If I were going to bet on a pick that no one is expecting, this would be it. Rep. Eric Cantor represents my place of residence, Henrico County, VA, along with a good-sized chunk of suburban and exurban central Virginia. While not the cosmopolitan technocracy that is Northern Virginia, Cantor’s congressional district isn’t exactly the deep south either. Culturally, the region that sends Cantor to Congress could be any community in Western Michigan or Western Pennsylvania. It’s largely middle class, Caucasian, doesn’t sport a disproportionate number of young people, does have a strong blue collar demographic, and is traditional in the sense that most residents probably still go to church, watch the big game, and enjoy a beer on occasion.
And yet here in the heart of this Norman Rockwell painting, Eric Cantor, a member of the Jewish faith, gets consistently elected to Congress by scores of blue collar Christians. That alone should get the McCain team turning its collective head.
On paper, Cantor seems to be a good pick, especially when the McCain running mate A-team seems to present few options that aren’t huge risks. Pawlenty would help among blue collar Midwesterners, but is he too much of a lightweight for prime time? Ridge could deliver the Keystone State, but how many pro-lifers would he lose elsewhere? Would the few votes that Romney brings in Colorado be neutralized by the independents in Ohio who turn up their nose at a ticket that seems too old-line Republican? Would Huckabee’s appeal to evangelicals end in disaster after he says something to piss everyone off at the same time? Would Fiorina’s appeal to women be negated by her supposed embodiment of a golden parachute? We can all imagine the Democratic attack ads that would dismantle each of these selections.
Even if Cantor isn’t a part of McCain’s A-team, he is someone who probably wouldn’t lose McCain a single vote anywhere, while possibly garnering a few votes for the ticket in a few states and among a few demographic groups. Absent a game changer, that’s all McCain can really ask for in a running mate. Cantor’s a a) pro-Israel b) Jew who c) wins middle class and working class populations, who d) is adored by the conservative intelligentsia and who e) is youthful and vibrant and who f) hasn’t said or done anything to really piss anyone off just yet. He wouldn’t be worth many votes. But he would be worth a few. And in the right places. One percent of the vote could determine whether Virginia ends up in the McCain or Obama column, and Cantor is from Virginia, and from the sort of reddish suburbs that McCain needs to win to offset Obama Country in Northern Virginia. An equally marginal percentage could make the difference in Florida or Pennsylvania, both of which have significant Jewish populations. Missouri is also teetering on the edge. Could a base-pleaser deliver a few thousand additional votes there? Probably. All in all, a few votes in a few places could decide this election. And if the A-team doesn’t come through for McCain, a choice like Cantor is eons better than putting a bore like John Thune on the ticket, hoping that everyone will just ignore him for the rest of the campaign.
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Good piece DaveG, i think Eric Cantor would be an excellent choice, but i sure am starting to get worried about all of this “Obama is going to spend money in all 50 states stuff.” I read an article that said by July 4th Obama’s campaign will have paid staffers in all 50 states! Yikes! Even though the fundrasing totals were about even this past month in May. McCain and Obama both raised 22 MIllion, and both had about 30 Million or so cash on hand. But it is worrisome to see that Obama is putting together this 50 state strategy, even though i’m sure he still wont win regular republican states, it scares me that McCain will have to defend states that he shouldnt be defending at all?
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:38 pm
A congressman does not have enough gravitas to be VP. There are so many governors and senators who can fulfill the spot and deliver other constituencies.
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:48 pm
I have never been impressed with Cantor. He is not extremely articulate on TV, especially on interviews. Although he appears to be a good legislator, he does not bring in many votes at all.
Bryan, Obama cannot afford a 50 state strategy. Obama spent $200 million dollars in 48 states on the primaries/caucuses, and of course, this was not concurrently. To do the same for the next 20 weeks, concurrently, he will need to raise at least another $400 million. The GWB campaign, with the mother of all fundraising teams did not complete in at least 10 states. Obama has the ability to saturate Ohio, Michigan, Florida and Penn. Why would he not do that? If Obama has a 50 state strategy, he will certainly be defeated.
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:54 pm
I love Cantor, but I would rather see him in Congress. Cantor, Pence, Shadegg and Flake need to take over the leadership instead of the bumbs we have in charge now.
Boehner has done a little better in the last couple of weeks with regard to energy, but otherwise he has been what I expected, not ready to lead a reform of the party.
Cantor could be part of a reform movement within the House GOP.
I still like Pawlenty for VP and Romney for RNC Chairman.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:00 am
Obama will spend real money in OH, PA, MI, VA, NC, CO, NM, NV, FL, IA, WI, MN, NH, and MO.
The pretty much the rest of the country is not going to make a difference how much money either candidate spends. Perhaps there are a few other states that have cheap enough media markets that Obama might make a short run at to see if he can bump his numbers there. Maybe ND, SD, MS, GA, AR or AK.
The truth is if he spends money in other states other than that first list he is probably just being arrogant and potentially costing himself the election. Another reason could be that his campaign is acting as the DNC and the purpose is really party building or to help down ticket.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:01 am
Bryan,
I do not see Cantor bring much to the ticket? Does he have any executive, business or military experience? I think he was a lawyer before he was a Congressman.
On the Obama cash machine……interesting statistics from the GOP primary season. Did you know that in the final week of each of the NH, SC and Florida campaigns, McCain just about matched Romney’s TV and Radio ad’s? This is Phil Gramm’s strategy. Use free media to stay as close as possible, then just before the election when voters tune in, make your big ad buy. Obama has over 800 paid staff, McCain 250. Obama alone will have in access of $15 million more expendatures on salaries, PC’s, phones, etc, than McCain. Also keep in mind, Obama has a 48 state team in place from the primary season.
Every 4 years we hear about new states being in play, a changing dynamics to the red state-blue state pattern. But for years the same mid-western states are the battle ground. Basically since 76 (not incl. 3 candidates in 92′) the same states are in play. This election will be about OH, MO, FL, PA and MI.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:11 am
DSkinner is correct.
The DNC is broke. Somone needs to pay their salaries. Interesting though, that Obama’s monthly fundraising totals have been cut by 50% since February, while McCain’s has doubled in the same time period (and McCain has been directing ten’s of millions to the RNC victory fund).
I predict that McCain/RNC have the same cash, if not more on hand as Obama/DNC by convention time. This has been the most unreported story in June. Bush and Romney are going to continue to bring in mega-bucks for McCain, exceeding the 2004 totals. Of course this does not take in to effect the fact that many Clinton donors are either hesitating to fundraise for Obama or have switched to McCain.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:16 am
Has anyone seen the noobamanetwork.com that was potsed earlier? It has about 176 groups that are mainly women’s groups that are pissed off at Obama, and it seems that there may be more to this about women and Hillary supporters going to McCain than the media may be letting on. I don’t know how much stock to put in it yet, but if there is anything accurate about the numbers of people who were members of those groups, then there is a serious amount of support out there for McCain or atleast against Obama that has yet to be tapped and needs to be immediately.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:18 am
Free media is an area where McCain traditionally has done very well. It remains to be seen how the MSM will treat him head-to-head against Obama as opposed to a more conservative primary challenger.
There is some hope though because the Obama campaign is starting to shut the media out and make him less and less accessible (probably to prevent the gaffes he is prone to making). Maybe McCain catches a break and gets less biased coverage by making himself more available.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:44 am
Eric Cantor for VP
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:45 am
YOUNG HOUSE STAR IS JUST THE TICKET FOR JOHN
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:51 am
I just want McCain to pick already and get it over with. We have several different factions on this for “insert name here” for VP.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:54 am
Cantor: GOP in danger of becoming ‘Pelosi-lite’
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:01 am
Not sure if this has been posted, but surveyusa is showing a cliffhanger in Oregon…
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=6d876854-13d5-4f70-b17d-9ea29d0bb4d8
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:44 am
Re: Cantor: GOP in danger of becoming ‘Pelosi-lite’
If only… At this point if Republicans could ONLY be Pelosi-lite when it came to spending I’d be happy. Washington increased DOMESTIC spending by 50% in 7 years. Let that sink folks.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:01 am
Cantor is very quickly moving into my top five VP choices, along with Whitman, Rudy, Ridge and Romney. He makes me feel better about the future of the GOP – just imagine the party in 10 or 15 years when Cantor, Jindal, Palin and others like them are our Republican leaders.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:24 am
I know Bill Owens is going thru a divorce, but I he’s gotta be one of the most qualified and yet rarely mentioned candidate. Colorado is vital this year.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:34 am
DaveG,
What is this “Pawlenty is too much of a lightweight” meme you seem to have adopted? Pawlenty is a lightweight compared to Cantor, a 38-year old Congressman, who at times seems positively incoherent? Umm. Eric Cantor….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsuKXO_McNE
Heavyweight I say.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:37 am
Hmm. Apparently Cantor is 45. He looks younger. He’s still a lightweight. I wouldn’t be disappointed if he was the guy, since he’s a solid conservative, but he has FAR higher Quayle potential then anyone who’s been seriously discussed, saved Palin.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:37 am
save*
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:24 am
Safe choice.
I think Cantor is definitely an option if Obama picks a Veep from Virginia.
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:45 am
Cantor just seems like an all around less interesting version of Sarah Palin. Youngish, beloved by certain segments of the conservative base, somewhat diverse, pretty lightweightish all around. But, where Palin could actually expand the base, as a woman, Cantor’s Jewishness would almost certainly be considerably less helpful in attracting disaffected Democrats or moderates. And while too much protestation about Palin’s inexperience, would probably begin to look like sexism after the way Hillary was treated, and given that the Dems have nominated a guy halfway through his first term in the Senate, Cantor would have no such shield.
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:52 am
There is real no upside to choosing Cantor since he can’t guarantee VA. He’s probably not even as well-known in the state as McCain himself and possibly even Obama. I’d like to know what John Warner thinks of him.
Regarding campaign financing, the not so well-kept secret is that Obama raised a lot of primary cash from small donors but has now moved toward the larger donors who basically funded Clinton. That means going from the $2000 plate dinners to $28000 plate dinners. That is a lot of money to the vast majority of Americans, but the Hollywood and Wall Street sets can write that check without batting an eye.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:20 am
I’m not terribly familiar with Cantor, so I can’t really comment. I’m starting to think that Mitt is not a good VP pick. It’s not so much that he’d lose Independents. I think he’d do okay with them. It’s more moderate Democrats I’m concerned about. If a moderate Democrat who voted for Hillary is considering McCain, having Romney on the ticket would repel them in a way that Pawlenty or someone else like that wouldn’t. Romney rubs center-left people the wrong way. The best choices right now look to be Crist, Pawlenty, and Jindal. Huckabee, while not a personal favorite, would have a certain amount of traction with blue collar voters. He tended to do well in the same places Hillary did, the western part of Virginia being an example. Bob Beckel once said McCain/Huckabee would be an unbeatable ticket. I’m not very familiar with Fiorina. Sarah Palin is an interesting choice. I think there are some logistical problems though with her being pregnant and so forth.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:34 am
Clarence,
Sarah Palin is no longer pregnant. She gave birth to Trig Palin about two months ago.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:47 am
Palin is not pregnant, that is old news. She had the baby earlier this year.
Matthew E. Miller is correct, Palin would be shielded from sexism-based attacks. At the end of the Clinton campaign there was a lot of discussion about the role of sexism in the campaign. The first negative thing said about Palin, that could be at least loosly related to sexism would result in a massive pushback from voters and some media.
I have a feeling many female voters (an ex-Clinton voters) are just waiting for McCain to select a female VP. That will be their signal to jump ship. I am conflicted on this. I do not believe in quota politics, but if it helps him win, then he should go for it. I know many Conservatives who are voting Obama just because he is black.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:50 am
Haha, okay. Guess I should pay more attention. The only thing is, is it very Republican to have a mother of a young child be Vice-President and have the child raised by a nanny? Maybe it is, a lot of rich people used to have nannies. Maybe her husband can take care of the kid I guess. It just seems to run counter to the idea that Republicans are the “family values” party. I’m not suggesting women shouldn’t work when they have kids, but the Vice-Presidency is not an ordinary 9-5 job.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:52 am
Obama Camp Closely Linked With Ethanol
If McCain beat Obama over the head with this, it would be a savvy move, as even the eco-friendly New York Times doubts the efficacy of the corn-based biofuel. But it would also signal that the ethanol-guzzling Pawlenty would likely remain right where he is, in Minnesota.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:53 am
Cantor is a freemason. And so is Roy Blunt. I wouldn’t vote for either of them.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:53 am
Actually, logcabinGOP kind of has a point. The idea of a young mother being VP might irritate some conservatives, but it would be the ultimate victory for the feminist movement to have a woman with a young child be Vice-President, totally putting career ahead of family, acting basically like a man. Because this is such a feminist-friendly idea, it could attract a lot of Hillary voters.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:54 am
Anon, you can be Jewish and a freemason?
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:57 am
I don’t care that Blunt is a freemason, but I don’t like him because when he moved up in the leadership in Congress, he divorced his wife and married another woman. The power probably went to his head.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:01 am
I sincerely do NOT think that many conservatives would be put off too heavily by a young mother like Palin being the VP nominee. Palin’s credentials and conservative bona fides are simply to compelling to keep many who might object to her age and motherhood for too long. Her ridiculously high approval ratings help bear this out.
http://www.joshualawson.blogspot.com
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:02 am
Aron,
Yup. The ethanol thing looks like the biggest obstacle to making Pawlenty veep. Take away his support ethanol subsidies, and I’d consider him practically a shoe-in. That said, it’s my understanding that Pawlenty has done some “shifting” recently on ethanol-based issues. I can’t remember where I read that, but I’m almost positive that I did. Regardless, we might have an inkling of McCain’s position vis-a-vis Pawlenty by how much of an issue he makes of ethanol; so far, he’s talked about it very infrequently.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:04 am
#26: “I have a feeling many female voters (an ex-Clinton voters) are just waiting for McCain to select a female VP. That will be their signal to jump ship.”
Bingo.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:04 am
I do not object to her age. I wouldn’t object to Jindal either. If she wants to be Vice-President and have someone else raise her kids, that’s her decision. I’m not that crazy about it, but everyone has their own way of life. She’d a fine Vice-President, just not my first choice. She would be a feminist icon though because she would be the ultimate careerwoman.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:06 am
That said, ethanol for Pawlenty is no more problematic then Palin’s support for drilling in ANWR, or Romney’s support for the Federal Marriage Amendment, etc. Anybody Mac picks is going to disagree with him on major issues. But, it would be fairly difficult for McCain to select someone who opposes his position on a signature issue (i.e, he can’t select a huge Porker, or someone who’s been waffly on Iraq). If he tries to make opposition to ethanol a signature issue, I’d say Pawlenty is probably out.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:10 am
In the days of smoke-filled backrooms neither Cantor nor Palin would get more than a friendly mention, but neither would Obama. I just don’t like the idea of trying to respond to Obama with a gimmick. Neither Palin nor Cantor standing alone (ie, not vis-a-vis Obama and not as McCain’s understudy) is qualified to be president. Obama himself still has an inexperience problem, which suggests Cantor and Palin will not get a pass.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:12 am
Opposition to ethanol will not be his signature issue. Palin’s support for drilling is probably a plus because it would shore up conservatives, plus the public is fed up with high gas prices. Alternative energy is a noble cause for the long term, but what are people supposed to do right now? Gas prices hurt the poorest among us because they tend to have the furthest commutes. They live in rural areas where there is affordable housing and commute a long way to their jobs in more urban areas. That’s why it is annoying when wealthy city people such as Charles Krauthammer and Thomas Friedman call for increased gas prices. It’s easy for them to say since they live in cities and probably take subways everywhere, like most wealthy urban-dwellers.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:13 am
#36. I think you’re showing your age. You must be over 60, am I right? The truth of the matter is that almost all kids these days are being raised by someone else. Kids spend at least 9 hours a day in daycare five days a week.
And if her husband, who has taken a leave of absence from his job, puts in more parenting time than her for their 5th child, what’s wrong with that? Can’t fathers take care of babies as well as mothers?
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:17 am
Todd palin is on a leave from the Oil fields to help take care of the family (I think he still does commerical fishing on weekends). I have a feeling Gov. Palin would never use a nanny. Anyway, McCain had a nanny. But I have read that Sarah Palin still attends all the PTA meetings, and she takes the baby to work with her, etc…..
Palin is much more qualified that Obama. Her business and executive career started before she was Governor.
All McCain requires is someone with the word “Governor” before their title. Remember, 99% of voters are not in touch or as interested as we are.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:18 am
How about Emilio Vasquez for VP? No one knows him either…but that may be the big advantage. Turns off no one. Hispanic surname, young, inexperienced ( no baggage of ANY kind). Lives in a car so can help in all states.Not remotely know to McCain so no downside there. Seems to fit all the slots. Can speak a little english and knows a slight amount about any subject.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:27 am
Clarence Claus,
We luv-ya brother, but please refrain from chasing all the women off this site with the “Leave it to Beaver” talk.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:40 am
logcabinGOP,
The vast majority of female ex-Clinton supporters are pro-choice, and while they might be ok with a woman who’s personally pro-life, they would be vehemently against any candidate (even one with a vagina) who not only opposes a woman’s individual right to choose, but would prohibit exceptions even for victims of rape and incest.
Also, by McCain’s own stated criteria — “it could be someone who has a lot of experience and someone who doesn’t on national security issues” — Palin should be disqualified from consideration, as she has neither “a lot of experience” nor any experience on national security issues.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:53 am
it’s my understanding that Pawlenty has done some “shifting” recently on ethanol-based issues. I can’t remember where I read that, but I’m almost positive that I did. Regardless, we might have an inkling of McCain’s position vis-a-vis Pawlenty by how much of an issue he makes of ethanol; so far, he’s talked about it very infrequently.
Matthew,
Not sure what you’re thinking in terms of, but I’d call this recent news problematic…
Pawlenty wants feds to take a look at E20
As for McCain making an issue of ethanol…
Well, look at what he said about an hour ago.
He reiterated his opposition to government subsidies for corn-based ethanol and called instead for equal treatment of all forms of ethanol, especially sugarcane-based ethanol from Brazil.
“Instead of playing favorites, our government should level the playing field for all alcohol fuels that break the monopoly of gasoline, lowering both gasoline prices and carbon emissions,” McCain said.
I guess Pawlenty is going to finish out his term as governor, after all.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:59 am
Sen. McCain offers $300 million prize for new auto battery
“In the quest for alternatives to oil, our government has thrown around enough money subsidizing special interests and excusing failure,” said excerpts from McCain’s prepared text. “From now on, we will encourage heroic efforts in engineering, and we will reward the greatest success.”
The pork-barrel opponent also blasted “a hodgepodge of incentives” for the purchase of fuel-efficient cars.
“Different hybrids and natural-gas cars carry different incentives, ranging from a few hundreds dollars to four grand. They’re the handiwork of lobbyists, with all the inconsistency and irrationality that involves,” McCain said.
Looks like McCain is throwing Pawlenty’s pet project under the bus…
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:04 am
Pawlenty pumps ethanol
Governor Pawlenty is challenging other states to boost their ethanol consumption. He told a meeting of the Governors’ Ethanol Coalition that the corn-based fuel will reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil. The group consists of 31 states and five countries that support ethanol. But unlike Minnesota, few of them mandate ethanol use.
St. Paul, Minn. — Minnesota was the first state to require that all gasoline sold in the state contain 10-percent ethanol. Montana and Hawaii have passed similar laws, although they haven’t gone into effect yet. This year, Pawlenty pushed for doubling Minnesota’s ethanol mandate to 20-percent by the year 2013. He says the events of the last few months have made it clear that the nation must reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.
He also defended ethanol subsidies, which critics have questioned.
“Every other fuel is subsidized too,” he says. “This notion that ethanol is subsidized and somehow it’s therefore tainted is ridiculous, because we subsidize oil like crazy! Look at the federal tax code and the incentives we give to oil exploration and production and refining.”
Pawlenty says ethanol has the added benefit of creating jobs in rural America. He says only people on the far margins of the political spectrum oppose ethanol.
While that may be true, many states aren’t convinced an ethanol mandate is the best way to increase its use.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:07 am
Aron:
“The vast majority of female ex-Clinton supporters are pro-choice, and while they might be ok with a woman who’s personally pro-life, they would be vehemently against any candidate (even one with a vagina) who not only opposes a woman’s individual right to choose, but would prohibit exceptions even for victims of rape and incest.”
So what? We’re not going to win many Clinton voters anyway because they’re liberals (their strident pro-abortion position is just one part of their wider liberalism). The real prize is conservative Democrats and center-right independents.
McCain can’t become “pro-choice” enough for Clinton voters without becoming too pro-abortion for conservatives.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:30 am
The vast majority of female Democrats and center-right independents who are culturally conservative and receptive to McCain, even those who are personally pro-life, do not support taking away a woman’s right to make her own decision. Even more women would find Palin’s position, one that would deny victims of rape and incest of the ability to end their pregnancies, to be utterly abhorrent.
Can you explain what the logic would be in actively working against your self-interests, spitefully facilitating the election of the “pro-abortion” Obama, risking the overturn of Roe becoming permanently out of reach, when you have a moderately pro-life candidate in McCain, who, at worst, would maintain the status quo?
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:36 am
Matthew wrote: “it would be fairly difficult for McCain to select someone who opposes his position on a signature issue (i.e,…someone who’s been waffly on Iraq).
That would eliminate Romney, Huckabee and Ridge.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:36 am
Aron,
I’d argue that McCain has largely treated ethanol as an example of his willingness to go against the grain; i.e, “I think subsidizing ethanol is a mistake, therefore I’m going to oppose it, despite the political consequences”. The point McCain makes, when discussing ethanol, isn’t focused on the ethanol, per se, but rather on what opposing ethanol demonstrates about his political principles; that he’s an independent type, and a Maverick. In this way, it’s rather distinct from his focus on pork-barrel spending, Iraq, immigration, or clean government, where the focus is on the issue itself.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:47 am
anon: I don’t know if Cantor or Blunt are Freemasons, but considering that George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, James Monroe, Theodore Roosevelt, and many other patriotic Americans have been members of that organization also, I can’t see why that should be an issue.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:20 am
Aron, spite has nothing to do with it. I’d prefer to have one party in America that is unambiguously against ripping human beings apart.
I don’t mind campaigning against a Republican party that would waffle on the issue of mass murder. We need at least one party in America that isn’t committed to mass murder.
Polls typically show between 55-65% of Americans favor tougher laws restricting women’s ability to commit abortion. Only 25-30% of Americans are in favor of the status quo.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:52 am
I am not old, but perhaps my comments were un-PC. I don’t mind women working when they have kids. I’m just saying the Vice-Presidency is not a 9-5 job. Most kids probably are raised by someone else nowadays, but is that really ideal?
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:55 am
You guys are also overestimating how pro-choice women are. One of my grandmothers is fairly liberal, and a few of my aunts on both sides of my family are. I’ve never heard any of them even bring up abortion. They talk about stuff like the war or funding for people with disabilities or education or health care. Not all Democratic women are obsessed with abortion, but a lot of the elected ones are.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Doug,
91% of abortions performed in America occur in the first trimester, when pea or dime-sized fetuses are simply vacuumed out.
Just four percent of abortions occur after 16 weeks gestation, and less than 1% take place after 20 weeks, which then requires doctors to dismember the developing fetuses as you describe. And, statistically, zero percent of abortions are performed post-viability, which, I agree, could arguably be deemed murder by law.
By the way, the new ABC News/Washington Post poll asked respondents:
“Do you think abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases, or illegal in all cases?”
Legal in all cases 18%
Legal in most cases 35%
Illegal in most cases 28%
Illegal in all cases 16%
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Aron, human beings have intrinsic worth whatever their size or shape or level of development. I don’t favor killing innocent human beings.
I understand that you and many other Americans don’t mind the killing of little human beings.
At one point many human beings were cannibals or held slaves so this barbarism isn’t particularly surprising.
If politics is about anything it should be about opposing evils like slavery, cannibalism or killing innocent human beings. I’m sorry you’re devoted to supporting the modern day equivalent of slavery or cannibalism.
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:55 pm
“modern day equivalent”?
Doug,
From Blackstone’s Commentaries (1765-1769):
Life is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in every individual; and it begins in contemplation of law as soon as an infant is able to stir in the mother’s womb. For if a woman is quick* with child, and by a potion, or otherwise, killeth it in her womb; or if any one beat her, whereby the child dieth in her body, and she is delivered of a dead child; this, though not murder, was by the ancient law homicide or manslaughter. But at present it is not looked upon in quite so atrocious a light, though it remains a very heinous misdemeanor.
An infant in ventre sa mere, or in the mother’s womb, is supposed in law to be born for many purposes. It is capable of having a legacy, or a surrender of a copyhold estate made to it. It may have a guardian assigned to it; and it is enabled to have an estate limited to it’s use, and to take afterwards by such limitation, as if it were then actually born. And in this point the civil law agrees with ours.
* Quickening occurs naturally in the middle of a pregnancy. A woman pregnant for the first time typically feels fetal movements at about 20-21 weeks, whereas a woman who has already given birth at least two times will typically feel movements around 18 weeks.
Previable fetuses weren’t considered “little human beings” at the time of our nation’s founding, and even the deliberate killing of a developing child after quickening was handled legally as nothing more than a misdemeanor.