Posted on 12/05/2001 6:50:44 AM PST by randita
Pro-choice Riordan looks to GOP women
Support could be key in governor's race
Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Wednesday, December 5, 2001
Most Republicans haven't been eager to make abortion an issue in the coming 2002 gubernatorial primary election. But Richard Riordan, the former Los Angeles mayor and GOP gubernatorial candidate, is already doing it.
Not only has Riordan made clear his support for abortion rights and public funding of abortions, but he is also appealing to an influential group of voters who have been increasingly disillusioned: GOP women who support abortion rights.
"I don't think choice is the only issue -- but where a candidate stands on abortion reflects their whole policy and whole perspective," said Bay Area literary agent Jillian Manus-Salzman, a GOP activist.
Riordan is scheduled to appear at a fund-raiser today in Atherton that is expected to generate $100,000 for the leading pro-choice GOP women's lobby, the WISH List. Already, so many women want tickets to the event, at Manus- Salzman's home, that the local police department had to be consulted about crowd control, she said.
"Bring them on," Manus-Salzman said. "I'm so sick of (conservatives) stealing our party, and our candidates. . . . We're going to create our own march, our own soldiers." Riordan's stand on abortion -- and his ability to appeal to California's increasingly pro-choice female electorate -- may prove critical in the March Republican gubernatorial primary election.
Riordan has described himself as personally "anti-abortion," but in a recent interview with The Chronicle, he underscored his strong support for abortion rights. His stance contrasts sharply with that of his two GOP primary challengers, Secretary of State Bill Jones, and businessman Bill Simon, both strongly anti-abortion rights.
"I'm in favor of the right for women to make their own moral choice," Riordan said. "I believe economically disadvantaged women should have access to medical funds, so they have the same right to make the choice as any other woman. You're not really giving the choice to somebody unless they have the wherewithal (to pay for an abortion)."
And Riordan noted that abortion is among the issues that have cost the GOP dearly in recent elections, as when 1998 gubernatorial candidate Dan Lungren went down to a landslide defeat against Democrat Gray Davis. "Look at the vast majority of Republican women -- they're pro-choice," Riordan said. "We've lost most of them in the last couple of elections."
But some Republicans say Riordan's position will be a challenge with more conservative primary voters.
"GOP primary voters are probably the most pro-life subset of the whole electorate you can find, . . . and married GOP women are probably the most pro- life group of all," said strategist Jeff Flint, who is working with the Simon campaign. "I don't think the evidence supports the suggestion that a lot of (Republican) women have walked away."
Flint argues that Simon, although pro-life, simply doesn't fit the stereotype of an intolerant hard-liner.
"He has a clear record of being compassionate to people in need. He runs Covenant House, which has turned around the lives of teenagers in need. . . . He can't be portrayed as a heartless guy who wants to tell women what to do with their lives."
And Jones, also strongly against abortion rights, has eschewed the hard- line stance, expressing compassion and concern for women on the issue -- and noting that Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land.
Candy Straight, president of the Washington-based WISH List, says Riordan's views are resonating with women in California.
"Dick Riordan has had a record of doing well with women voters -- 59 percent of women voters supported him in his last election," Straight said.
Straight said a September WISH List poll of 800 likely GOP primary voters showed that 41 percent of voters who described themselves as pro-life agreed that they would not meddle with a woman's right to make her own choice on the issue. It signals that Riordan's stance mirrors that of most GOP voters, and "the Republican Party, if it wants to win, has to get somebody from the center, " Straight argued.
Judy Buchanan, a Republican who heads the Bay Area-based nonprofit Bring Me a Book Foundation, said Riordan's appeal to women on the issue could help revive a party that has fallen on hard times.
"He has a great opportunity, as a centrist, to bring back women to the Republican Party," she said. "If you're pro-choice, you're more pro- environment, pro-education, and anti-guns. It's not just a single issue. It tells a lot about a candidate."
Manus-Salzman said Riordan has, at least, revived something of a fighting spirit among more moderate female GOP voters. "I was embarrassed to be a Republican," she said. "But my grandfather, a Jewish Republican, said, 'You don't leave something you love, . . . you stay and fight.'
"My goal is to bring women back through the same door they left," she said. "And he's handing us the opportunity." E-mail Carla Marinucci at cmarinucci@sfchronicle.com.
©2001 San Francisco Chronicle Page A - 19
Regardless - Pro-Life still is an integral platform plank of the RNC. Period.
Just like there are Pro-Life Democrats, even though pro-death is part of the Dem platform.
Gallup 1998 - 23% of women say abortion should be legal in all circumstances. (Down from 36% in 1995)
And I love this quote:
"When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."
- Elizabeth Cady Stanton in a letter to Julia Ward Howe, October 16, 1873. Recorded in Howe's diary at Harvard University Library.
If I lived in California, not only would I vote against Riordan, but I would vote for DAVIS. Davis at least hasn't publically called for a ban. You know it's bad when the GOP'er is WORSE than the dem.
GO SIMON!
Yep, you got that right. Lungren kept apologizing for it and blaming it on his Catholicism every chance he got. Sure hope Simon doesn't do that.
Amen - Thank you!!!
But that is the sad state of affairs of the California Republican Party. The desire to "win" has totally superseded ANY consideration as to what ideals to advance or what the party stands for. The losers who run the party (dare I include some of their friends in DC) thinks the party stands for "winning" now. So sad since the left-right tensions were dying down a bit before but this will rip them right back open because obviously conservatives will not support a Riordan-McPherson Gov.-Lt. Gov. ticket and so the only hope is that Bill Simon will win the GOP nomination. (Jones would be acceptable but the Bush forces would leave him to hang out to dry since they and the Jones people are at war for Jones renegging his support for Bush and switching to McCain).
STOP THAT WH*RE DICK RIORDAN - Go Simon!
Just like "fidelity" is an integral part of Billary's marriage vows. Say all you want, but the Republicans are pro-life only in theory.
And don't make a fuss about eugenics -- the Rockefeller branch of the Republicans won't like it. Just yell "Partial-birth abortion!" around election time, and then put respect for life on the back burner until the next election.
FR, bring forth those who defend the sanctity of life.
Pro Life Freepers - LET US HEAR FROM YOU ON THIS THREAD - Speak Up - Buzz your compatriots!!!!!
Sometimes an effective counter to this kind of non sequitur is to put such a system of moral relativism to other ethical tests in specific situations, and assess the validity of its conclusions, because, as Prof. Singer would say, an ehtical system that does not provide guidance for our actions is useless. While you run the risk of being accused of setting up strawmen and demolishing them, you can avoid that by providing realistic and clear-cut cases that illuminate the dilemma in non-trivial ways. So, here are a few:
"I am personally against murder, but I would not stand in the way of a woman's choice to murder her husband if she decided to for her own private reasons." This is not a strawman because there are many real-world cases of women murdering their (perhaps abusive) spouses. Other than in clear cases of self-defense, a murder charge is the usual result. So, what say the "pro-choicers" on this one, valid or not, and why?
"I am personally against bank robbery, but I would not stand in the way of a woman's choice to rob a bank if she should so choose." Again, not a strawmen because it serves to illustrate the if the operable principle is choice in an of itself, other factors could be used as a basis for justification of the act. IOW, the nature of the act itself does not have primacy, but rather the circumstances (objective truth does not exist, IOW). Again, yea or nay, and why?
"I am personally against espionage and I would never do it myself, but I would not stand in the way of a woman's choice to do it is she should want to." (See above.)
My guess is that these moral choices would invariably be answered in the negative, yet the "pro-choice" idiots turn handsprings over the slaughter of tens of millions of innocent persons. Yet the same moral lodestar (choice) is the operable factor in these cases.
And I think we all know the "why" of the answer they would give, both conscious and subconscious. Consciously, they deny the humanity/personhood of the unborn child. Subconsciously, they don't care because it doesn't affect them. Its done in secret, out of sight and out of mind, where the horror is unseen and untold (except for those brave souls who drive the pro-life billboard trucks around), and it happens to the other guy, not them.
I completely agree with you on this. What we need to do is keep getting the word out, responsibility and with Christian charity. State the facts in clear, compassionate language; show women that they have been lied to and that the "blob of cells" they are carrying is an aware, feeling human being; offer solutions through counseling and kindness -- adoption, support, love.
We must only vote for pro-life politicians. I am a Republican and I have, rarely, voted for a pro-abort Republican when the Dem was particularly bad. But never again. Some things are too important to close your eyes and vote for the lessor of two evils.
Riordan and Davis and one and the same when it comes to abortion. I don't care that they are both Catholic and "personally opposed to abortion" -- the condone and promote the taking of innocent human life, and encourage it through funding of abortions.
Bill Simon opposes abortion AND he doesn't cop out. We can count on him to -- at the minimum -- help promote a culture of life instead of a culture of death. We need to stand by him, because too often, we get a good guy in, and then leave him to fight the good fight without us.
We need to be in it for the long haul ... the primary, the general, walking precincts, talking to voters, manning phone banks ... we can NOT sit back and let the pro-aborts win and say, "California is pro-choice, abortionists do what you will." We must work for Life.
Not only has Riordan made clear his support for abortion rights and public funding of abortions, but he is also appealing to an influential group of voters who have been increasingly disillusioned: GOP women who support abortion rights.
I guess the Chron thinks most GOP women support abortion.
Inquiring minds want to know.
Oh a moderate is basically a liberal in the closet. And since they won't say they're really liberals they fool people into thinking they aren't since they look like they appear open-minded on the issues til its time to decide. But since they're wishy washy and don't believe in anything they go with whatever happens to be the fad of the moment which no surprise is almost always invariably liberal. Which is why a "moderate" will always vote with real liberals. So you see apart from the agonizing they do there's no real difference between your garden variety liberal and garden variety moderate. They're both cut from the same cloth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.