Skip to main content

According to Red State, the problem Republicans are having is because they don't talk enough about abortion.

Well I haven't recently come from outer-space, so I know the average GOP platform is gun, gods, tax cuts, ban gays and ban abortions. I'd have thought that after Akin, they would have understood that they talk too much about abortion, in between fapping over Raygun.

No, not quite.

According to Red State "Social Conservatives" are not supposed to talk about abortion.

We social conservatives are often counseled to not fight on “divisive” social issues as they are presumed to be losers. Take for instance abortion. As early as 1996, a “truce” was declared within the GOP on the subject to soft pedal opposition to the normalization of in utero infanticide.
They quote the delightful Maggie Gallagher who claims that Cuccinelli is in trouble because he doesn't go on about social issues enough.
For an example of the truce strategy in action, recall the July 19 debate between Cuccinelli, a Republican, and his Democratic opponent, Terry McAuliffe, a man whose position on abortion is far outside the Virginia mainstream.

Debate moderator Judy Woodruff asked Cuccinelli whether he would push for tougher laws on abortion. The state attorney general responded: “I do not expect to use the political capital of the governor’s officeto be moving those pieces of legislation. My focus is on job creation and job growth.” Translation? He doesn’t want to appear to care about the issue enough to govern on it.


Supposedly forced birthers are told to shut up, all they need is to go on more about abortion and they will be successful.

The truce strategy demoralizes the GOP base and makes it hard for the grass roots to care about Republican candidates. Conservative candidates are advised to deflect or retreat when social issues are raised, and their refusal to speak clearly and hold the line allows Democratic candidates to adopt more extreme positions, energizing their own base and unleashing a flood of money at no political cost. Democrats are confident that their opponents will not make an issue of their positions. Republican candidates’ apparent discomfort discussing such issues makes it look like they have something to hide, confirming to many voters Democratic suggestions that GOP candidates’ positions are extreme.
Here are things you would know if you came from outer-space.

The GOP loves themselves tax cuts for billionaires.
If there is a budget, unless it is military related it should be cut.
They still hate gays, except when in public toilets.
They hate minorities, even ones they pretend to love.
They wake up each morning dreaming about how to restrict or ban abortion.

Their primaries are decided almost entirely on those issues. Their debates are based entirely on what of the above list they should put first.

Follow me below the squiggly bit to find out what happens when the GOP speaks more about abortion.

chadb • 21 hours ago
I don't understand the rape and incest exceptions. Honestly if the baby is a baby then abortion is murder regardless of the circumstances of conception. If it is only a tissue blob then there is no reason to prohibit any abortion. The only stance that doesn't make any sense is "kill her if she is a product of incest, but don't kill her otherwise." Personally I believe the best arguments are for life at conception, which puts me in the 4% crowd. I just don't understand that 29% group.
BareTruth  The_Gadfly • 4 hours ago
Regardless of personal responsibility, if the fetus is a person, then abortion is murder, and so there can be no exceptions.
PTTP  chadb • 20 hours ago
I agree completely, and personally am against any abortion. But on a political front, I am ready to run to support any bill that would limit abortions to life of mother, rape, or incest. The reason is very simple, there is no way I would work against any restriction on abortion just because it does not go far enough. Any lives saved is worth the effort, then I just keep working for more.

Life of mother, rape, and incest are horrible situations for a woman to be in. But these abortions only account from around 1-3% of all abortions. I sympathize with a child raped by a family member who is then pregnant. I want to drag rapist in the street and shoot them like rabid dogs as they are the scum of the earth. I also sympathize with a woman who has to make the choice between living and a child, no one has to make a harder choice. But the child is innocent in all these cases and in the cases of incest and rape, there are so many cases of women and men who have allowed the child to be born and raised him or her with nothing but love. For those who can not, adoption is there for them. There is really no excuse to kill the child who is a victim just like the woman or child.

midwestconservative  rightappeal • 19 hours ago
The problem with the Ultrasound laws is that they mandate ultrasounds. The Ultrasounds are already performed so the mandate itself is unnecessary ( the necessary part is mandating that the Clinic shows the pictures). The specific language of each law has allowed the Left to claim that "The GOP wants to force women to be probed" and stuff like that, which has been effective in particularly Virginia.
Then our candidates run away rather then exposing the Left's radical position on abortion

The rest, were without comment from me, in part because this next upvoted comment sums up what all of the above really think:
Tbone  mkeprof • 18 hours ago −
Anyone who votes for a Democrat is inferior to not only me but to anyone with a 3 digit IQ. As the majority of women vote for Democrats, the majority of women are only suitable for menial labor and casual sex.
7  •Share ›
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site