Veep watch: Tom Ridge negotiates the abortion tightrope on "Fox News Sunday"

During Saturday's Saddleback Civil Forum, Republican nominee-in-waiting John McCain responded emphatically when asked by Pastor Rick Warren: "At what point is a baby entitled to human rights?"

"At the moment of conception," McCain replied, to loud applause from the audience.

"As president of the United States, I will be a pro-life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies," he said. "That's my commitment, my commitment to you."

This is, of course, the same John McCain who was recently asked by the Weekly Standard -- a highly influential magazine among the party's conservative base -- about potential vice-presidential candidates and replied: "Tom Ridge is one of the great leaders, and he happens to be pro-choice. And I don't think that would necessarily rule Tom Ridge out."

Today, on "Fox News Sunday" ...

... host Chris Wallace asked Ridge, a former governor of Pennsylvania and the country's first Homeland Security secretary, about McCain's views and his own pro-choice position:

WALLACE: Given its long pro-life history, do you really think that the Republican Party would accept a pro-choice running mate?

RIDGE:  My friend of 25 years is passionately pro-life.  He is also passionately a believer that the Republican Party must have a big tent.  And I think, frankly, what he was just saying to the rest of the world is that we need to accept both points of view.

He's not judgmental about me or my belief. He just disagrees with me. And there's no doubt in my mind, no doubt whatsoever, that there would be -- he would have a strong pro-life administration.  No question about it.

WALLACE: And to answer my question specifically, do you think the Republican Party would accept a pro-choice running mate?

RIDGE: Well, I think that would be up to -- first of all, to John to decide whether he wants a pro-choice running mate, and then we would have to see how the Republican Party would rally around it. At the end of the day, I think the Republican Party will be comfortable with whatever John makes.

Later, Ridge described the #2 slot this way: "The last time I checked, the vice president is not an independent voice. He echoes the position of the president of the United States."

WALLACE: And that's what you would do if you were the running mate?

RIDGE: I think that's the responsibility of the vice president. If you're unwilling or unable to do that, then I think you should defer to someone else.

In the Weekly Standard interview, McCain also noted: "I think it's a fundamental tenet of our party to be pro-life, but that does not mean we exclude people from our party that are pro-choice."

Apparently, "we" also don't exclude the possibility of winning 21 electoral votes from Pennsylvania, a battleground state where Ridge remains popular.

-- Leslie Hoffecker

Photo credit: Freddie Lee / Fox News Sunday

Comments

[jefflz]

Ridge is the perfect partner for McCain.. the lame leading the blind. Maybe he will pass out some duct tape and plastic sheets as souvenirs of his tenure directing Homeland Security. I am surprised we haven't heard that Karl Rove, Ralph Reed or Phil Gramm are possible running mates since they are running his campaign from the sidelines. Why not . Mary Matalin for Secretary of State..Jason Corsi for Ambassador to the UN.... After eight nightmarish years of Bush it is astounding that there is any serious person who believes that a Bushie like McCain can run this country with or without the help of another blunderer like Ridge!! Enough is enough.

[JimBob James]

The federal government has no right to tell the states they cannot ban abortion, this goes against the constitution and the design of the USofA. The Federal government could decide that the right to life begins at conception and therefore abortion is denying a person their rights, that would be constitutional, though forcing an opinion on the states that is better left to the states. I will never vote for a democrat soley because of the kind of people they appoint to the courts. Democrat appointed judges go against the text and meaning of the constitution and make up their own meanings and reasonings behind their vote. They act like dictators not judges who follow the law.

[Gypsy Man]

It's unbelievable that Obama cannot answer a simple quesiton about when he thinks babies have "human rights," instead dodging it by saying it is "above my pay grade." If he is president, who is above his pay grade?

As Not WRIGHT for America points out, Obama clearly does not believe life begins at birth, that's why he voted agains the Infants Born Alive Protection Act. So when does he think life begins, 1 month, 1 year? Oh, that's right, above his pay grade! What he means is we should ask Planned Parenthood. That's who he takes orders from on this issue.

[Rajah]

Take his from me, if OBAMA does not choose Hillary Clinton for VP, he will lose the election, big time..

[Jeffersonian]

McCain says he is pro-life yet, of all the fine choices he could make for VP, he digs up this pro-death hack Tom Ridge ... and of course, there is no chance McCain will die in office so it is no issue to America ... right. Well, I'm done with Republicans now. They can kiss theirs sorry a**es goodbye. I was done with Dems long ago, but now the Republicans are Dems, so the Right will have to start a new party and kick all these losers out for good. Give Obama his 4 years and then watch the new party steamroll both of the establishment parties. May they go painfully into the night with weeping and gnashing of teeth.

My bumper will read: GOTO-HELL 2008

[Ginger K.]

If embryos have human rights at conception, can anyone explain to me why these church folks are not picketing and protesting fertility clinics where embryos are flushed down the sink every day. Why don't these people have funerals for these embryos? Why don't they baptize them? It's odd, don't you think?

[Dana Pintago]

I have a lot of difficulty believing Mc Cain. His words say one thing, his actions say another. Right now I am undecided. The candidates choice for Vice President will pretty much decide if I vote for Mc Cain or a third party candidate. Mc Cain's age only makes a difference when you consider that he may not be able to finish his full term of office. A pro choice VP will assure my vote goes to a third party unless Obama chooses Hillary for a running mate. In that case ,I would vote for Mc Cain regardless who he chooses for VP.

[Ben]

@jefflz:

You say:
"The Federal government could decide that the right to life begins at conception and therefore abortion is denying a person their rights, that would be constitutional, though forcing an opinion on the states that is better left to the states."

The only way the Supreme Court could say that life (and therefore human rights) begins at conception -- is if they listen to religion and not science. And our government, is not supposed to make policies based on any religion, but rather policies, that accommodate and protect whatever religion people choose.

Therefore -- any ruling about when "life" starts, would have to be based on science, not religion. And as far as science goes -- (and even common thinking) -- is that life starts AT BIRTH? Do you celebrate your conception day? No you celebrate your birth day.

I must admit, you are probably right, it should be left to the states -- BUT (BUT being the operative word here) if you are paying any attention to the Anti-Abortion movement -- thier goal is NOT for the federal Gov. to leave it to the states -- thier goal, is to get an ammendment to the consitution, that would ban for all states. So basically -- your argument, is it should be left to the states -- unless the federal government decides that it is OK, to include religious views, in the constitution, and therefore, "decide for the states" in that way.

The way I see it though -- banning it federally, would be even more constitutional, than forcing states to not ban it. Because a federal ban, could only be supported by religious, and therefore, non-scientific views.

And either way -- if you think life starts at conception -- DON'T GET AN ABORTION. But don't legislate what women can and can-not do with their own bodies. By banning abortion, whether at the state or federal level -- you are forcing your religious views (i.e. opinions) on others.

And if you are christian, and you really view abortion, as mass killing of innocent babies -- remember -- your own god is letting it happen -- and if he really wants it to stop -- he doesn't need your help.