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.
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.