The Political Voices of Women

Here is a guest post by community member Deb Della Piana from Turn Left.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

The pundits are coming out of the woodwork since Obama chose Joe Biden over Hillary Clinton (or any other woman) for vice president. Some, like the generally suspect Dick Morris, have suggested that McCain pick Kay Bailey Hutchison as his running mate in order to secure votes from the angry Hillary supporters. Women, don’t let the conservatives and the pundits dumb you down and defocus you from the task at hand. You know and I know that had Obama chosen Clinton, the pundits and conservatives would have had a bigger field day. There’s no polite way for me to say this, so I’ll just say it:

John McCain is no friend to women. There is no need to discuss Kay Bailey Hutchison’s position on women’s rights because it doesn’t matter one bit. What really matters is the position of the presidential candidate. Casting your vote for McCain rather than Obama, out of some twisted sense of loyalty to Hillary Clinton, makes absolutely no sense. For the record, Hillary Clinton feels that way too. If, however, you want to set women’s rights back a few decades then pappy McCain is your man and the Republican party is your ticket.

Now, I’d be a liar if I said that this isn’t a ‘gender election.’ It has been a gender election from the beginning because of Clinton’s candidacy and the malodorous treatment she received from the male-dominated news and broadcast media. However, for women the gender issue goes far deeper than that, and the election issues go deeper than the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq or the state of the economy. That’s because the conservatives are very quietly waging a war against womens’ rights that is slithering just under the radar screen. Make no bones about it, John McCain wants it kept under the radar. He’s counting on it. However, in order for women to make an intelligent, informed decision, this is one war that must be exposed.

Let’s start with the here and now. Probably as his last great act of pandering to the right-wing Christian conservatives so intent on legislating morality (in their image and likeness, of course, because they are the chosen ones and everyone else is just dead wrong) George Bush has fired the first shot. Under a new rule instituted by the Bush administration, health care workers can refuse to provide a patient with information on abortion sources, contraception – even preventing or ending pregnancies – if they have a moral objection to such things. There’s no ambiguity here, when we say ‘health care workers’ we are talking about doctors, nurses, pharmacists and others. According to our imperial president, a person’s ideology comes before the health and welfare of female patients. Even worse, this ruling doesn’t require a Congressional vote; it could simply go into effect after a 30-day comment period.

I have spoken informally to a few health care workers since learning about this regulation, some of whom I’ve known from my previous job, some of whom have treated my immediate and extended families in the past. In their minds, each and every one, health care workers should suspend their ideology in favor of what is right for the patient. That’s part of the job. In the case of doctors, the Hippocratic Oath and the promise to ‘do no harm’ comes first, not a provider’s personal ideology or religious conviction. While, on the face of it, the regulation seems simple enough – protecting health care workers against being fired or other forms of punishment for not performing or supporting procedures that they find abhorrent – the fact is that the regulation also allows the worker to refuse to refer the patient on. There is the slippery slope. It is at this point that you potentially put a woman’s health at risk. Now, let’s fast forward to John McCain.

Do you think that John McCain will reverse this regulation if elected? Are you kidding? He’s probably thankful that his predecessor got this one out of the way. I invite you to Senator McCain’s campaign web site and his page about overturning Roe v. Wade, where he reveals the steps he will take to accomplish this task if elected. There’s no chance in hell that John McCain is coming down on the side of women. He’s another in a long line of rich white guys who will be more than happy to tell women what’s best for them. Do you know what Slate is saying about us women? In an article posted Thursday, August 21, they say that John McCain is betting on us not paying attention to what he’s doing. If you still view McCain as candidate v2000, be advised that the software has been updated. McCain has learned the hard way that he needs the Christian conservative vote to win. That is his base. The Slate article postulates that women who find out McCain’s true position on abortion and reproductive rights tend to run away from his candidacy. The problem is that most women aren’t finding out about his position. It’s important to keep the war on women quiet, but McCain’s camp is also betting that women won’t go looking for information. That’s because McCain has a slippery slope of his own.

You see, not only does McCain need the Christian conservative vote, but he also needs the support of women to win the White House. A dilemma, no? The problem is that he has tried floating pro-choice names for his vice presidential nominees, with a very negative reaction from his ultra-conservative Republican base. In light of this, a pro-choice running mate is unlikely and I say it doesn’t really matter anyway. What matters is McCain’s very clear position. I urge all women, especially the angry Hillary supporters, to reconsider handing McCain their votes. While McCain has clearly shifted on this issue to gain the Christian conservative vote, perhaps it’s fair to speculate about his attitude toward women in general.

If John Edwards’ extramarital affair and his subsequent handling of it is seen as a reflection of his general attitude towards women, then I say we must look at all politicians in that light – including John McCain. After all, he is the presumptive GOP nominee for president. Here’s a candidate who has admitted to womanizing in his own books. (Apparently, if you boast about it right off the top, it’s more palatable.) While I often assume that most people know about how he got to be Mr. Cindy, perhaps some do not. Here’s a quick synopsis: McCain cheated on his first wife with Cindy. Then, he divorced his first wife, married the rich Cindy, and proceeded to launch his political career using her money. But there’s even a more recent, more telling event that may well reflect McCain’s true attitude toward women.

One of his recent campaign stops happened to be in Sturgis, South Dakota, at the Buffalo Chip Campground, site of a huge 10-day biker festival where the women are encouraged to bare as much skin as possible, and the women are only happy to comply. (You can’t say McCain doesn’t know where his appeal lies.) While standing on-stage with his perfectly coiffed wife, addressing a bunch of flag waving, beer-drinking bikers, he told the crowd that he had encouraged Cindy to participate in the nightly Miss Buffalo Chip bikini competition. He said, “I encouraged Cindy to compete. I told her with a little luck she could be the only woman ever to serve as first lady and Miss Buffalo Chip.” Perish the thought. This is the guy who is supposed to bring dignity back to the U.S. Presidency? It has been suggested that McCain may be much more at home in Sturgis than he is with the Christian conservatives. But either way, women are the losers in the equation.

The 2008 election is about so much more than exacting revenge out of some sense of misguided loyalty to one candidate. This election is not only critical for America, but also for American women. Returning America to the dark ages would be a disaster for both, and we are certainly headed there under McCain. I believe that Hillary Clinton would prefer a united Democratic party focused on beating John McCain, to a party that will defeat itself on so many fronts if its members misuse the ballot box to exact political revenge.

Writers Note: Barack Obama is fully pro-choice. For those concerned about Senator Biden, he has consistently supported a women’s right to choose. See NARAL Pro-Choice America president Nancy Keenan’s statement on Joe Biden here.