“War on Women” 2.0: Obama attacks Romney on Planned Parenthood
The Obama campaign launched a television ad over the weekend attacking Mitt Romney for attacking Planned Parenthood.
Airing in seven battleground states (Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Ohio, Nevada, North Carolina, and Virginia), the ad manages in 30 seconds to hit Romney on several liberal reproductive talking points.
The well-crafted piece starts with a pitchwoman assailing Romney for opposing contraceptives. One must read over what she is saying (see above right) to know the complaint is actually about Romney’s opposition to the Obamacare contraception mandate.
The ad swiftly moves on to brand Planned Parenthood as America’s seemingly sole contraception distribution chain and then slams Romney for promising to defund it. It ends with Romney’s “Planned Parenthood, I’ll get rid of that” comment without any context, making it appear Romney is out to destroy PP (I wish)….
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YhDQJU1NlE[/youtube]
As CNN noted:
While once a supporter of abortion rights, Romney now says he believes life begins at conception and opposes abortion.
This marks the third commercial in the last month the Obama campaign has released targeting Romney on the issue, signaling the fierce competition between the two candidates over the crucial voting bloc of women.
A Fact checker called the ad “misleading.”
It is politically inexplicable that Obama would continue to hold Planned Parenthood so close with such abandon. Planned Parenthood is a powder keg. That it is the United States’ largest abortion provider is but one of PP’s controversies. Planned Parenthood has shown itself ugly in multiple undercover stings and is also under investigation in at least five states as well as the U.S. Congress.
In fact, were it not for Obama, PP would already be collapsing. He has delivered PP a cash cow via Obamacare. And if a state tries to defund PP, Obama either sues the state or goes around it to fund PP with federal dollars. Obama went so far as to threaten to hold up the entire U.S. budget to keep PP in it.
It is no wonder PP CEO Cecile Richards sounded a bit like Marilyn Monroe in an August 4 tweet…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4SLSlSmW74[/youtube]
I could even say there is some resemblance. But I digress.
Meanwhile, MSM appears not to notice the Obama campaign’s obsession with contraception and women’s “healthcare choices” (i.e., abortion). But if conservatives were to dare to broach the topic, they would be accused of ignoring what America really cares about, jobs and the economy. Or their words would be twisted.
Obama was audacious enough to write about his own audacity. Nowhere is that more on display than now. Here is a man who is so fanatical about abortion he endorses infanticide. Yet he dares to make the topic a focus.
There is much Romney could make of this. But he is not budging off message. In response to the ad, his spokeswoman told Politico:
One day after the unemployment rate increased and we reached 42 consecutive months with a jobless rate greater than 8%, it is not surprising that the Obama campaign would release a false ad in an attempt to distract from the effects of the President’s failed policies. Dishonest political attacks will not change the fact that President Obama has not turned around the economy, and his policies have hurt women and families all over the country.
Apparently, Romney is staying on message for good reason, despite the fact Democrats and Obama are taunting him in various ways – Bain, tax returns, and the supposed “war on women.”
I’ve previously written that the latter meme, launched late this winter, didn’t work. Indeed, Obama’s standing among women actually slid after he launched that attack. So he backed off. But apparently he is being forced back to it, for whatever his internal polls are showing. Likely he does not have much else. Back to Politico:
The Obama campaign initially sought to capitalize on the president’s already high approval rating among women by accusing Republicans of waging a ‘war’ on women, but has more recently focused on economic issues, Romney’s personal finances and his business record. The ad, in a sense, marks a return to the gender politics of earlier in the cycle.
Obama must hope Planned Parenthood can works its voodoo anti-Komen magic on Romney. But so far, nada.
I do think Romney can make something of Obama’s extreme views on abortion during the debate(s). Around that it is up to pro-life groups to spotlight Obama’s radical positions on abortion.

Jill,
I hope your platform will be even bigger than it was in 2008. Keep at it. We are behind you 100%.
-ttpl
Surprisingly, a website that should win a medal for taking things out of context is mad that a political ad took things out of context.
How ironic!
I’m looking forward to your post about the new Rasmussen (!) poll showing a new high of 52% of Americans self-identifying as pro-choice.
Here’s the link: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/abortion/new_high_52_are_pro_choice
Hmmm, should I believe Rasmussen (public opinion polling since 2003) - or George Gallup, who founded the American Institute of Public Opinion, the precursor of The Gallup Organization,in Princeton, New Jersey, in 1935.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/154838/Pro-Choice-Americans-Record-Low.aspx
Frebus -
In the Gallup poll, 77% said legal under certain, or legal under all.
Do you feel pro-life allows legal under certain?
I’ve seen some on this board say that a rape exception still is allowed under pro-life.
Thoughts?
I have doubts about the quality of Rasmussen’s polling myself (though nothing that would cause me to immediately discard any of its findings), but because it tends to lean towards conservative candidates and positions (whether intentionally or as a result of methodological quirks), it’s generally treated as gospel by many Republicans, which is why I found this particular result (not to mention this site’s silence about it) interesting.
This is going to be a long year…sigh.
Ex- do you think Obama for four more will reduce abortion? *honest question
Just hit me..people ” need” commercials to decide who to vote for! SMH
I don’t believe any poll that doesn’t ask appropriately specific questions regardless of the outcome. Asking “are you prolife?” or “Are you prochoice?” is far too vague to get a legitimate answer.
Priests for Life has a good compilation of polls here:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/statistics/polls.htm
How Rasmussen’s results have changed over the past couple of years:
August 2010 – 49% prochoice, 43% prolife
March 2011 – 44% prolife, 42% prochoice
August 2011 – 48% prochoice, 43% prolife
What a mess. Why even bother doing a poll with this wording? You might as well ask people what’s their favorite color and act like the results mean something.
I’m looking forward to your post about the new Rasmussen (!) poll showing a new high of 52% of Americans self-identifying as pro-choice.
52% of likely voters, not 52% of Americans. I think it shows that more pro-life adults need to become voters rather than grousing about Romney’s shortcomings.
In the Gallup poll, 77% said legal under certain, or legal under all. Do you feel pro-life allows legal under certain? I’ve seen some on this board say that a rape exception still is allowed under pro-life. Thoughts?
Of course not, Ex-GOP! Nobody is allowed to call themselves pro-life until they go through the investiture ceremony, where we hand them their plaques and baby feet pins. For someone that’s been here so long, it’s pretty shocking that you don’t know that.
Seriously though, I believe the term “pro-life” is generally understood to refer to the position that abortion should generally be illegal. “Pro-choice” refers to the position that elective abortion should generally be legal. Some people are against abortion on demand but support legal abortion in certain cases (life of the mother, rape, extreme fetal abnormalities). They would be considered pro-life. Likewise, some people support abortion on demand but would favour certain legal restrictions (bans on late-term abortions, parental consent laws, Hyde Amendment). They would be considered pro-choice. So the two terms are somewhat vague and limited, as there are more than two possible positions one could hold on abortion.
The 77% statistic from the Gallup poll doesn’t really say anything. “Legal under certain or all” would include the position that abortion should be legal iff it’s necessary to save the mother’s life. I support this position, as do most pro-life organizations. If abortion was legal only in the first trimester in cases of rape, the law would be unjust and need to be changed. But that 77% would also include the position that abortion should be legal and unrestricted throughout all nine months. This is what groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL support, and I would not support this position. So that factoid is even more vague (and less useful) than the labels “pro-life” and “pro-choice”.
The excerpt from Marilyn Monroe reminds me of something sad about her life: she had abortions. Later, when she badly wanted to carry to term and give birth, she suffered miscarriage after miscarriage. Thomas Noguchi in his autopsy noted “a history of multiple abortion.” The biography “Goddess” gives the number os abortions as 13!
Before anyone jumps on this to show that abortion should be legal — since it was illegal during her time — perhaps we should use it instead to underline the vital importance of PREVENTING PREGNANCIES in those who are not prepared to carry to term and give birth. As I’ve pointed out previously, no woman gets an abortion who is not pregnant. And a happily pregnant woman is unlikely to WANT to abort.
Marilyn Monroe should inspire us to work to ensure that the woman who get pregnant are those who greet the news with joy.
Hmm, those results are very volatile by year. Polls routinely show though that a majority of Americans don’t agree with abortions done for reasons of convenience, abortions past the first trimester, etc. It’s clear most Americans just don’t know a lot about the issue, because if they were able to vote their beliefs, they would ban 90% of abortions tomorrow. The only reason abortion is hanging on is because of the cruel sob stories told by abortion supporters to justify the needless death. If you guys embraced true compassion for both mother and child instead of the “compassion” of “kill it!”, abortion would be history. Why not give it a try for a month and see how it suits you, wouldn’t it be nice if mothers didn’t think that killing their own child was the answer to their problems? Why do abortion supporters otherwise talk about compassion, and looking out for those worse off, and tolerance, and hope for a better future, but when it comes to abortion turn into pessimistic fatalists? Wouldn’t it be nice to say no more babies have to have their arms and legs torn off today because they were inconvenient for someone else’s desires?
Dear Cecile,
Abortion is not healthcare.
You do not speak for me.
Gosh, with all the echoing going on, I seem to have missed the answer. Do tell,
Will 4 more years of Obama reduce abortion? If one is a pro-lifer, should one vote for Cecile Richard’s candidate? Waiting to hear.
Carla,
Abortion is health care. You do not speak for me.
John Lewandowski – I completely agree with your 12:48 remarks. Semantics and lack of empathy is at the heart of this issue. People will avoid the truth every which way possible. Justice is only complete at the final judgement, where no squirt room is possible.
AMY.
Since when is having your “un-ripe” cervix forced open introducing chemicals into your system, having your uterus scraped, and having your own child torn to pieces HEALTHY???
The politician-in-chief of Chicago-style thug politics and his Dead Babies R Us crew are just warming up you guys. It is going to be a nasty next 3 months. “Strap it down” and get ready for a slimey political battle of mammoth proportions. Those of you who are Christian prolifers please pray. God help all the unborn, the churches standing for Biblical standards and this nation if he is re-elected. You ain’t seen nothing yet. But as the song says “our God is greater, our God is stronger”. 2 Chron. 7:14 ”If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray, seek my face, turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and heal their land.”
Abortion is healthcare like Mao Zedong’s Great Leap brought health to China by killing off 50+ million people. You have to be completely insane to think killing off other people brings health and prosperity.
Given that kind of logic, James Holmes must be seriously healthy by now – right Amy?
Hope you get well soon.
Someone says he’s pro-life but wants us to vote for the Celebrity in Chief, who is the most anti-neonate leader in the world today. Someone claims to be pro-life but has never met an abortionist, abortion, or abortion-apologist that he doesn’t like more than pro-lifers. We are still waiting for the answer:
Will 4 more years of Obama reduce abortion? If one is a pro-lifer, should one vote for Cecile Richard’s candidate? Waiting to hear.
I suspect the answer is: “Why should we want to reduce abortion? That would imply there’s something wrong with it. Just because I let my kids live to take their first breath, that doesn’t mean that other parents should be barred from snuffing theirs.”