This is Carol Fowler, the South Carolina Democratic Party Chairperson. Fowler said today that Senator John McCain had chosen Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate because her primary qualification is she hasn’t had an abortion.
Carol Fowler
It seems that South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler suffers from PDS — a condition also known as “Palin Derangement Syndrome.” It occurs in those who also suffer from the common but tragic desease “BDS.”
Fowler, who should know better but obviously doesn’t, reportedly lashed out at Sarah Palin saying the Republican vice presidential candidate’s “primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.â€? She also said that John McCain’s decision to choose an abortion rights opponent would not boost his candidacy among many women. This of course refers to Sarah Palin — a self-described “hockey momâ€? and mother of five children — who gave birth April 18 to her youngest child, Trig, diagnosed with Down syndrome.
But thankfully the outrage has been swift and sure. The shrill efforts of Ms. Fowler to demean Governor Palin and wipe out all of her accomplishments because she disagrees with the NARAL crowd is again evidence of the unhinged.
Fowler issued the obligatory apology but of course any damage was done.
“I personally admire and respect the difficult choices that women make everyday, and I apologize to anyone who finds my comment offensive,� she said in a written statement. “I clumsily was making a point about people in South Carolina who may vote based on a single issue. Whether it’s the environment, the economy, the war or a woman’s right to choose, there are people who will cast their vote based on a single issue. That was the only point I was attempting to make.�
I guess South Carolinians who are one-issue voters, Pro-Life, are wrong to be so? Thankfully, Mrs. Fowler isn’t “The Decider.”
Interestingly, Carol Fowler is the wife of Don Fowler, former National Democratic Party Chair who was also forced to apologize after being captured on an amateur video during an airplane flight chuckling while saying,
“Hurricane Gustav is going to hit New Orleans about the time the Republican National Convention starts. … That just demonstrates God is on our side.�
We blogged about that here at RightPundits. I guess a rabid form of foot-in-mouth disease runs in the Fowler family.
Carol Fowler Photos
Photos: South Carolina Democratic Party website
September 10th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
The gift that never stops giving! Thank you Democrats.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
what a moron. Obama will give his classic speech about distancing himself, I’m sure.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
This is not the Chairperson that I once knew.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Okay. WHY have we let the abortion issue run elections? Conservatives, I understand if you feel it is your moral imperative to prevent abortions. But there are lots of moral imperatives out there: you’re being selective. As are liberals. Liberals feel it their moral imperative to protect society from the negative consequences of criminalizing abortion. But is protecting the right to choose worth it, when you consider the cost? No matter how strongly you feel about abortion either way, should this issue be trumping all other issues when it comes to choosing a leader? I want my president to be good at lots of things: preventing nuclear attacks, improving the education system, cutting the deficit, and improving the economy. Importance of the president’s stance on abortion with respect to these capabilities? Zero.
I understand where Fowler is coming from because the fact that Sarah has lived out her pro-life values seems to be all that Republicans talk about when they list their reasons for supporting her. I’m not trying to sling mud. It truly baffles me. Then I think, well, liberals would never select a leader that wasn’t pro-choice. Many liberals would list pro-choice values as one of the most important attributes of a political candidate.
We have to wise up, people! There are bigger fish to fry. Beating our breasts about abortion gets us nowhere.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
June - I agree. The bigger fish to fry is the Global War on Terrorism. Here again, McCain-Palin win. But them, most of us have one or more issues that we see the defining issues of our times.
I DO think that Obama’s life-birth abortion stance is over the line of human decency. And this from the very same people who are outraged at the ‘cruelty’ of Sarah Palin hunting animals. I don’t get how they view animal lives as more valuable than human babies.
However, you are right, the President has very little impact on those issues … expect through the appointment of Supreme Court judges - which is one more reason this is an important election.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
June, I’ve actually argued that for years (damn, I’ve agreed with you twice today:P). While I strongly disagree with abortion, my view is more nuanced then most on this side of the isle. No way no how is Roe ever going to be overturned, no matter what. The principle of stare decisis is too entrenched in our legal value system, at least it is for someone who believes in legal orginalism (note that Scalia is a textualist, not an orginalist, makes a big different in legal jurisprudence). So, for me, abortion has never been high on my list, taxes, foriegn policy and federalism (in the form of smaller federal governments and more autonomy to state governments) always rates higher on my list of things I want from a candidate.
I know a lot of folks though, that would never ever vote for someone who is pro-choice, period. This is why McCain could not have chosen Liebermann, this is why Guiliani didn’t really ever have a chance, because the core evangelical base will stay at home before they would ever vote for a pro-choice candidate. I’ve tried reasoning with them, if the candidate is more or less on agreement with you about other things, and the Democrat is certainly going to expaind abortion rights, why not at least vote against the Democrat. That talk typically falls on deaf ears.
September 10th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Beth- liberals don’t value animal lives more than human babies. Well, I take that back, I think some do- their argument is that animals are more innocent than humans, even babies, by virtue of animals not having consciences. Now that I think about it, it’s an original sin argument. Animals never, and never will, sin. Unborn babies already have. If life begins at conception, doesn’t sin as well? But anyway. Those people are in the way waaaay liberal fringe. Most pro-choice liberals see abortion as a tolerable evil (tolerable in certain circumstances like China’s basic need to control its population, or as a humane way to allow victims of incest or rape to move on, and tolerable simply from the view that since people will do it anyway, safe procedures should be made available to the poor as well as the rich), just people across the aisles, as Bryan would put it, view war as a tolerable evil. Killing animals for sport, on the other hand is, well, gratuitous. No one takes pleasure in having abortions or does it for fun. Not saying abortion is right or that hunting for sport is unjustifiable; just trying to explain the distinction from a liberal perspective.
But I’m not convinced Roe v. Wade won’t be overturned. Scalia may be a textualist, but the next few justices? And the next? They could be anything- including total wack jobs. Stare decisis can’t be that much of an obstacle. It just takes some twisted logic and poof! Out with precedent. And twisted logic- there’s plenty of that to go around.
Bryan- well heck I’ll agree with you too, at least on the unshakable views of the evangelicals toward abortion. I appreciate your intellectual honesty, as well as the smiley faces.
September 10th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
“There are bigger fish to fry.”
well obama does support infanticide …
babies are bigger
September 10th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
June, it is Carol Fowler’s remarks which imply this is a single-issue election for her. It’s all about Sarah Palin’s abortion views? I don’t know anyone who thinks that other that Democrats like Carol Fowler.
September 11th, 2008 at 8:26 am
No, McCain, Carol Fowler didn’t imply this is a single issue election for her. She said that it’s s single issue election for Republicans, because abortion is all Republicans seem to care about. She implied that Sarah Palin’s opposing abortion is the only reason many people are planning to vote for McCain. Is that a gross distortion of the truth?
September 11th, 2008 at 8:55 am
It’s false which is why she apologized. The only people yapping about abortion in this election are Democrats. For the rest of us this election is about our economic future and foreign policy, not social issues, for better or worse.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
“She implied that Sarah Palin’s opposing abortion is the only reason many people are planning to vote for McCain. Is that a gross distortion of the truth?”
yes it is.
i am voting for Palin because obama is a sexist pig
September 13th, 2008 at 1:37 am
Fowler needs to keep her flap shut. She made the most stupid statment I have ever heard. She should have said something like. “I am Carol Fowler and I agree with murdering unborn babies. Babies have no rights because I have not met them and they cannot vote. But, animals have rights because they cannot speak for themselves”.
Her mother should have had an abortion so we wouldn’t have her standing at a podium talking trash.
She needs to resign for this offensive remark.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Abortion Carol….you’re mother should have had one.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:27 pm
[...] repulsive statement that her primary qualification to be vice president appears to be she hasn’t had an abortion the possibility is not so remote as I once would have thought it to be. But I am heartened for the [...]