Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) sat down with David Gregory on "Meet the Press" yesterday, and though he had to know the question was coming, the Republican still struggled to defend his record on forced ultrasounds.
The host asked the governor a pretty straightforward question: "You backed an abortion bill initially that included a very invasive procedure as part of an ultrasound that the state would have required and then you backed off of that. Were you wrong to support that initially or did you simply back off because the political heat got turned up the way it did?"
Under the circumstances, that was hardly an unfair inquiry. McDonnell had announced his support for a measure that would have required women in Virginia to undergo a state-mandated vaginal probe in order to terminate a pregnancy. Once the proposal generated a national controversy, the governor dropped his support and opted for a different forced-ultrasound measure.
Despite weeks of debate, McDonnell struggled with Gregory's question, repeatedly trying to change the subject. For those who can't watch clips online, the full transcript is available, but after repeated exchanges, the Virginia governor eventually offered this underwhelming defense.
GREGORY: This was the state of the Virginia mandating women have an additional procedure, a mandated health procedure. I thought that's exactly what conservatives opposed?
McDONNELL: David, this was about stating what informed consent is and saying that women have a right to know certain things before a procedure. Every invasive procedure has an informed consent requirement.
This was the best the Republican could do, and after these two sentences, McDonnell changed the subject again.
The Virginian obviously still hopes to be added to his party's presidential ticket, but before McDonnell packs his bags for Tampa, he'll need a more coherent explanation of his record.
He publicly endorsed a proposal to require women, against the wishes of physicians, to undergo an invasive, medically-unnecessary procedure, because some right-wing culture warriors want to shame patients. McDonnell ended up signing an only-slightly-less outrageous measure that still requires Virginians to undergo state-mandated, medically-unnecessary ultrasounds, to satisfy the demands of far-right activists.
Asked about this, the governor argues that "women have a right to know" about their pregnancy? McDonnell's defense is, in effect, big-government paternalism?
Good luck with the vetting process, gov.
Leave a Comment:
Perhaps the Governor would understand the outrage over the "procedure" if he were to ask his doctor for Viagra:
"Okay, Governor, but before I write the prescription, I'll just need to attach these jumper cables to the "faulty" equipment."
Ultrasound Bob has trouble explaining his non-tenable position because there is no way to justify government mandated medical rape. As for his "women have a right to know" argument about their pregnancy, my guess is that women know all about it without the State of Virginia (or any other state) offering a helping hand - or jamming a device inside her. For a suppoesedly small government guy, Gov. McDonnell sure like big, intrusive and nosy government.
What a hypocrite.
I have a feeling he forgot that women can vote. He completely discounted the importance of this issue to HALF the population.
Grrrrr....
We only pushed for this because ...well you know there would have been some resistance to hanging a big red "H" for harlot around their necks and forcing them to buy "Whore - Babykiller" license plates.
We're against big government unless it is Republican.
Modern republicans are the new big government supporters. They want to legislate who you can marry, how you reproduce and even where you can build churches. They want a government so big that George Orwell would be shocked.
From chastity belts in the dark ages, to today's vaginal probes...funny how even in modern times, men lay claim to something that isn't theirs.
That's GOP progress for you though...
IOKIYAR
Hypocrisy
Big government
Can't someone just ask him, "Why, if women are presumed incapable of making an informed decision about their own pregnancies, are men presumed capable of writing legislation regarding it?"
While the invasive nature of the procedure is worth ridicule, the assumption the idea rests on should be given it's own scrutiny. This bill presumes that women aren't capable of making their own reproductive choices without a man's help.
Correction:
"...that women are not capable of making their own reproductive choices
without a man's help."Which is why the reich wing position is that old, white men are the only ones capable.
The party of small government and no regulations has an issue called hypocrisy.....
They can tell a woman they are going to decide something about her body, while saying that we have no buisness protecting everyone's health from polution, or the speculators that dirve up prices on commodities that pay these ridiculous low taxes??
I DO NOT understand how they are able to get otherwise intelligent folks to go along wiht these types of farces.
The other party isn't the best either - makes me want to start a third party for moderate Americans that wants a reasonably sized government, that takes care of our country first ( close 3/4 of the foreign military bases) and promotes progressive causes to grow our people and economy.
Steven, you sound so.... reasonable. :)
While I appreciate the focus that the Maddow Blog and Rachel Maddow on tv does on Governor Ultrasound...
please begin to cover the outrage in Arizona and Kansas - putting into law that women cannot be told - BY THEIR DOCTOR- about things in her pregnancy that could lead to abortion.
How can you defend an indefensible position such as "forced state sanctioned rape"?!? You can't hence, he has NO WORDS.....So much for "small government"......
Why aren't men forced to watch the ultrasounds? There are some couples who come to this decision together. There are even men who push for the abortion. Has anyone ever suggested that they should 'have the right to know' what they are doing?
Maybe an unnecessary probe thrown in for good measure.
There goes the big government in our bedrooms menace known as the Republican Brand a la Trans-Vaginal Bob!
Ol' TVBob puts forth an argument that is even worse than his sponsored bill:
A governmental definition of "informed consent" being enforced by the state through an unnecessary medical procedure middle aged men like him believe a woman needs before she enters into the medical care of her own doctor seems rather over the top for a small government brand! What rubble!
No, TVBob, I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, a woman is "informed" about her own medical conditions (she knows her own body as you my dear TVBob know yours), and then "consents" in the privacy shared between herself and her doctor to medical procedures necessary for her health care.
You my dear sir are using government to intrude into the lives of women citizens, and as an avowed conservative, your actions are hypocritical at the least and dangerously unprincipled at the worse! For a man who projects moral decency, Ol' TVBob is being a bit amoral and politically opportunistic on this matter! -Kevo
Re the general debate about abortion/contraception.
I think it's time to be more intrusive and get out the hypocracy detector.
I think the Republican candidates should be asked if any women (wives/daughters etc) in their families have taken, at any time, prescribed contraception medication for a medical condition.
I wouldn't normally advocate bringing candidates' families into the spotlight but the candidates have themselves raised contraception/abortion as an election issue. Also, as 98% of American women have taken contraception there is a very good chance someone in a candidate's family has. If so, I smell hypocracy.
We could even leave the families out of the discussion. Just ask the men if they make sure their mistresses use contraception. Or how many abortions they've paid for.
We could start with David Vitter---did he make sure his prostitutes were on the pill? How anti-abortion would he be if he'd gotten one pregnant?
McDonnell also forgot to wash the ky-jelly off of his hair.
Bob's graduate thesis should have scared the pants off everyone in the state. He contends that he mellowed with age, but it's pretty obvious that he didn't. http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/politics/McDonnell-Fornicator-Paper-Makes-Race-Interesting-56318427.html
What should scare us more is that the social agenda legislature being pumped out by TeaGOPs in many states is coming from Americans United for Life. If you look at their model legislation, you can see all these bills are identical. Take a look at the list of accolades for their state by state plan. http://www.aul.org/defending-life/
For the source of this social agenda Google:
David Barton, Christian Nationalism, Theocratic Right, Christian Theocracy, Christian Reconstructionism, or Christian Dominionism. You might also look up From The Changing of the Guard: Biblical Principles for Political Action by George Grant, published in 1987 by Dominion Press. Grant pretty much laid out the road map being followed by the Theocratic Right candidates.
And no - this is not a cabal - nothing secret about it - the goals are publicly available - just google. One warning - in Changing of the Guard - the first 49 pages is a little like John Wayne in McLintock "We don't want a Theocracy, We don't want a Theocracy ... then page 50 wham! - We want Dominion!.
Keep in mind - all of this is about converting Federal First Amendment Rights into individual state legislated "Privileges" determined by the tyranny of the 51%.
Here is another zealot who decided he could screw a lot more people as a politician than as a priest.
As a Virginian who participated in protests against this and other similar bills, I can assure you that "Bob for Jobs" has been about Bob in my personal reproductive business. Due to heat, the assembly or senate managed to put aside or ditch each of these bills, except this one. They changed this legislation from state-mandated rape to state-mandated jelly-belly, which most insurance won't cover because it's an unnecessary procedure. Because 50% of women obtaining abortions are considered at poverty level or below, this means that the cost of their abortions just increased $500 for a medically unnecessary procedure that will not show the fetus anyway. 90% of all abortions are performed in the first trimester when you can't see anything via a jelly-belly ultrasound. These bills are designed to humiliate women.
"Women have a right to know certain things." Okay, they know that they are in the early stages of pregnancy, they know that they are not presently prepared to have a child, and they know that abortion is legal and performed by a doctor. Isn't that enough "informed consent"?
What are you talking about? The very fact that she's seeking an abortion is evidence in and of itself that she is either an immoral skank who deserves to be imprisoned, mentally ill, or a moron who doesn't realize that abortion is murder! Thank goodness we have Republican men telling all of us women what we should be thinking and doing. Otherwise we'd just become so overwhelmed by our emotions we'd never be able to make decisions!
#sarcasm
; )
The radical zealot Maddow's attempt to demonize Gov McDonnell== fail.
Bob McDonnell's approval ratings remain sky high, and he was recently listed as #1 on the leading "Veepstakes" listing.
The Virginia law mirrors that of at least 7 other states. Also, over 20 states require an ultrasound to determine the age of the fetus.
McDonnell when he found out that the bill might involve invasive procedures, he lobbied to change it. There was no flip flop.
The entire reason why the vaginal ultrasound was to be required in the first place is because the belly ultrasound isn't going to produce viable imagery for the vast majority of abortions. The majority of abortions take place between 3-12 weeks which belly ultrasounds are not capable of displaying. Therefore the only way to get a reliable image is to use the vaginal probe. If these images are truly to 'inform' women then there would be no logic behind forcing women to undergo ultrasound bills on the belly since it won't produce any information. So either he's an idiot who doesn't understand the legislation he's proposing OR he's a hypocrite who doesn't want to fess up to his intentions because it's not politically popular.
Additionally an ad populum argument isn't going to make your side's argument more valid. Arguing that other states do it doesn't suddenly make what the other state's do a. ethical or b. relevant. Additionally you are making the assumption that what other state's do isn't also being driven by the same anti-woman sentiment.
McDonnell will not be the VP candidate. If Romney were to nominate him, the Republicans would lose the election by a landslide. Women voters are the largest block of voters and they are more likely to vote than any other group of voters.