Posted on 05/08/2010 2:34:02 PM PDT by Josh Painter
You have seen discussion of the California Governor's race on other places on this web site. Today we want to discuss the candidates and campaign for the U.S. Senate nomination to replace Barbara Boxer.
Months ago we were in an enviable position, both candidates were pro-life. Pro-life Assemblyman Chuck DeVore was running and Carly Fiorina, who had made public statements of being pro-life. What remained was assertaining just how real those commitments were.
Fiorina is the former Chairman of Hewlett-Packard and her pro-life comments were in contrast to the typical Silicon Valley 'culture' of monied Republicans. Her pro-life commitment meant she would be risking the alienation of some of her 'pro-choice' Rockerfeller Republican friends. It turned out that Fiorina was indeed genuine and has been endorsed by the Susan B. Anthony List which only endorses 100% pro-life candidates.
Fiorina has since met with National Right to Life Committee leadership and committed to very specific issues of pro-life public policy. Board members of California ProLife also met with her and all have been impressed by her genuine and heartfelt commitment to the cause of Life.
All of the election's dynamic changed when pro-abortion candidate Tom Campbell moved from the Governor's race to the U.S. Senate Race. Would this create a scenario we've seen too many times before? The pro-life candidates split the vote between them allowing the pro-abortion candidate to become the nominee. We hope not.
The Board of California ProLife has been watching this race carefully and hoping that Campbell would not pose a threat, but now the scenario is requiring incisive action. DeVore has been attacking Fiorina for not being conservative 'enough' because she is seen as competing for his conservative base. And Campbell has continued to gain in the polls posing as a conservative.
Perhaps most importantly, though all of CPLC's Board knows Chuck, all were equally concerned about his actual ability to break out beyond 'our base' to reach the wider electorate (which is how elections work.) Chuck has had a very hard time demonstrating the ability to raise the funds necessary to compete in a state the size of California, and this has been frustrating to many involved.
At the last reporting DeVore had $300,000 on hand; Fiorina $2,800,000; and Campbell $800,000. Perhpas more importantly, like other statewide candidates of note, Fiorina also has substantial, personal financial resources she has still not drawn on.
Who will have the resources to close the gap on Campbell and then turn around and do the same to Boxer?
While DeVore is indeed pro-life and familiar to us all, Fiorina is clearly better situated to fight an incredibly expensive campaign in the most costly state of the union.
Carly Fiorina has shown a genuine personal commitment to life, as well as clearly articulated policy commitments. Her husband's mother was told to abort him, but as Carly has said, it is his presence that is 'the rock of my life.' And as a recent cancer survivor she knows the threats posed by euthanasia and rationing. She is assertively opposed to both, in addition to opposing the Obama plan for Healthcare. She is outspoken against the 'climate mongering' which appears to have as a goal the reduction of human population.
She has been endorsed by the national pro-life women's group, Susan B. Anthony List and pro-life Senators Kyl, Graham, Coburn, McCain, and Inhofe.
California ProLife Council PAC has added its endorsement as well. CPLC's endorsement of Carly is not a repudiation of Chuck DeVore as much as it is an earnest desire to defeat both Tom Campbell and Barbara Boxer. In our considered opinion, Carly Fiorina is the pro-life candidate that can do that.
Read about the Susan B. Anthony List endorsement of Carly HERE.
Might not want top mention McCain in the next press release. Just sayin’.
DeVore campaign response to CA Pro-Life Council Endorsement of Carly Fiorina
from Josh Trevino, campaign Communications Director
Joe Garofoli at the San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that the California Pro-Life Council will tomorrow endorse Carly Fiorina. I find this rather astonishing, given Fiorina’s record — or lack thereof — on pro-life issues. It certainly does not stand to reason that the Council would endorse a candidate who has ....
1) .... no record of pro-life activism whatsoever.
2) .... affirmed her willingness to confirm pro-abortion judges.
3) .... demonstrated an ignorance of pressing pro-life issues.
4) .... publicly stated that the pro-life movement is a de facto waste of time.
Unfortunately, this accurately describes Carly Fiorina. If I may take the liberty of providing a brief rundown:
1) Fiorina told a group of reporters in November that she would have voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to SCOTUS:
Source: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34552
2) On November 5th, 2009, Fiorina was directly “asked whether she would vote to reverse” Roe v. Wade, and dodged the question: “The focus of my campaign are the issues that matter to the people of California, and what matters is what’s on the table right now — is how to we create more jobs and how do we get federal spending out of control.”
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=51106&tsp=1
3) On November 9th, 2009, in a KPCC interview, Fiorina downplayed her pro-life stance, saying, “I believe that life begins at conception ... I also recognize that these social issues are not whats on the table today.” Of note is that she said this at the same time the so-called Stupak Amendment was a topic of national debate.
Source: http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2009/11/09/carly-fiorina-runs-for-senate
4) Finally and most revealing, two weeks ago, in a conversation to with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board, Fiorina affirmed that she was personally pro-life, but reiterated her support for Sotomayor, saying, “I do not believe where a potential judicial nominee stands on that issue [of abortion rights] is a qualifier or an unqualifier.”
She then went on to characterize the entire American pro-life movement as essentially a waste of time, saying: “[M]any, many voters are going to conclude while that is a very important issue, it is frankly a decided issue. The law is clear in the state of California, where there is a constitutional guarantee to the right to an abortion. So why are we talking about a theoretical issue?”
Story and audio here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/02/MN8J1CP7H5.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/opinionshop/detail?&entry_id=60529
Contrast this record with Chuck DeVore’s. He has a 100% pro-life, pro-family rating from the Capitol Resource Institute — and multiple 100% ratings from the California Republican Assembly to his credit.
And, I should note — he has been a staunch supporter of the California Pro-Life Council for years.
The bottom line is that Chuck DeVore has been a consistent fighter for the unborn throughout his entire public career, and he’s not afraid to be forthright about it now. He’s also been with you at the California Pro-Life Council through every fight over the years. Carly Fiorina, by contrast, wishes to claim the pro-life mantle, but has publicly stated it is an essentially irrelevant distraction to her and her preferred politics — and she never gave you the time of day before this campaign.
The “Bart Stupak” Republican. The GOP is finished as a party.
And he's been running for almost a year. In the midst of the Tea Party movement and anger at Washington, he should have raised millions.
That means he has no strong message to attract CA voters. Saying that you're a conservative and the other candidates aren't simply isn't going to cut it. In fact, I haven't heard DeVore openly talk about the issues and tell voters what's wrong with Washington. All he's done is attack Carly. Has he ever attacked Campbell?
Finally, the nail in the coffin was when his campaign attacked Palin for endorsing Carly. That's a big no-no. Even JD took the high road when Palin campaigned for McCain.
That tells you right there that Chuck doesn't have the temperament to defeat Boxer. Boxer would have gotten him angry and he would have lost it.
Run for state Senator or Congress Chuck. The Senate is too big a leap for you.
If you want to run on single-issues in an overwhelmingly blue state that's fine, but you'll never win over the majority of voters who right now are concerned about big government and weak national security.
The bottom line is Chuck DeVore has spent more time attacking Fiorina then he has Campbell. That’s why he’s not the pick for any of these people.
Here is Chuck Devore addressing the Fiorina question himself.
Here is an exchange with Devore and Chris Matthews, it looks like Fiorina did not have any pro life differences with Devore, that Devore could point to.
Tom Campbell though is openly campaigning as being pro abortion.
MATTHEWS: Is Carly Fiorina pro-life, like you are?
DEVORE: Well, she says she is. She`s a fairly recent convert to the cause.
MATTHEWS: No,no, no, no. No, I don`t know — I don`t care what you — what you say she says. I`m asking you. Is she like you?
DEVORE: The difference is the track record. I have a track record and she doesn`t.
MATTHEWS: OK. Again, I`ll try the question by you. This is sort of an interesting show, where we ask a question...
DEVORE: Yes. No. Of course.
MATTHEWS: ... and somebody has to answer it. Is Carly Fiorina pro- life or not?
DEVORE: Again, she says she is.
MATTHEWS: No, you`re not answering — no, why...
DEVORE: I have the book (ph) to prove it. There`s a difference.
MATTHEWS: Well, why don`t you give me the difference between the BS we get on this show sometimes...
DEVORE: No, no!
MATTHEWS: ... and a truth-teller? Is your opponent — because this is a big fight out there. I want you to explain your position.
DEVORE: Chris — Chris, we don`t know.
MATTHEWS: You`re pro-life. Is your opponent? You don`t know?
DEVORE: We don`t know. She`s never had to vote on any of the issues. I`m a proven leader. She`s an unknown quantity. It`s as simple as that.
Carly Fiorna on the AZ immigration debate “The debate over immigration has a racist tone”. She also supported Internet taxation. Carly has blown through money on ineffective ads that have left her struggling in the general election matchup polling behind both Tom Campbell and Chuck DeVore.
Here it is folks:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MtQ9_NgGys
I'm damn proud of Chuck DeVore. Carly is NOTHING but an empty suit.
Chuck is the pick of the principled, and no amount of Carly's money will buy us off.
How about lightening up there a little jerk-off.
If you want to see the video instead of the transcript, then how about asking me to look for it rather than getting nasty and personal for no reason.
A posting of a simple transcript of an interview did not call for that.
I/we are not running on single-issues, but on a platform of smaller government and fiscal responsibility, constitutional rights and civil liberties. And we are not ashamed of our social conservatism values.
Carly was on McCain's Team as his economic advisor. How well did that go? Supporting cap & trade, supporting the bailouts as Carly has, that is NOT smaller governemnt.
Supporting Sonia Sotomayor's nomination is pathetic, and Sotomayor's problems lie well beyond her abortion stand, unless you think Sonia's OK for the Supreme Court, go right ahead and give her a pass.
I’ll show you the respect you show me, Sunshine.
I applaud Chuck for not letting these misguided endorsements slide. We have garnered much media attention and turned this arounda against Team Carly.
Chuck is the ONLY candidate with the temperment and integrity to take on Boxer. I have never seen him lose it. Just check out Chris Matthews interview with him I posted on this thread. How many of us would put up with Chris Matthews’ crap?
Can’t wait to watch tomorrows tape-delayed broadcast of the senatorial debate. Finally, after all these months of hiding behind her handlers, Carly finally takes the stage with her opponents.
This is a primary, not the general election and Devore is still his roughly consistent, 20 points behind, while Fiorina is about 4 to 7 points behind the proabortion/gay marriage Tom Campbell, besides, Devore does worse in the general anyway, so I don't know why you would claim the opposite.
You can’t say Fiorina never accomplished anything. She managed to run a rather large American company into the ground.
HP used to be a world leader in industrial electronic equipment that attempted to make consumer electronics. She spun the successful part of the company off (Agilent) and what remains is a company that relies on ink-jet cartridge sales to stay afloat, a mere shadow of its former self. Meanwhile, Agilent is doing well, the only weak spot was its use of HP computers in their early automated testing systems. A shortcoming that was quickly corrected.
Are you carrying baggage with you from thread to thread?
There is no reason for you to have gotten so hostile and aggressive from a transcript being posted.
As much as I like DeVore, it is time to get behind a single candidate. Fiorina is that candidate.
Exquisite sarcasm....love it... :):)
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.