Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Mike Coffman (candidate for congress) Clarification

Last week, while appearing on the Caplis & Silverman radio show (630 KHOW, Denver), Congressional candidate Mike Coffman was heard to say that he did not oppose abortion in cases of rape or incest. This sent CRTL and many other pro-lifers into a tizzy, because it went against what Mike had pledged in his Candidate Survey, as well as what we all thought we knew about Mike's beliefs.

When contacted about this, Mike immediately expressed surprise that he'd said any such thing. He thinks he may have gotten confused and said the opposite of what he meant. While with many candidates, we might suspect evasion, this didn't seem to be the case with Mike. He has written to attempt to clarify with Dan Caplis, so no one will misunderstand. Here is his note (copied to CRTL):


First of all, thanks so much for your help with my campaign and for inviting me on your show. During the debate, Craig Silverman was questioning me on the issue of abortion. My response was focused on arguing that Roe v Wade was bad law. During that exchange, Craig asked me about the issue of rape and incest. Apparently, my answer came across as supporting abortions under a rape and incest exception. I absolutely do not believe in that.

Dan, I would deeply appreciate it if, during your show, you could state that I wanted to make sure that my position was clear, unequivocally, that I oppose abortion in all cases of rape and incest. I believe that all life is equally sacred irregardless of how it came into being.

Thanks again,

Mike Coffman

It takes a big man to admit such a mistake. And Mike Coffman's strong relationship with the pro-life community over many years is obviously important enough to him that he wanted to make this correction/clarification despite the fact that he surely has Colorado's 6th District race locked up and will almost certainly be one of Colorado's newly elected Congressmen in 2009.

This is great news for unborn children!

Monday, October 20, 2008

Presidential Scorecard & Schaffer vs. Udall

CRTL has examined the records and public platforms of all the candidates for US President on the ballot in Colorado (many of whom are on the ballot elsewhere also).

What we found should not shock most followers of CRTL or this blog, but it might shock alot of Republicans and the general pro-life community. Most candidates, of course, are NOT pro-life.

What's most shocking, is that even most of the candidates who CLAIM to be pro-life actually reject the God-given Right to Life.

We found 3 candidates on the ballot in Colorado who are truly pro-life (who believe we have a right to life, not just a privilege to be granted or revoked by the government): Ambassador Alan Keyes (who has been central to the Personhood movement, and who is a good friend of Colorado Right to Life -- his running mate nationally is Brian Rohrbough, former CRTL president), Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party), and Gene Amondson (Prohibition Party).

(click on image to get a clearer, close-up image)

John McCain is not pro-life (see ARTL Action for evidence). What's more, many of the candidates who claim to be pro-life are not pro-life. Libertarian Bob Barr was long respected as a pro-life congressman, but he believes some states should kill kids, just not others. Like the Libertarians, the Tea Party candidate supports abortion, and the Objectivist Party relishes in abortion -- all three "fiscally conservative" parties who reject a Right to Life. The Heartquake candidate runs as a pro-lifer, but believes abortion is appropriate if the mother is not "emotionally mature." Mr. McEnulty is associated with the Knights of Columbus, yet believes abortion is appropriate for victims of rape or incest (NOT the Catholic or KoC position).

Sen. John McCain is a liar when he says he's been "consistently pro-life" -- he has a long record of support for exceptions for rape and incest, a long record of middle-road avoidance of strong pro-life positions, a long record of contempt for Christians, and a long record of support for Mengele-style experiments on the smallest human beings (embryonic stem cell research), not to mention forcing taxpayers to pay for abortions and embryo destruction. John McCain was considered the moderate, "pro-choice" alternative to George W. Bush in the 2000 GOP primary -- a label he embraced!

Sen. McCain regularly earned only 50% or 66% or 75% scores, even on the National Right to Life scorecards, which would always attempt to give every Republican 100% ratings so they would be easier to get elected.

The fact that McCain said at the Saddleback (Rick Warren) debate that he believes "life begins at conception" only makes things worse for him. First, it's probably a lie. Worse, if he's not lying, then it means that McCain believes that innocent human beings should be cultivated for harvest, and slaughtered for the benefit of the elites of the world!

You will be told that you should vote for McCain because "he will appoint pro-life judges" to the Supreme Court. But that's a lie, too. McCain has said he will appoint justices like Bush appointees Alito and Roberts, both of whom chose to support Roe v. Wade in the Gonzales vs. Carhart decision, by refusing to sign the Scalia/Thomas concurring opinion which said Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided. With McCain's maverick reputation, he can be counted on to appoint justices who are LESS pro-life than those Bush appointed (who were bad enough as it is).

If you believe CRTL is going too far with this charge of pro-abortion appointees by McCain, Bush or any Republicans, remember the $10,000 Challenge to National Right to Life, which has gone unclaimed so far (and will go unclaimed forever, unless good pro-life conservatives refuse to vote for people who don't believe in the Right to Life!). There are currently zero judges on the Supreme Court who believe an unborn child has a Right to Life.


What this means is that we must start from scratch, and quit relying upon the Republican Party to carry water for the pro-life movement -- they've been carrying empty buckets for years!

As an illustration...

Colorado's Senate Race -- Schaffer vs. Udall vs. Campbell

Former Congressman Bob Schaffer was once considered one of the most conservative, most pro-life representatives in Washington. He was one of the few legislators who would dare claim, in the '90s, that human life began at conception, and should be protected from that point on.

A perfect candidate for supporting Personhood (Amendment 48) wouldn't you think? Think again...

(click on image to get a clearer, close-up image)

Bob Schaffer is running as a "centrist" this year (his words), and has hired a campaign manager (Dick Wadhams) who hates Christians and any Christian moral positions (yet still considers himself a Catholic). Wadhams has said that GOP candidates should "avoid social issues" in the 2008 race, and has called supporters of Personhood "the fringe of the pro-life movement". He prohibited pro-life groups from having any tables at the 2008 GOP State Convention, and yet welcomed not one but two tables from pro-abortion groups opposed to Personhood.

Schaffer has refused to endorse Amendment 48 (Personhood), and has also refused to support Sen. Wicker's S.3111 Personhood bill, which Schaffer would be asked to support if he were elected.

Bob Schaffer will not be elected. He's lied his way into oblivion by alienating the conservative base which once thought he walked on water. Partly, that's Wadhams' fault, but the responsibility ultimately lay with Bob Schaffer, who hired Wadhams and who has himself turned his back on Christians, Catholics and everybody who once held out hope for him to be a conservative voice in Washington.

Pro-lifers who care about supporting the God-given Right to Life, rather than lip service or government regulation of the privilege to life should vote not for McCain, but for Alan Keyes. If you don't like Alan Keyes, then Chuck Baldwin is another good alternative.

Pro-lifers who care about the God-given Right to Life should support Doug "Dayhorse" Campbell, the Constitution Party candidate, rather than turncoat Bob Schaffer.

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Legislative Scorecard 2007-2008

Colorado Right to Life has examined the legislative voting records of all Colorado legislators over the past two years in light of our stand on Personhood – grading people up for positive votes, and voting them down for votes that undermine the Personhood of the unborn child (even if it’s a supposedly “pro-life” bill which proposes to regulate the abortion industry).

Before we go on, we just want to remind you that a post about the Presidential Election is up next…

What we’ve found is that those legislators who scored highest – because of several positive votes that did not undermine Personhood – are often the same legislators who at other times undermine Personhood with votes for regulation. Clearly they do not understand that a “right” (to life) is something that cannot be regulated, and the government has no right to decide when it is granted and when it can be taken away.

This poses CRTL with a dilemma, because if we “endorse” or give one of these candidates an “A”, it confuses the whole issue about whether or not they actually support a guarantee of the Right to Life in law. We’ve decided, instead, to simply release raw data on specific votes or positions rather than try to place a value on these hit-or-miss voting records.

One positive measure is who has endorsed the Amendment 48 Personhood Initiative. Some of these legislators still undermine Personhood with compromised votes, but at least they can be seen coming in the right direction.

(click the image to see a clearer copy)

Remember there may be good candidates running for office who are not on these lists, because they may not have been elected yet! A number of the unelected candidates indicated they would not support compromised legislation, and have also endorsed Personhood.

This assessment deals primarily with Republican legislators who voted right or wrong. As a general rule, Democrats can be assumed to have voted wrong – the highest scoring Democrat senator cannot be considered a pro-lifer by any stretch, and the highest scoring Democrat member of the House recently switched parties from the Republicans.

Sadly, the same assumption of stance cannot be made of Republicans, since the lowest scoring Republican (Rep. Ellen Roberts of Durango) is well below many of even the liberal Democrats – she might as well be one!

(click the image to see a clearer copy)
X = voted wrong on bill; XX = voted wrong more than once, or cosponsored bill; More X's = sponsored bill or voted wrong more than twice (i.e. in committees, plus floor vote -- usually a combination of votes or sponsorship)

Shockingly, the Republican House Minority Leader, Mike May of Parker, is the 5th lowest scoring Republican, barely even scoring in the positive numbers! He supported “emergency contraception” mandates, and was even the primary sponsor of the bill to require all pre-teen schoolchildren to be vaccinated against the HPV venereal disease (a move which CRTL testified would encourage underage pregnancy, and therefore underage abortions). This kind of voting behavior from the leading Republican only demonstrates how much they take Christian and pro-life voters for granted.


SB 07-060 Emergency Contraception – This bill requires medical professionals who treat rape victims to tell them there is emergency contraception available that will “prevent pregnancy” (which we all know terminates a pregnancy – a chemical abortion). Those 20 Republican legislators who voted for this will tell you they modified the language of the bill so it specified that it did not refer to abortifacients. But that’s a silly argument – there is no such thing as “emergency contraception” which is not an abortifacient, and several of their Republican colleagues realized this and still voted against the bill. Gov. Ritter signed this bill into law.

SB 07-080 Requiring HPV Vaccine in Middle School – Colorado Right to Life testified against this bill because we believed it would encourage kids to think they were “immune” to STDs, and therefore they could have free sex, and the resulting pregnancies would increase the number of abortions. The House sponsor of this bill was the Republican Minority Leader, Mike May (R-Parker). Rep. May was told we would oppose it, and was asked to drop the bill, and he refused. This bill did not make it out of committee in the House, partly because of CRTL lobbying.

SJR 07-031 Reproductive Health Programs – This NARAL-sponsored resolution (a non-binding statement urging compliance) encouraged state government to use its power to promote “family planning,” which naturally (to the sponsors) includes use of various abortifacients, as well as surgical abortion. Two GOP representatives and 4 GOP senators voted for it. The only one who is not typically identified as a pro-abortion Republican is Sen. Shawn Mitchell, who is a compromiser, but generally supports responsible pro-life positions. No idea why he voted the way he did.

SB 08-003 Gov’t Funding for Reproductive Health – This NARAL-sponsored legislation would allow low-income Coloradans to use taxpayer funds for “reproductive health” and “family planning” programs. Gov. Ritter signed this bill into law. Two GOP House members and 3 GOP senators voted for this bill.

SB 08-192 Residential Picketing – This bill was aimed directly at Colorado Right to Life and allied organizations (most particularly, the Collaborator’s Project). It was aimed to restrict the free speech rights of picketers who protest outside the homes of abortionists or executives whose companies are building abortion centers (like AuschWeitz, the nation’s largest killing center, which was built by Weitz Construction). Several “pro-life” legislators felt it was important to vote for this bill (it was written/sponsored by pro-abortion Sen. Steve Ward) because they don’t want to support “extremists” (those of us who want abortion to be in the public eye, and who want abortion promoters to understand exactly what they’re doing to little children). While most Republicans who voted for this legislation are known to be pro-abortion, the big surprises on the list of supporters were Sen. Andy McElhany (Sen. Minority Leader), Sen. Shawn Mitchell and Rep. Amy Stephens (formerly a public policy expert at Focus on the Family), who obviously felt their responsibility was to promote quiet neighborhoods, rather than to stop the killing of unborn children. Gov. Ritter signed this into law, which does not stop the picketing, but places significant restrictions upon it.

HJR 08-1009 UN Womens’ Rights Resolution – This resolution (non-binding support) recommended support for the United Nations’ definitions of “womens’ rights,” which specifically means the “right” to abortion, “controlling their own bodies (and those of their unborn children)” and “reproductive health care.” Three GOP representatives and one senator (Steve Ward again) voted for this.

There were other votes related to abortion during these two years, such as Sen. Schultheis’ SB 95, which was a compromised informed consent and ultrasound bill (watch an ultrasound, and then you can kill the baby). We know those legislators who voted for this bill were well-meaning, even though we attempted to educate them about what was wrong with the bill. This bill, in particular, is why we decided not to issue any endorsements of these legislators this year – because they still do not understand the Right to Life.

Sen. Renfroe, in 2007, also ran a bill that would have totally banned abortion. However, it never made it out of committee, and Sen. Renfroe and Sen. Mitchell were the only legislators who were able to vote for it.

We welcome any questions you might have with regard to legislators or the legislation!

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Beware Mary Arnold!

If you live in the northern Jeffco region (District 29, centered on Arvada), the Republican running there for the state house is no friend of life!

These are the comments of Mary Arnold, Republican nominee, to a CRTL member:

"As much as I would like to completely ban all abortions, I don't believe that its realistic that we could ever get this kind of legislation passed. Instead I believe that we should work to pass legislation that would severely restrict abortions. Studies have shown that states that have tough restrictions and promote education on alternatives to abortion, abstinence and birth control have a much lower abortion rate.

Amendment 48 I plan on voting no on. I believe the amendment goes to far in defining an embryo, fertilized egg or fetus as a person. This could have a negative impact on couples going through the invitro fertilization process and women's health care in general.

Let me know if you have any other questions.
Mary Arnold"

I wonder if she would have said the same about slavery...

She can be reached at if you have insights to lend to her!

The Legislative Scorecard, and a Presidential information list should be appearing this weekend -- watch for it!

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Yes, Information Is Coming!

Yes, CRTL does intend to publish more information on the election, including the results of our Legislative Scorecard, though without "letter grades" -- I'll explain once we get there.

Secondly, please urge your local candidates to send in their CRTL Candidate Questionnaires if you don't see them already listed as responding. This is critically important, because there ARE voters who will NOT vote for them if they have not responded!

Thirdly, please remember to support us financially. We're really wanting to have as much funding as possible for the Personhood (Amendment 48) campaign, and every dollar helps! See and locate the Donate link.

Lastly, please pray that God's will be done in this election. CRTL's positions are not typical positions held by "traditional" pro-life groups, and whether they're right, or we are, we DO want God's will to be done. Just keep in mind God's will may be that some supposed "pro-lifers" should be humbled for not doing his will!

Thanks! We'll be in touch in just a few days, so you'll have relevant information for the early voting and absentee balloting.