Topinka's abortion position: a loser from every angle
Topinka's supposedly center-left abortion position will score her points with no one. Appearing moderate on abortion may work for some incumbents, but it does challengers no good.
Call it a wash? No. In Topinka's battle for the middle, pro-lifers will not lift a finger to defend her, but pro-aborts will and are doing all they can to spin Topinka's "moderate" abortion position as radical right. Moderate voters will be pulled toward Blagojevich.
Case in point: Planned Parenthood Illinois Votes recently sent out an email alert saying things like:
While Topinka has spun herself as a moderate, her record on reproductive rights and her choice of anti-abortion hardliner, Joe Birkett, as running mate make it clear: Topinka's no moderate on abortion.
Judy Baar Topinka's Record While Judy Baar Topinka claimed to support reproductive choice during the primaries, her record sings a different tune. During her 13 year tenure in the legislature (1981-1994) Judy Baar Topinka voted against reproductive choice 84% of the time.
The bold emphasis was theirs.
Who will defend Topinka? Certainly not pro-lifers. Judy's positions against partial birth abortion and for parental notification only indicate she's not whacked-out barbaric, not that she expresses thoughtful "common sense" on the issue, as one on this blog has said.
And Judy certainly doesn't like to discuss the a-word. It makes her uncomfortable, as it rightfully should; bringing it up could only cause trouble. For instance, how could she answer a knowledgeable reporter's question, "Explain why you oppose second-trimester partial birth abortions but not second-trimester dilatation and evacuation abortions?"
(Perhaps one of you pro-aborts can answer that.)
Pro-aborts are invested to see Judy lose, while pro-lifers are not invested to see her win. Abortion is big business, and Blagojevich has brought a ton of money to IL's abortion industry these past few years and also vowed to keep all abortion floodgates to and in IL open. The industry returns the favor with money, workers, and a push for votes.
Bottom line: Topinka's "moderate" abortion position will lose her votes.
15 comments:
Sometimes I don't understand pro-life sentiment regarding abortion. If there are 2 candidates both in favor of abortion, however, one of the candidates wants it restricted more than the other, isn't it the best interest of the unborn child to elect the individual who will kill the least amount of children?
If each life is sacred is it morally right to sit out an election to prove a point?
The majority of the public has a Topinka-ish view of abortion: legal in early stages with parental notification. Sure, moderates on the issue aren't as vocal as those on either extreme, but if it becomes a major issue in the campaign (likely not this time), they will express themselves as such.
For evidence of what I just said, look to South Dakota where a lot of people will lose their offices because they supported the restrictive abortion ban.
Jill -
I agree with your political analysis. In a state where the majority of voters consider themselves pro-choice, Topinka would be better off if she were pro-choice too.
The rest of your rhetoric is really disingenuous and, frankly, pathetic. Planned Parenthood is the leading advocate for preventing abortions in Illinois and the country, by leading the way to preventing unintended pregnancies. If they could make birth control universally available and 100% effective and convince everyone who chooses to have sex to use birth control unless they are planning to get pregnant, they would. So this whole notion that Planned Parenthood is performing abortions to make money is absurd.
YDD,
Planned Parenthood was found by racists and eugenicists.
They lie continously and hurt minority communities.
I know it's only tangentially related, but the current Governor and the State Board of Elections had better learn to work together a little better...
I agree with Lairdude. As long as Roe v Wade is on the books, there's little pro-Lifers can do. Why not make more efforts to prevent abortions?
Abraham Lincoln:
You are correct, but accept the fact that this is the way the far Right bashes. Not once, not twice, but again and again and again with the same material, like a broken record.
Jill won't change any minds with this piece, and never intended to do so. It's all just Topinka-bashing by the sore losers from the primary.
Margaret Sanger-
Christians throughout history have oppressed, tortured, murdered, etc. to spread their religion.
Should that taint the present day 'pro-life' message of those basing it in their Christian faith?
Jill, you're the loser. Not Topinka. Topinka views on abortion matches the vast majority of Illinois citizens. Go get a life, will ya?
"Planned Parenthood was found by racists and eugenicists."
And the United States was founded by racists and slave owners... but it still beats most of the alternatives.
The fact that one can make an analysis saying Judy's abortion position is wrong is exactly why I will vote for her: she's not taking the political positions that according to polling or consultants will cynically get her the most votes (like Rod). She's taking positions that she actually believes in. She is genuine and after Rod, that is enough to get my vote
Jill --
The Topinka position on abortion while regretable can not be the deciding factor in casting your vote in November. If you can not differentiate between Judy B and Blago on this issue, there are many other issues. Sitting on your hands is a vote for the incumbent.
IMHO Roe was an arrogation to the federal level of what needed to be decided by the state, one by one. Some may vote pro life, some might vote pro choice. In fact I would like to have seen the States delegate to the Counties and in Illinois, home rule communities.
You can not legislate social mores.
Wistful Vista -
You state as fact, "You can not legislate social mores." Hhmmm. I suggest your statement could not be more incorrect. In fact, ALL social/civil law legislates (i.e. discriminates) social behavior. Laws serve to encourage behavior that is "good" and discourage behavior that is "bad", or destructive. Take speed laws, as an example. They are established to protect life and provide safety (moral right to life). Breaking the law leads to fines and even driving privledge revocation. Thus, speed laws "discriminate" against speedy drivers. Speed laws serve to promote one type of behavior over another. Speed laws would serve no purpose if society placed no value on life. Further, the very statement that "you cannot legislate social mores" is a moral judgement in and of itself. I guess you would need to pass a law to outlaw making moral judgements. Quite a dilemma?
I don't care about abortion. I don't care about the issue at all. I want a good governor to replace the embarrassment we've been witnessing since 2003.
This election is about corruption and how the guy we elected refuses to follow through with the promises he made to us, and we've discovered he is as corrupt as the last one we threw out.
Abortion? Like anyone cares, but you. You sound so 1970s.
Post a Comment