Abortion activists challenge candidate, Simon says he'll avoid divisive topic if asked

SF Chronicle ^ | 3-16-02 | Carla Marinucci

[Oldeconomybuyer]

GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon Jr. has promised he will "change the topic" if asked about controversial issues like abortion in the coming campaign, but pro-choice activists defiantly signaled this week that he won't have an easy time of it.

[madprof98]

Michelman addressed 1,000 pro-choice supporters yesterday at the Power of Choice luncheon at the St. Francis Hotel in San Francisco, an event that raised nearly $500,000 for the Washington, D.C., organization's election-year push.

I would say America in general is in its post-Christian phase, but it's a bit more glaring on the Left Coast.

[kezekiel]

GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon Jr. has promised he will "change the topic" if asked about controversial issues like abortion in the coming campaign, but pro-choice activists defiantly signaled this week that he won't have an easy time of it.

Not if the media has anything to say about it. I can hear it now: "Simon is dogged by his stance on abortion, which is clearly at odds with the will of the people of California. Back to you, Tom."

[helmsman]

"Liberal Democrats supporting liberal Democrats is not news," said Simon campaign manager Sal Russo. "We have proven, rather conclusively, in the (March 5) primary that the issues we raised -- the economy, jobs, and rebuilding California -- resonated better," he said. "Even the Kate Michelmans of the world know that abortion is pretty well settled, . . . both at the federal and at the state level."

Well, that proves it. Simon is operationally pro-abortion, since the status quo is pro-abortion. He's not willing to discuss it, do anything about, or even recognize that the issue is still in debate. He is pro-abortion, just like the scores of "pro-life" candidates who run for office across this country with their tails between their legs on this issue -- and who then lift not one finger to stop abortion in any of the many ways allowable by the Supreme Court. At least Davis is honest enough to tell the voters straight out that he supports the killing of the unborn, Simon evidently can't muster even that. I thought Simon was different -- I was wrong. PLINO (Pro-Life In Name Only)

[helmsman]

Simon will never win if he is anti abortion. Avoiding the subject is the best stance.

Then why lie to the people who voted for him believing that he would save at least some children? I mean, what is the point of this fakery? It's like saying you're for tax cuts, but you're not going to do anything about it because taxes are a "settled issue." What this really is is a slap at the intelligence of religious conservatives. He, like many other PLINOs, thinks that merely claiming to be pro-life will get him the votes of single issue pro-lifers because they're too stupid to recognize his "wink and nod" disowning of the issue during the campaign. GW Bush also believed he could do this in 2000 and paid for it when 4 million evangelicals he had counted on didn't show up to vote for him! I hope Simon suffers the same fate.

[helmsman]

And if Simon loses we get more of Davis. I'll take Simon. The abortion issue will always be a problem for republicans trying to get elected in liberal states. All he can do is avoid it.

Or, he can be honest and admit that he supports abortion-on-demand. I would much sooner vote for a moderate pro-choicer who would fight to enact programs to discourage abortion, than I would for a deceiving PLINO who insults my intelligence and would sit idle as the unborn are subjected to the Cuisinart. I don't appreciate being lied to, by politicians or by scumbags -- but these days the two are indistinguishable, it would seem.

[B Knotts]

Oh, baloney. Simon is absolutely correct. Abortion is largely a federal issue. It shouldn't be, but it is. That's reality. So, he needs to run on the issues that are actually relevant to the race. There's no need for him to Don Quixote himself into obscurity.

He's not pretending to be pro-abortion, like Riordan supposedly did; he's just saying "yes, I'm pro-life, but that's not an issue in this campaign." He's not hiding it; he's just trying to prevent the baby-killers from beating him about the head with it.

A pro-life candidate can win statewide office in California, but not if that's his only issue.

[homeschool mama]

Simon stated he is pro-life. I read his statement on FR and will find the exact source if you'd like me to.

He also stated that he would not seek to overturn the pro-choice law in California...probably because it'd be next to impossible.

I'm pro-life and choose to not make this a one issue Gov race. I'm voting for Simon in November, just like I voted for Simon in the primaries.

[helmsman]

Oh, baloney. Simon is absolutely correct. Abortion is largely a federal issue. It shouldn't be, but it is. That's reality.

Oh yes, the passing of the buck. The PLINOs running for state office always claim abortion is a federal matter, while those running at the federal level claim restrictions should be sought at the state level -- how devilishly clever. No, what's happening here is that we have just another politician who wants the single-issue pro-life vote without having to do anything for it. He believes that lip-service will accomplish this, as it has for so many others. I hope he turns out to be sadly mistaken.

he's just saying "yes, I'm pro-life, but that's not an issue in this campaign."

"Yes, I'm for tax cuts, but that's not an issue in this campaign."

"Yes, I'm for less government, but that's not an issue in this campaign."

"Yes, I'm for gun rights, but that's not an issue in this campaign."

The question: Then what exactly is the difference between you and your liberal opponent, if you won't stand up for the causes you claim to believe in?

Answer: There is no difference.

[helmsman]

I'm pro-life and choose to not make this a one issue Gov race. I'm voting for Simon in November, just like I voted for Simon in the primaries.

Then you're voting for someone who will do nothing to stop abortion. That is the same position that Davis holds. I can't believe that I have to tell anyone this, but please don't accept a politician's word until he has proven that he deserves your trust by action. How could Simon prove himself as pro-life by action? By aggressively attacking Davis on partial-birth abortion, which is a politically safe issue -- even in California. This would show that he is willing to fight for the unborn, not just issue meaningless position papers. But I won't be holding my breath, since his idiot campaign staffer was stupid enough to leak the truth of his position to the press. Usually, the PLINOs are smart enough to continue the deception at least until after the election.

[homeschool mama]

So, if you were a registered voter in California and you didn't vote for either Simon OR Davis, who would you vote for? Hmmm?

[helmsman]

Well, in light of this revelation, I would vote third party or not for governor at all. And before you tell me that I would be exercising defeatism, I don't consider it a defeat for the pro-life movement to allow the election of a pro-abort who's opponent is also pro-abortion by default. This is the same argument that was made by many here before the primaries about Riordan. If he's a liberal, then what purpose would his election serve? Well, it would serve to give the liberals more control over the party, which would be counterproductive to conservative causes. In the same way, if Simon wins, PLINOs all over the country will be emboldened to do exactly what he did on abortion -- take a hollow position, then disown the issue.

If that is allowed to happen, then the butchering will go on unabated forever -- as it has for decades now.

[Kevin Curry]

I would say America in general is in its post-Christian phase, but it's a bit more glaring on the Left Coast.

A wise, insightful, accurate diagnosis.

[B Knotts]

But tax cuts, less (state) government and gun rights are all things that the governor does have considerable say-so over, so the comparison is invalid.

Have you been asleep these past 30-40 years? Have you not seen the way the left has accomplished its goals? They didn't do it by running around shouting "Vote for me; I'm a socialist!" They did it through incrementalism. The only way we can achieve our goals is likewise through incrementalism.

People fear change. Incrementalism is the way you get things done in our system. If you push too hard, too fast, the change will result in a backlash.

[TheAngryClam]

Good God.

Then you're voting for someone who will do nothing to stop abortion. That is the same position that Davis holds. I can't believe that I have to tell anyone this, but please don't accept a politician's word until he has proven that he deserves your trust by action. How could Simon prove himself as pro-life by action? By aggressively attacking Davis on partial-birth abortion, which is a politically safe issue -- even in California. This would show that he is willing to fight for the unborn, not just issue meaningless position papers. But I won't be holding my breath, since his idiot campaign staffer was stupid enough to leak the truth of his position to the press. Usually, the PLINOs are smart enough to continue the deception at least until after the election.

I have a hard time figuring out where to begin. Oh wait, no I don't: this isn't THE issue for most of the state, or even the GOP and it certainly isn't for me. I can back that up with polls on what Californians say the issues are in the governor's race. Abortion ranked 26 out of 28.

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

Abortion is largely a federal issue. It shouldn't be, but it is.

unfortunately the uneducated masses dont ralize this, it is like when jeb ran the first time in fla, gov childs ran ads on how jeb threatened seniors social security and not one press reporter that I ever heard asked just how could a govenor cut a federal program

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

advice to simon just run as a f**king conservative (a real one) and you will win I come from the school of thought true conservatives WIN elections

[helmsman]

But tax cuts, less (state) government and gun rights are all things that the governor does have considerable say-so over, so the comparison is invalid.

Bull, B. The single most devastating anti-abortion policy in existence is called informed consent. When a woman considering abortion is required to learn about the development of her baby, or beter yet, see the child in an ultrasound scan, she decides to give birth -- at rates exceeding 70%!!! While there is no real reason the federal government can't enact an informed consent law of it's own, these laws are usually sought at the state level. These laws are generally supported by vast majorities of the public -- even in California! Plus, there are half a dozen other substantive policies that could be implemented at the state level that could cause dramatic reductions in the abortion rate. I have spelled them out before many times here at FR.

Have you been asleep these past 30-40 years? Have you not seen the way the left has accomplished its goals? They didn't do it by running around shouting "Vote for me; I'm a socialist!" They did it through incrementalism. The only way we can achieve our goals is likewise through incrementalism.

Ah, time for another lecture of Helmsman about the necessity of incrementalism. The veins in my neck are really starting to bulge now, baby! Where is that aspirin of mine? You're obviously not familiar with my postings here or you'd know that I'm not insisting on banning abortion tomorrow. I'm simply demanding that those politicians who claim to be pro-life actively fight for majority supported pro-life policies that will have immediate effects in saving unborn babies. That's all, B. Aren't I a frothing, raving lunatic? But we can't even expect that, evidently. Instead we get cheap politicians who lie to us and do nothing to move the cause. Incrementalism requires constant progress, B.