[ad_1]
The question was simple, straightforward, and predictable: “Would you support a federal ban on abortions?” And yet, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, who has formed a committee to explore running for the GOP presidential nomination, responded as if it was the first and only time that he had heard the question.
Scott’s answer was mostly gobbledygook: “I would simply say that, the fact of the matter is when you look at the issue of abortion, one of the challenges we have, we continue to go to the most restrictive conversations without broadening the scope and taking a look at the fact that I’m 100 percent pro-life, I never walk away from that, but the truth of the matter is that when you look at the issue of abortion, I start with a very important conversation I had in a Banking hearing where I was sitting in my office and listening to Janet Yellen, the secretary of the Treasury, talk about increasing the labor force participation rate for African American women, who are in poverty, by having abortions. I think we are having the wrong conversations.”
Excuse me? What the heck did he say? And how the hell did Yellen get into Scott’s answer?
Scott was appointed (by then-Gov. Nikki Haley) to fill a Senate vacancy in 2013. He won a special election in 2014, as well as two other Senate contests, in 2016 and 2022. This is a guy who is experienced and, yes, even thoughtful. He’s not part of the “crazy caucus.” He’s low-key and willing to work across the aisle.
But if you have been in the U.S. Senate for years, have run multiple campaigns, and want to be president of the United States, you must have a better answer to whether you would support a “federal ban on abortions.” Even if you are trying to duck and cover to avoid answering the question, you certainly should have something reasonably coherent in your reply.
[ad_2]
Source link
