Conservatives Need to Rally Behind Sue Lowden

Conservatives have a number of opportunities for victories in 2010, but none is more important than the chance to defeat Senate majority leader Harry Reid. We must rally behind the right candidate to ensure that we not only defeat Reid but also gain a solid conservative senator. That candidate is Sue Lowden.

I have known Sue and her family for years. I know that she has the fortitude to take on Reid and withstand the onslaught that he and his allies will unleash against her. More importantly, I know that she has strong conservative principles rooted in her personal faith and her belief in free-market ideals. (Sue recently spoke with a group of Nevada tea-party activists.) She is a proven leader with a track record of success, who has earned every opportunity she has had. Many don’t realize that Sue is the daughter of a former coal miner. She and her husband both come from humble backgrounds but have succeeded in business through smart decisions and hard work, not through government handouts or their family name.

In 1992, Lowden won election to the Nevada state senate by defeating the incumbent senate majority leader. Her victory ended Democrats’ control of the chamber, and Sue’s colleagues immediately elected her senate majority whip.

Because of her strong fiscal-conservative principles, Lowden later served as chair of the taxation committee. When pro-tax legislators tried to push through higher taxes, she blocked their efforts. Her panel became known as the “no-taxation” committee. Lowden fought against higher taxes in the state senate, and she will fight against higher taxes in the U.S. Senate.

Today, labor bosses continue their efforts to kill a union member’s right to cast his vote privately without the bosses looking over his shoulder. Will we have a conservative U.S. senator with the fortitude to stand up to them? As a state senator, Lowden cast the deciding vote in the Nevada state senate to protect Nevada’s right-to-work status. She has had unions picket her home and businesses, but she has withstood their onslaught. Lowden will stand with conservatives against union bosses in the U.S. Senate.

On issue after issue, we know where Sue Lowden stands because she has been elected to office and championed conservative principles. She earned the endorsement of the NRA in her race for state senate. She is one of the original architects of Nevada’s charter-school law. As a pro-life advocate, she fought for parental-notification laws. Through her personal family experiences and decades of work with children with muscular dystrophy and Jerry’s Kids, I know Lowden values life. I know she will be a pro-life U.S. senator.

Lowden proudly signed the Americans for Tax Reform Pledge the week she announced her Senate campaign. She has pledged to join Senate conservatives to fight for earmark reform and tax and spending cuts. She is staunchly opposed to taxpayer funding of abortion. Lowden has stated that she would not have voted for President Bush’s TARP bill and is a strong opponent of the “stimulus” bill passed earlier this year. She was the first candidate running against Harry Reid to sign the Club for Growth’s pledge, and she has also signed the Americans for Prosperity anti–climate tax pledge.

Some conservatives have chosen to support Danny Tarkanian for the Nevada GOP Senate nomination. I say to my friends that they are mistaken in their support for the son of the former UNLV basketball coach. Tarkanian has used his campaign to falsely attack Lowden and try to trick us into believing that she isn’t conservative enough. If Sue Lowden isn’t conservative enough to be a leader in the conservative movement, than neither was Ronald Reagan.

As I’ve listened to Tarkanian ignore the facts and twist Sue’s words, I’ve been reminded of Reagan, who once spoke of what he called “the 11th Commandment”: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican. Reagan’s words highlight the contrast between Tarkanian’s rhetoric and Lowden’s conservative principles. It’s clear which candidate is best equipped to represent Reagan’s conservative movement.

I know that Sue Lowden is the proven conservative we can and should rally behind. Others do too. In the last quarter of 2009, Lowden raised more than twice as much money as Tarkanian. In fact, she raised more money in her first quarter in the race than he raised in the past two quarters combined. We all know that it will take significant resources to defeat Harry Reid — and defeating him with a legitimate, tested conservative is our ultimate goal.

Reid is hoping that Tarkanian wins the Republican primary. While Lowden knows what it takes to be successful, Tarkanian has been on the ballot in two of the last three election cycles and failed to win both times. In his last campaign, he earned the endorsement of Sarah Brady and the Brady Campaign because of his liberal positions on the Second Amendment. Instead of taking responsibility for his stance on gun rights, Tarkanian claims it wasn’t his fault.

This is a critical moment when we must have the good judgment to stand behind the right conservative candidates who can win in November. There is a great uprising coming from the American people. We are ready to work and ready to earn real change, not only in government but also in the direction our economy and our country are headed. There is no better leader to join us in this effort than Sue Lowden — the right candidate to defeat Harry Reid.

— Saul Anuzis has been a conservative activist for much of his adult life, including serving in leadership positions in the fight against card-check legislation at American Solutions. He is former chairman of the Michigan Republican party.

I have no idea what you base the superiority of a woman who at best seems to be a closet RINO over another candidate who seems to be more conservative. We have enough RINO'S in the Senate I don't care how much political experience they have, we don't need another especially when there's other conservative choices to be had.

You seem to be a bit disingenuous about your real reasons for supporting a RINO and I don't know why you want conservatives to support this one. Pro-life groups seem to be rallying around Tarkanian yet you prefer to rally around pro-choice Lowden. Reid has not withdrawn and there's no inkling that he will. My support goes to Tarkanian until it can be shown to me why that's a mistake.

Now you’ve gone from suggesting she’s a Mormon to calling her a Kay Bailey Hutchinson and you don’t even vote in Nevada. Lowden has the experience whereas Tarkanian has a great family name and the voters in Nevada will decide. Either one will beat Reid and that’s what is important.

It serves NO useful purpose for you to try to smear Lowden.

A few months ago, when I was under the impression that Lowden was pro-abortion, I said that if it was a choice between Tarkanian and Lowden I’d support Tarkanian (you can check my posts) even though Lowden would have a higher probability of being elected. However, I’ve read some more about Lowden and am now convinced that she is pro-life, and given her other issue positions and attributes I prefer her to Tarkanian as our nominee. That’s not to say that I wouldn’t support Tarkanian if he won the nomination (and I would be rooting for him to prove me wrong about his ability to win the general), or that if someone that is both more conservative and more electable than Lowden ran I wouldn’t support that other candidate. But life is about making the best decision given your options, and in the case of the NV Senate election, unless there’s a change in the primary field, we will have to agree to disagree.

Smear means falsehood, I'm raising issues of her honesty. She used to be pro-choice and even contributed to the Reid campaign, and now I'm supposed to believe she's this staunch pro-life conservative, sounds a little too Romney-ish for me to jump on that bandwagon without a red flag.

There are many RINOS who have the experience to run for higher office, so what? If the choice is a closet RINO with experience vs a conservative with just a little experience, give me the conservative every time.

She’s not a RINO and Danny Tarkanian has not yet held elected office, so please get off the RINO horse. It doesn’t play well. It’s a tired, worn-out term from over use that doesn’t apply to Lowden.

They’re both good candidates and the Nevada voters will decide. Sue has a record and Danny does not. The voters will have to decide if they like her record or if they want to vote on hope and a fresh new face.

Again, either one will beat Reid and they both hold conservative values. That is what is important!!!

will have to agree to disagree.

Well that's fine but your thread was about getting conservatives to rally around Lowden, and I have yet to see the reasons why her and not Tark. The polls show Tark and Lowden have just about an equal chance of beating Reid and considering some of Lowden's past actions she comes across as just another opportunistic moderate.

We cannot afford to put a person with questionable conservative credentials in this Senate seat. We have been burned too many times already. But there's time to vet her more and hopefully the truth will win out.

Lowden 2010: In 2009, a Republican U.S. Senate candidate named Sue Lowden told a conservative publication, Human Events, that Roe v. Wade was a “bad decision.” (Las Vegas Sun/Dec. 16, 2009)

Lowden insisted her evolution is personal and not political, providing me with a lengthy statement and declining to speak on the record beyond it. “I am pro-life and I will defend life as a U.S. senator,” the statement began. (Las Vegas Sun/Dec. 16, 2009)

Reality: LAS VEGAS SUN/May 18, 1996 Joining Ernaut in opposing an abortion ban: Las Vegas Assemblywoman Deanna Braunlin, state Sens. Kathy Augustine and Sue Lowden of Las Vegas, Lowden and Hettrick said the national party ought to follow Nevada's lead and take abortion out of the platform.

LAS VEGAS SUN/Dec. 16, 2009 In 1993, a GOP state senator named Sue Lowden expressed to a reporter support for Roe v. Wade on the 20th anniversary of the decision. If circumstantial evidence is to be believed, Lowden is easily convicted of not one, but perhaps two acts of political convenience, tacking left when it was advantageous and then shifting right when the race called for it. But her comment about not standing on the Senate floor to salute Roe v. Wade is disingenuous because other senators in favor of abortion rights were caught off-guard by then-Minority Leader Dina Titus’ call for everyone to stand.

RECORD COURIER/Jan. 15, 2010 “I voted for choice in 1990.”

1992 Candidate Questionnaire /Nevada Roll Call/ Christian Coalition When asked the question if she would “Prohibit abortion except when the mother’s life is endangered” her response was “OPPOSED”.

Lowden 2010:

In 2009, a Republican U.S. Senate candidate named Sue Lowden told a conservative publication, Human Events, that Roe v. Wade was a “bad decision.” (Las Vegas Sun/Dec. 16, 2009)

RECORD COURIER/Jan. 15, 2010 “I voted for choice in 1990.”

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.