear on these issues. It is very difficult to reconcile the GQ interview with the chairman’s pledge.”
March 12, 2009 at 4:12 am
Amen. If the GOP wants to take back Congress and the White House they need to show strong leadership. That means staking out markedly different positions from the Party of Death and standing by them.
March 12, 2009 at 4:13 am
Amen to that!
March 12, 2009 at 4:42 am
This is a true pity. I had great hopes for Mr. Steele.
March 12, 2009 at 5:56 am
I’m Done GOP – you’ve caused me nothing but frustration anyway, and now you have tossed my primary reasons for tolerating you idiotic pundits and reflexive promises to cut taxes to solve all problems.
I won’t be back
March 12, 2009 at 8:02 am
This guy has shot himself in foot time after time. Unbelievable.
March 12, 2009 at 10:49 am
Hate to break the news, but he’s always been pro-abortion.
By the way, google ads is displaying an ad for a “Caring Abortion Clinic” (www.novahc.com) just below your photo of the Holy Father (Succisa Virescit). Wonder if there’s truly pro-life blog hosting out there???
March 12, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Anon, thanks for the heads up. We’re on it.
March 12, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Steele is a disgrace. Either he’s the world’s worst communicator or he’s a terrible thinker. Either way, he’s proven himself incapable of leading the Republican Party.
March 12, 2009 at 12:40 pm
K-Lo over at the National Review thinks he just misspoke. I want to believe her, since the guy IS a Catholic and K of C……
She DOES think he’s in over his head, though.
I guess we should stage a junta and get Rush for RNC chair— at least his press conferences would be fun!
March 12, 2009 at 1:18 pm
The charitable interpretation is that he mis-spoke. Again. That’s really not much better, especially given the track record.
I do think it is not time for Steele to go.
March 12, 2009 at 1:35 pm
So we’re supposed to believe Steele misspoke in this interview and his interview with Meet the Press?
So how many times does he have to say the same thing before we actually believe that’s what he means. Once more? Twice? Let’s agree on a number.
March 12, 2009 at 1:43 pm
There are no nuances to the Catholic position. Period.
In or Out Steele, make up your mind and/or shut your mouth.
March 12, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Sure, you think he’s bad. But he’s bad by accident. Most of the alternatives would have been bad on purpose.
I watched the MTP interview with Russert, and to my mind, he gave an answer similar to that of Judge Scalia, or any strict constitutionalist. He has come out against abortion in the past; the difference is in how he expects it to happen, or whether Roe V Wade is a factor.
It helps to remember that Steele is taking on the world almost by himself, having fired nearly the entire RNC staff. The problem isn’t what he says, so much as that he is saying anything at all. Until the RNC gets its house back in order, Steele is inclined to respond to the immediate need of defending the party. But he’s doing it without anyone watching his back, and that’s why he’s his own worst enemy right now.
Steele should not have to resign. He should put a moratorium on himself, and give more thought to the message, BEFORE he goes around shooting his mouth off about it.
March 12, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Whoops – I misspoke above. I meant to write that it is NOW time for Steele to go.
FYI, Steele responded with a press release. If the guy is going to have to issue a press release after every interview he gives, that’s reason enough to give him the boot.
Anyway, here’s the text.
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/03/12/michael-steele-responds-to-gq-pro-choice-comments/
March 12, 2009 at 1:58 pm
I’m sick of nuance. I don’t want nuance. What a disappointment. I agree, Steele should go.
March 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Please give us a politician with a spine to stand up and differentiate themselves as PRO-LIFE with consistency and without caring what the media thinks! I agree with you that he’s waffled too many times and has gotta go…
March 12, 2009 at 2:15 pm
David,
Steel in the MTP interview said
“stare decisis, which means that the law is as it is and, and so this is a matter that’s ultimately going to be adjudicated at the states”
This shows just what he doesn’t understand. Stare Decisis would insure that Roe v Wade stands and the issue would not be decided at that state level.
He is either disingenuous or brain dead. Either way, he should go.
March 12, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Patrick:
Were this the full extent of his position, I would agree that it’s disingenuous.
Steele is attempting to emulate Scalia, I think, in drawing a distinction between his own convictions on abortion, and how the law would determine we go about eliminating it. That said, he handled it badly. Steele has been a disappointment, to say the least. And the RNC deserves better than he has done so far. But I remind you that most of the alternatives are unambiguously pro-choice.
March 12, 2009 at 2:41 pm
I told you all years ago that this was going to happen.
They will give the church going crowd whst they want to hear because we believe everything. It is time to take a critical look at what we do ourselves that is pro life instead of pushing it on everyone else.
March 12, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Being pro life has cost me having a family from us. No IVF.