<\body> Stories in America: Is Bush Against Birth Control?

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

Is Bush Against Birth Control?

The treasurer of Planned Parenthood, when it launched its first national fundraising campaign in 1947, was none other than Prescott Bush, father and grandfather of the two Bush presidents.
Prescott Bush won a Senate seat two years later, and his son George and daughter-in-law Barbara continued to support Planned Parenthood even after George's election to Congress from Texas. In fact, he was such an advocate for family planning that some House colleagues gave him the nickname "Rubbers."

But as he began to position himself for the White House within the increasingly conservative GOP, he gradually began to identify himself as averse to abortion -- first by opposing Medicare funding for abortion except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother, and ultimately by acceding to presidential nominee Ronald Reagan's demand that, as his vice presidential nominee, Bush embrace the GOP platform's call for a constitutional amendment against abortion.
Of course George W. supports birth control, but he'll never admit it.

From Bush V. Choice:
Is Bush opposed to birth control?

Amazingly, the President still hasn't answered this question.

38 members of Congress, led by Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), sent President Bush a letter asking him whether he is for or against birth control.

This is the fourth letter sent to Bush on the subject since White House Press Secretary Scott McLellan refused to answer this question earlier this year.

“I thought that in the 21st century, answering a straightforward question about birth control would be easy, but apparently it isn't for the Leader of the Free World," said Maloney. "I was hoping that the president would be able to answer whether or not he supports birth control in less than 165 days. Since we received no response, we have to ask again."

I wouldn't hold your breath for an answer. Sigh.

8 Comments:

At 12/21/2005 6:57 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And whether or not Bush supports birth control is important....why again?

 
At 12/21/2005 7:44 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Off subject...but there's an interesting article here about the Red State/Blue State divide and the liberal/conservative media tilt. Any thoughts Rose?...

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=122005B

 
At 12/21/2005 8:32 AM, Anonymous tea said...

Do you really have to ask? He says he's against abortion. Let's get rid of it. He says he's against stem cell research. Let's avoid it. He says he's against assisted suicide (at the patient's request). Let's not allow it even though the state of OR voted for it.

 
At 12/21/2005 9:38 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, you think that if Bush is against birth control he's going to get rid of it? That he even could?

Apparently I lack the requisite paranoia to take this supposed possibility seriously.

 
At 12/21/2005 11:14 AM, Anonymous tea said...

Get rid of it completely? No. Limit access to it? Absolutely.

Do a google search.

 
At 12/21/2005 12:42 PM, Blogger storiesinamerica said...

I believe the red state/blue state divide is a media creation. The number of people who didn't vote in 2004 surpassed the number who voted for Bush, so how can we say we're divided? Some of the people I met on my trip this summer think everyone in California is liberal because it's so blue on the electoral map. Bush got 45% of the vote here. We're purple.

 
At 12/21/2005 1:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well tia, I googled my bestest, and I'm still not convinced I should start hording condoms to insure I remain child-free for the duration of the Bush presidency.

I'm not sure what you're specifically referring to, but it looks like much of these "limited access" articles I've googled up have more to do with who pays for it, (and how), than anything else. I don't mean to shock anyone, but there are quite a few people who have no objections to birth control that have real problems with the notion that the government should have a role in deciding who pays for it.

Regardless -- I don't think investors will be hedging their bets on the stock prices of pharmaceutical companies for fear that "limited access" would cause any serious downturn in the contraceptive's market.

Not in my lifetime, anyway.

 
At 12/21/2005 1:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see why you think that the blue/red divide isn't primarily a state thing, but the rural/city divide does seem to have some validity.

And just because there are many people in California who don't follow baseball, it doesn't mean there's not a real divide between San Francico Giants fans, and Los Angeles Dodger fans.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home