Cosmopolitan magazine, known for insightful, thought-provoking articles on current events, the state of our economy, and issues affecting societal standards is set to release endorsements for the upcoming midterm elections.
Wait, hold on. Let’s redo that.
The women’s magazine, Cosmopolitan, known for touting fashion advice, intermixed with dating, sex, and makeup columns, culminated with articles on the latest celebrity crushes and break-ups is set to release endorsements for the upcoming midterm elections.
You read that correctly. Cosmopolitan magazine recently told Politico that beginning September 8, the magazine will publish one to three endorsements every week for political candidates until the November midterm elections. And what is the criterion to which one must adhere to receive such a coveted endorsement? The criteria has been established by the editorial staff – as suspected, the relevant stances include being against voter-ID laws, yet, in favor of equal pay legislation, support of abortion-inducing birth control coverage, and unsurprisingly, abortion-on-demand.
The magazine, first published in 1886, became dedicated solely to women in 1960, and in recent years has decidedly favored abortion. In June 2013, after Wendy Davis’ failed attempt to stop Pro-Life legislation in Texas, Cosmo deemed Davis their “hero.”
When asked by Politico if a candidate who matched all of the above criteria, except on the abortion issue, would qualify for an endorsement, Cosmo’s editor said, “no, thanks.”
“We’re not going to endorse someone who is pro-life because that’s not in our readers’ best interest,” Odell said. “[P]eople say that’s a liberal thing, but in our minds its [sic]not about liberal or conservative, it’s about women having rights, and particularly with health care because that is so important. All young women deserve affordable easy access to health care, and that might include terminating a pregnancy, and that’s OK.”
Also, not in the best interest of their readers: assuming that your magazine knows what each and every interest, best or worst, is for the 30 million readers you have each month.
While endorsements from the likes of Cosmopolitan may sound trivial, the fact that the editors of the magazine are even considering branching into the political realm shows how much citizens rely on third-party recommendations when casting votes. With a large reader base – in the demographic on which the left thinks they have staked their claim – Cosmo’s move makes a lot of sense.
Political endorsements have proven to be key elements in a person’s viability as a candidate, positively affecting electability to office. And in our high-tech, fast-paced world, the ability to lean on endorsements is much less daunting than researching every aspect of a candidate’s platform.
Each election year, Pro-Life Texans look to Texas Right to Life for candidates who have proven their commitment to advancing and protecting Life. Some have strong, long-standing voting records; others have given their time and family to promote Life in their communities. However, each candidate endorsed by Texas Right to Life meets the highest criterion that ensures the commitment to advance the Life of preborn Texans, limiting the abortion industry’s access to tax dollars, and improving the health and safety of women.
Because candidates know Pro-Life Texans trust Texas Right to Life’s judgment and endorsements, those running for office seek Texas Right to Life’s endorsement based on our unwavering and staunch commitment to electing solid, 100% Pro-Life advocates.
Cosmopolitan is veering into new territory by placing candidate endorsements next to lipstick ads, yet, the goal is clear: to sway Americans into voting for candidates who do not see Life as a priority.
Texas Right to Life has a long-standing record and commitment to promoting Life – without compromising. The newly minted political meanderings of Cosmopolitan hold no clout when compared to steadfast Pro-Life advocates who never waver in the fight for Life.