John McCain, the flip flopper Part 2: Abortion
Welcome to Part 2 of my continuing series, John McCain, the flip flopper. Part 1 can be found here.
In 1999, McCain was in New Hampshire, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a moderate. He proclaimed himself a pro-life candidate, but told reporters that “in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade.” He explained that overturning Roe would force “women in America to have illegal and dangerous operations.” Now, campaigning for President as a conservative, McCain has flip flopped again. Once again, McCain had a stance based on his conscience, not on his party and comes down on the right side of the issue. Then, to appease the Republican base he changes his mind.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask one question about abortion. Then I want to turn to Iraq. You’re for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.
MCCAIN: Rape, incest and the life of the mother. Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So is President Bush, yet that hasn’t advanced in the six years he’s been in office. What are you going to do to advance a constitutional amendment that President Bush hasn’t done?
MCCAIN: I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support…. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states.
Don’t you miss the old McCain? He no longer qualifies to be called a “maverick” by the media, he’s now just your standard Republican, prepared to say anything to get elected.

April 25th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
[…] off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states. Dont you miss the old McCain?… source: John McCain, the flip flopper Part 2: Abortion, Mere […]
May 1st, 2008 at 2:57 pm
So why do you feel it’s so horrible to believe it’s a state’s rights issue instead of a federal issue?