Daschle and People for the American Way

The Washington Post reports that Senator Daschle will be presenting the "Spirit of Liberty Award" on behalf of People for the American Way to former PFAW president Carole Shields: "Liberally Awarding Lefties."  Excerpt:

Alerting all celeb spotters -- you didn't hear it from us, but Tuesday night's a good night to lurk around the Kennedy Center. You know the saying: Award 'em and they will come, and that's just what People for the American Way and its Foundation are doing there. The annual D.C. fundraiser for that granola-chomping semi-vast left-wing conspiracy promises to attract a mob of million-dollar faces. (Or at least five.)

Chevy Chase (the comedian, not the suburb . . . or bank, for that matter) and Cynthia Nixon have agreed to co-host the event. We do appreciate that if you're active within the People for the American Way, they do reward, er, award you well. Board member Alec Baldwin is getting a Defender of Democracy award, presented to him by PFAW founder Norman Lear, while former PFAW president Carole Shields is nabbing this year's Spirit of Liberty award, which she'll accept from soon-to-be-former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.). Meanwhile, who could throw a liberal bash and not invite Susan Sarandon? She's taking home a Defender of Democracy award, too, which is being handed over by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.).

According to a recent article in the New York Times, PFAW is "girding for conflict" in preparation for the anticipated resignation of Justice Rehnquist from the Supreme Court. Excerpt from the NYT:

Liberals, especially, are girding for conflict because Mr. Bush has often said he admires Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, two of the court's staunchest conservatives. Ralph G. Neas, president of People for the American Way, warns that similar nominees would turn the clock back on civil rights and environmental protections, not to mention Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.

Weekly Standard piece on Catholic voters

The Weekly Standard's Joseph Bottum has written a piece for the Weekly Standard headlined "The Myth of the Catholic Voter." Excerpt:

A surprisingly consistent history of Democratic politicians over the last three decades has been their gradual trading of pro-life positions in exchange for national prominence. Think of Al Gore and Richard Gephardt and Jesse Jackson and a parade of others, culminating in the hapless Dennis Kucinich, whose first act even as a protest presidential candidate with no real chance in the Democratic primaries last year was to renounce his previously staunch antiabortion position. In 1978, Tom Daschle had the nuns who taught him in grade school write a letter to voters in South Dakota swearing he would always fight against abortion. By 2002, he was penning fundraising letters for NARAL and giving fundraising talks for EMILY's List.

"Daschle Documents" updated

The Ave Maria List's website, www.daschledocuments.com, is now providing a link to e-mail Senator Daschle's top campaign officials, so that readers can urge Daschle to release the entire video of Daschle's fundraising speech to Emily's List, a PAC that promotes only pro-choice female Democratic candidates.

"The reason I am here today as the Senate Majority Leader can be said in two words: Emily's List." - Senator Tom Daschle, speaking to an Emily's List audience.

Emily's List is so extreme it has even been accused of "fanaticism" by former Clinton adviser Paul Begala, according to a report in the liberal American Prospect headlined "Emily's List Hissed."

Sharon Gray to appear on "Straight Talk" next hour

Sharon Gray will be appearing on Greg Belfrage's radio show at 4:30PM today to discuss, among other things, her past support for Senator Daschle and why she is working to defeat him now. Be sure to listen in.

Sharon Gray responds to Daschle camp's comments

[Note: Correction appended]

Below is a letter Sharon Gray, a college professor from Vermillion, SD, sent to Dan Pfeiffer, Senator Daschle's deputy campaign manager, in response to his comments reported in today's edition of the Aberdeen American News and the Rapid City Journal:

Dear Dan Pfiefer,

I'm writing to take issue with your comments relating Daschle's "pro-life" record as quoted in the Aberdeen American News and the Rapid City Journal.

"The Ave Marie group is a shadowy group based out of state," said Dan Pfeiffer, deputy campaign manager for Daschle. "Their sole purpose is to distort Sen. Daschle's beliefs. Daschle is opposed to abortion and believes every abortion is a tragedy." Aberdeen American News

First, the Ave Maria group is no more nor less shadowy than any of the other special interest groups serving a very NECESSARY purpose in this post-McCain/Feingold era. They allow individuals to pool their resources and have their small voices heard above the cacaphony and din of political rhetoric. In a perfect world, if the press and media were truly un-biased, perhaps McCain/Feingold wouldn't have had as serious an effect on free speech as it has. But we do not live in a perfect world. And so I, therefore, am grateful for groups such as Ave Maria who to allow those of us with a strong view on particular issues to have our voices heard.

"To assert, as Ave Maria does, that receiving a contribution from a group is a de-facto endorsement of all of that group's policies is absurd....DASHPAC's contributions to EMILY's List were part of Daschle's efforts as Democratic leader in the Senate to elect Democrats, Pfeiffer said." Rapid City Journal

As you well know, Emily's list does not give money to ANY candidate who is not pro-choice. True, they have a three-prong test: Only 1) pro-choice, 2) Democratic, 3) female candidates can receive Emily's list endorsement. But, the ONLY time I have seen an Emily's list candidate have her endorsement pulled is IF she fails to vote pro-choice. So, clearly, that is a requirement: she must vote pro-choice. So, for Daschle to have given $10,000 to Emily's list, he is supporting their mission: to elect pro-choice, Democratic women.

Additionally, neither NARAL nor Emily's List would ever dream of inviting a "pro-life" individual to 1) write a letter on their letterhead (regardless of whether it was for Naral or indirectly for Jean Carnahan) or 2) address them at a fundraising gathering (as Daschle did in the video clips (which, by the way, are no longer available at the DashPac website. Is Daschle ashamed of that alliance?)

That brings me to my final point. Anyone who cares strongly about life issues and follows the voting (and writes letters on bills and gets back placating replies) KNOWS that Daschle voted pro-choice 75 out of 83 times. And the 8 "pro-life" votes were only when it was politically expedient to do so. When he voted for the partial birth abortion ban, he voted for the "life or health of the mother" exemption. This even AFTER abortion provider experts testified that the particular procedure is NEVER necessary to protect the life or health of the mother, that it is almost ALWAYS done on healthy fetuses of healthy mothers. In fact, a pro-abortion doctor is quoted as saying he would argue that normal childbirth itself is sometimes dangerous and life-threatening, and therefore would provide the exception that swallows the rule. Daschle voted for the Feinstein amendment which would have effectively gutted the partial birth abortion ban and finally ONLY voted for the ban as we now have it because he knew it was going to pass with or without his vote, and it would NOT resonate well with the voters back in South Dakota if he were unable to "show" that he voted for the ban. That is disingenuous.

I really don't care how a candidate feels "personally" about the issue of abortion. I care how he or she votes. A pro-life candidate is one who votes pro-life and a pro-choice candidate is one who votes pro-choice. Daschle is clearly a pro-choice candidate. His 100% rating from NARAL is irrefutable evidence of that.

I ask that you be forthright with the voters about Daschle's pro-choice voting record. Do not continue to misrepresent Daschle as a "pro-life" candidate when he most certainly is not. His 0% rating from National Right to Life is evidence of that.

Sincerely,

Sharon Gray

CORRECTION: Sharon Gray is a college "instructor," not a college "professor." I regret the error.

Ave Maria List press conferences

DVT has a report on the Sioux Falls press conference held by the Ave Maria List today to announce a new website, "www.daschledocuments.com" that illustrates Senator Daschle's doublespeak on the issue of abortion. Among those speaking at the press conference was Sharon Gray, who has written a piece about her support for Senator Daschle early in his career when he was a pro-life candidate.

Ave Maria List to hold press conferences tomorrow

The Ave Maria List, a pro-life advocacy group, will be holding press conferences around the state tomorrow. You can read the schedule for the press conferences to be held by clicking HERE.

Tom Daschle: A strong voice for NARAL

While re-reading MSNBC's article published yesterday under the headline "Will Daschle survive tough Senate race?" I thought it would be worthwhile to point out once again how Senator Daschle is simply not telling the truth about his position on abortion during this campaign. Here's the relevant excerpt from the MSNBC story:

In recent days Thune and the Republicans have accused Daschle of trimming his views on abortion.

In a fund-raising letter two years ago for National Abortion Rights Action League, Daschle said he had "stood up for a woman's right to choose.”

Last week, Thune's campaign handed out a videotape of Daschle telling an audience of California Democrats in 2002: "We will not surrender sacred ground, and that includes a woman's constitutional right to choose."

But in a conference call with reporters last week, Daschle said, “I’m anti-abortion. I don’t believe that abortion ought to be allowed. I think that others have expressed the need for exceptions, like rape and incest and saving the life of the mother, and I share the view about those exceptions, but I think we ought to do all we can to discourage abortion.”

(Emphasis added.) As John Thune would say, don't listen to what Daschle says, just look at Daschle's record. Daschle has repeatedly voted to endorse Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruling that requires states to allow abortion for any reason. The most recent such vote occurred on March 12, 2003, when Daschle voted for the Harkin Amendment, as recorded on the congressional roll call database at thomas.loc.gov, and in the on-line Congressional Record for March 12, 2003, page S3600 (2003 roll call no. 48). A screen capture of the text of the Harkin Amendment from the Congressional Record, March 12, 2003, page S3581, follows:

Again, don't listen to what Daschle says, just look at his record.

NARAL either disingenuous or mathematically challenged

In today's edition of the Rapid City Journal, Senator Daschle's spokesman discussed Daschle's 2003 NARAL rating:

The Republican brochure says Daschle received a "100 percent rating" from the National Abortion Rights Action League. Daschle actually received a 50 percent rating in 2003, Pfeiffer said, and his 100 percent rating in 2002 was based on a single vote to allow U.S. women in the military to pay for abortions out of their own pockets.

That 2003 NARAL rating looked suspicious to me, so I decided to take a closer look at it. Upon closer scrutiny, it appears that NARAL is either dishonest or can't do simple math. NARAL disingenuously gave Daschle (and Johnson) "50%" ratings, but in fact they both voted the way NARAL wanted them to over 85% of the time. Here's a screen capture of NARAL's legislative scorecard for Daschle (click to enlarge):

Clearly, out of the 14 votes NARAL viewed as important in 2003, Daschle voted against NARAL's preferred position only two times. Yet somehow 12 out of 14 is "50%" to NARAL. Why do they disingenuously give Daschle a "50%" rating? So Daschle's spokesman can give it to reporters in South Dakota as evidence of Daschle's "moderation" on the issue. Daschle is banking on the notion that these reporters won't look more closely at the claim. So far, that notion has been correct.

To view a PDF copy of the NARAL scorecard cited above, click HERE.

Daschle: "We will not surrender sacred ground, and that includes a woman's constitutional right to choose"

The Rapid City Journal has a report headlined "Thune camp releases Daschle tape." Excerpt:

Thune's Senate campaign late Friday distributed a videotape of Daschle telling California Democrats in February 2002: "We will not surrender sacred ground, and that includes a woman's constitutional right to choose."

[...]

Daschle responded Saturday in writing: "In my view, the polarization of this issue and the ‘pro-choice' and ‘pro-life' labels are counterproductive to the goals most of us share. Most South Dakotans and most Americans are deeply troubled by abortion, and they'd like us to find a way to prevent them."

Further into the RCJ story is this interesting passage:

The tone of Daschle's written response to Thune was measured, but last week, Daschle was terse and impatient with a Rapid City Journal reporter who pressed him on the "pro-choice" label.

Three days later, during a conference call with South Dakota reporters, Daschle responded sternly to a question on whether the label was fair. "It would be fair to call me anti-abortion," Daschle said. "I just don't believe we ought to send young women or doctors to prison."

Thune said Saturday, "Don't believe what he says; believe what he does."

It seems the most powerful man in the universe has been walking the corridors of power in Washington so long that he now believes he's immune to scrutiny. DVT succinctly captures the Daschle psychology:

The Daschle-going-ballistic-on-reporter matter was the topic of a number of emails I received this week. The bigger question is why? In part because, I think, Daschle is used to softballs and having reporters reprint his press releases. Daschle: "Don't you know the rule? I'm above criticism! If you need examples to follow, see the Argus Leader." Another reason is because Daschle's whole campaign depends upon his ability to hide his double life, i.e. telling rich California liberals about how he thinks the "right to choose" is "sacred ground" but telling people in South Dakota he's against abortion and refusing to say he's "pro-choice," even though he has sent fundraising letters for NARAL touting his "pro-choice leadership" in the US Senate.

Tom Daschle: A strong voice for NARAL and Planned Parenthood

It's interesting to note that a look at the NARAL scorecard for Senator Daschle shows he votes with them on more than 85% of important pro-choice (abortion) issues. Planned Parenthood gives Senator Daschle an 80% score.

Also, Daschle used his strong voice to put the general counsel of the National Abortion Federation (no euphemisms there, at least) into an important post in the federal government, according to the Washington Post:

"The President intends to nominate Barbara J. Sapin, of Maryland, to be a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board. . . . Ms. Sapin currently serves as general counsel for the National Abortion Federation in Washington, D.C."

A White House spokeswoman noted that this was a Democratic selection to the board, which by law has to include non-Republicans. Sapin, she said, was Democratic "Senator [ Thomas A.] Daschle's pick."

Daschle anti-anti-choice, anti-abortion, not definitively pro-choice

The Aberdeen American News has a story today headlined "Abortion surfaces in U.S. Senate race." The story discusses Senator Daschle's 2002 mass-fundraising e-mail sent out on behalf of NARAL. Excerpt:

Asked directly Thursday whether it would be fair to call him pro-choice, Daschle said sternly, "It would be fair to call me anti-abortion."

It was at least the second time in the past week Daschle has avoided a yes or no answer to the question.

The inquiry followed more general questions and answers about a fund-raising letter Daschle sent out two years ago for the National Abortion Rights Action League. The letter was, in part, on behalf of Sen. Jean Carnahan, D-Mo., as she ran for election. Carnahan lost the race. The letter said Daschle has "stood up for a woman's right to choose."

When Daschle is up for reelection, he tells constituents he's "anti-abortion." When he's laying the foundation for a possible run for the presidency, he raises funds for NARAL saying:

"As the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate, I’ve stood up for a woman’s right to choose, and the pro-choice leadership of the Senate has made a difference by safeguarding women’s rights from the anti-choice agenda of the Bush administration. Please give to NARAL today, so NARAL can mobilize the resources to get out the pro-choice vote on Election Day."

(Emphasis original.) Even in a place like South Dakota, with good-natured people willing to give one the benefit of the doubt, you can't have it both ways.

Below is a screen capture of Daschle's NARAL e-mail (which can be found at this website):

DVT: Daschle "was screaming" at RCJ reporter

DVT reports that Senator Daschle was screaming at Rapid City Journal reporter Kevin Woster for asking him whether he is pro-choice or pro-life in light of Daschle's NARAL fund-raising e-mail. I think one can get a sense of this in Woster's report, headlined "Abortion letter still an issue." In Woster's report is this sentence: "Daschle also questioned the appropriateness of the question."

Yes, how dare a reporter question the most powerful man in the universe about his position on an important issue? Why, you'd think this was a democracy or something, where elected officials are actually held accountable! It seems that Daschle is the one whose behavior was inappropriate here.

Drudge links to RCJ piece on Daschle's NARAL e-mail

Drudge has linked to Kevin Woster's report in today's edition of the Rapid City Journal headlined "Abortion letter still an issue." The Drudge headline reads "Daschle called abortion 'murder'; now won't say he's pro-life."

Rapid City Journal reports on Daschle's NARAL e-mail

The Rapid City Journal's Kevin Woster has a report headlined "Abortion letter still an issue" that is a must-read. Kevin Woster's report is a stellar example of reporting the facts "without fear or favor." DVT has a paragraph-by-paragraph analysis of the piece that is also a must-read.

In Woster's report, Daschle made the following breathtaking statement:

"That letter was not intended to be a fund-raiser for NARAL whatsoever."

In the heart of that NARAL letter, written and signed by Senator Daschle, is this statement:

"Please give to NARAL today, so NARAL can mobilize the resources to get out the pro-choice vote on Election Day."

(Emphasis in original.) That NARAL e-mail written and signed by Daschle contained variations of the phrase "give to NARAL" no less than FIVE times. Yet now we're supposed to believe that Daschle did not intend it to be a fund-raising e-mail. Whether one is pro-life or pro-choice, the breathtaking dishonesty Daschle is exhibiting here should give one pause. Senator McGovern never made any pretense about his position on the issue of abortion, and I respect him for that. Senator Daschle is no Senator McGovern.

You can view a screen capture of Daschle's NARAL fund-raising e-mail below, which I obtained from this website:

Sharon Gray once supported Daschle; now is working "doubly hard" to defeat him

At my request, SDP reader Sharon Gray of Vermillion, SD, submitted the following opinion piece, which details Sharon's story about working to elect Senator Daschle early in his career. At the time, Daschle convinced Sharon he was pro-life, but now it has become abundantly clear to her that he is pro-choice. Here's Sharon's opinion piece:

First, let me start by saying I am an unabashedly single-issue voter. I truly believe that without a right to life, no other right matters. We currently live in a country where more than 1 in 5 pregnancies ends in abortion. At least 95% of those abortions are for reasons OTHER than rape, incest, or to protect the life or health of the mother. There are more than 1.2 million abortions in the U.S per year. That is more than 3000 abortions per day. The supposed “right” to abortion through all nine months of a pregnancy is a tragic result of judicial law-making, rather than law-interpreting (through the 1973 Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton U.S. Supreme Court decisions), which federally foisted abortion on demand on all 50 states, regardless of existing state law.

With that said, I am ashamed to admit I worked to help Tom Daschle get elected when he first ran for Senate many years ago. I did so gullibly believing his assertion (along with the blessing of the Presentation Sisters) that he was pro-life. Imagine my horror and regret as I watched him repeatedly toe the NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League) line. Writing letters got me the typical response pro-choice-voting candidates give their pro-life constituency explaining his “personal” dislike of abortion but his belief that the choice should reside with the mother. It is inconsequential what a candidate’s “personal” feelings are on the issue of abortion; what matters is how the candidate votes. A pro-life candidate is one who votes pro-life. A pro-choice candidate is one who votes pro-choice. I am infuriated by Daschle’s attempt to disingenuously straddle the fence when he so CLEARLY votes pro-choice. He knows good and well this state is overwhelmingly pro-life. He knows he must go to great lengths to persuade voters that his “personal” pro-life sentiments (even allowing they are genuine) are enough.

In the Sunday (10/3/04) Argus Leader, Representative Mel Olson (a Democrat from Mitchell) said he believed Senator Tom Daschle would like to find a way to outlaw abortion as birth control. I couldn’t believe what I was reading. Once again, Daschle was being painted as a pro-lifer at heart. This blatantly misleads voters! I should know: I was one of those misled voters many years ago.

Daschle voted six times against the partial-birth abortion ban, a horrific procedure which in sworn testimony to Congress doctors have said is unnecessary and which is almost always performed on healthy fetuses of healthy mothers. He voted for a substitute amendment that would have killed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which gives protection of law to a fetus killed in commission of a federal crime. He wants to use taxpayers’ money to fund abortions for low-income women. He supports embryonic stem cell research, in which we cannibalistically destroy human embryos to “harvest” their stem cells ignoring the scientific success of NON-destructive, ETHICAL stem cell research using umbilical cord stem cells, for instance. Most disturbingly, however, Daschle has repeatedly acted in an obstructionist manner, preventing fully-qualified judicial nominees from getting a Senate vote unless they passed the litmus test of being pro-choice.

I extremely regret my work years ago to get Daschle elected. To try and make amends, I am working DOUBLY hard to effect his defeat. I hope and pray South Dakotans are more wise to his tactics than I was so many years ago.

Here is a screen capture of Daschle's mass fundraising e-mail on behalf of NARAL, which I took from this website:

Compare Daschle's NARAL e-mail to the letter sent on behalf of Daschle in 1986 by Rev. Terry Miller of Freeman, SD, in which Rev. Miller says Daschle used the word "murder" to describe abortion in a conversation they had. (You can read all of Daschle's pro-life letters HERE.) Rev. Miller's letter was sent along with a companion letter written by Daschle saying "I am unalterably opposed to abortion on demand":

NYT: Daschle's election in 1986 a "turning point" on abortion

In light of Senator Daschle's attempt to parse his fundraising e-mail on behalf of NARAL as "for a colleague and not a cause" it's important to digest what the New York Times had to say about Senator Daschle's election to the Senate in 1986.

In a piece by Linda Greenhouse dated November 13, 1986, (shortly after Daschle's defeat of Senator Jim Abdnor) and entitled "A Turning Point On the Abortion Issue?" the NYT reported the following (the piece even contained a photo of Daschle):

After long years on the defensive, advocates of abortion rights are cheering the results of last week's elections. They say that the victory of pro-choice candidates for the Senate and House of Representatives, as well as the defeat of several anti-abortion measures on state ballots, strengthens their movement not only to resist further erosion, but to regain the initiative on such issues as public financing of abortions for poor women....

Kate Michelman, executive director of the National Abortion Rights Action League, says the pro-choice side picked up at least three seats in the Senate and five in the House, while no pro-choice incumbent was defeated for any Federal office.

The three Senate seats, all won by Democrats, are in Georgia, with the substitution of Wyche Fowler Jr. for an anti-abortion Republican freshman, Mack Mattingly; South Dakota, where Representative Tom Daschle defeated James Abdnor; and North Carolina, where the Senate seat was held by one of the chamber's most committed abortion foes, John P. East, until his suicide last summer.

Isn't it interesting that the New York Times and NARAL knew Tom Daschle's true position on abortion only TWO WEEKS AFTER Daschle had sent out a letter to constituents in South Dakota stating "The truth is I am unalterably opposed to abortion on demand"? The letter was even enclosed with a letter from a pastor in Freeman, SD vouching for Daschle's pro-life credentials. You can read a PDF copy of the letters by clicking HERE.

Below is a screen capture of Daschle's 1986 letter:

Contrast that letter with Daschle's apparent long and cozy relationship with NARAL, which led him to write a mass fundraising e-mail on NARAL's behalf in 2002. Below is a screen capture of Daschle's NARAL e-mail:

NYT: Daschle a "friend of Roe v. Wade"

It's interesting to observe that a story in the October 23, 2003 Late Edition of the New York Times headlined "Bill Barring Abortion Procedure Drew on Backing From Many Friends of Roe v. Wade" lists Senator Daschle as one of Roe v. Wade's "friends." The NYT story discusses the passage of the partial birth abortion ban. Excerpt:

Some Democrats who voted in favor, like Ms. Lincoln, said they felt that they were reflecting the views of their constituents. Some, like Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, said the procedure was morally repugnant.

Others, like Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the minority leader, said that after eight years of divisive debate, they were ready to get the matter out of Congress and into the courts. Advocates of abortion rights say they will challenge the measure in court as soon as Mr. Bush signs it; they contend that the ban is unconstitutional because it lacks an exception for the health of the pregnant woman and, they maintain, is overly broad.

"The time has come to move on," Mr. Daschle said on Wednesday. "I have a lot of misgivings about this bill. I have initially opposed it because I didn't think it took into account the need for women's health adequately. But I also believe that we've got to address this issue and let the courts decide whether it's constitutional. In my view, the vote yesterday just moves that process forward."

If Mr. Daschle sounded conflicted about the vote, many of his colleagues seemed equally so. And if those senators are conflicted, so, it appears, is the general public.