In Defense of Michael Steele
12:25 PM, Mar 12, 2009 • By JOHN MCCORMACK
Ben Smith pointed out the following exchange between Michael Steele and a reporter from GQ:
Under fire from pro-lifers, Steele has now issued a statement to clarify his remarks:
Ed Morrissey writes: "The two statements cannot be reconciled with each other. They are mutually exclusive. And Steele has offered both as his views in two successive days."
I disagree. Steele was asked whether there is a right to abortion--not whether there ought to be a right to abortion. Under the current legal regime dictated by the Supreme Court, abortion is an "individual choice" throughout all nine months of pregnancy for effectively any reason. In the GQ interview, was Steele simply stating the fact that abortion is an individual choice or expressing support for the laws that make it so? Steele wasn't perfectly clear, but it's clear from the entire GQ transcript that he's making an argument in favor of choosing life over abortion.
It's been a rough couple of weeks for Steele, and maybe it would be a good idea if he heeded Jay Cost's advice and realized the primary role of the RNC is fundraising rather than doing as many interviews as possible. Nothing will do so much to reconcile Steele to Republicans as electoral victory.