Litmus Test, McAuliffe StyleDec 10, 2014
The headline of the Richmond Times Dispatch, an ardent supporter and apologist for what it calls “reproductive liberty,” screamed “McDonnell appoints anti-abortion doctor to board of health.” The story included hysterical quotes from the usual suspects in the $2 billion abortion industry about how horrible it was that McDonnell could appoint someone who was “ideological,” and how it was a “shocking conflict of interest.” Virginia’s media ran with it. How dare the governor have a “litmus test” and require that his appointees reflect, you know, his beliefs. How unpatriotic. The fact that the appointee, Dr. John Seeds, has over 40 years experience as an OB/GYN and was the head of the OB/GYN department at the Medical College of Virginia? Irrelevant.
Flash forward to Terry McAuliffe.
Since taking office, McAuliffe has made six appointments to the Board of Health, one of whom is a former board member for a chapter of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest provider of, umm, “reproductive liberty” (don’t say abortion, apparently it doesn’t focus group well). Planned Parenthood has five “clinics” in Virginia that must adhere to the abortion center health and safety standards that the new board member from Planned Parenthood will be considering. But nope, no conflict of interest there, at least not one worth reporting.
Last week, his excellency appointed former state Senator Mary Margaret Whipple. Her abortion voting record would make Wendy Davis blush. Whipple even voted against “Connor’s Law,” which made it illegal to intentionally murder someone’s wanted unborn child. Whipple was appointed to the board to represent the hospitals. Her expertise? Well none, when it comes to actual understanding of how a hospital runs. Her knowledge comes from being a paid lobbyist for the hospital association.
Litmus tests, McAuliffe style, are not only expected, but renowned by the media:
Whatever their ultimate impact, McAuliffe’s actions are a striking departure from those of McDonnell, an opponent of abortion.
The Republican also appointed like-minded people to the health board, but always tiptoed around whether abortion was a factor in doing so.
McAuliffe, elected with help from abortion rights groups, made no pretense of ignoring the litmus test, stating flatly that his appointees reflected his views not only on abortion but also on the need to review the clinic regulations.
Our guess is that such a festive attitude toward the abortion litmus test will disappear around the time the next pro-life governor takes office.