Massachusetts Citizens for Life Endorses Cahill for Governor

What about abortion? (5.00 / 1)

Tim Cahill will be an outstanding advocate for the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly.  He will bring commonsense solutions to protecting their rights and their lives.

Tim Cahill is Pro Choice right? How is that being an "outstanding advocate" for the unborn? How do you "protect their rights and lives" if you think it's ok for their mothers to terminate them?

Can someone explain this to me?

And has this group lost its credibility due to endorsing a Pro Choice candidate. (I know they're all pro choice before you Baker Bashers get all wound up.)

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 18:46:21 PM UTC

They endorsed Scott Brown (5.00 / 1)

Scott Brown and Matha Coakley are both "Pro-Choice."  There are major differences between the two on the many issues that actually come up for votes.  If you want more information, click on the link to read Tim Cahill's answers on the MCFL questionnaire.

Bob Hedlund for Minority Leader.

---

by: Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 18:52:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I did (5.00 / 1)

But it seems to me that Pro Life on abortion has to come first because if you aren't allowed to be born then nothing else can follow. The rest is "gravy" as it were.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 18:58:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And whilie it's nice (0.00 / 0)

to say you would sign such and such a law, with the current makeup of the Legislature what are the odds that any of these laws will never hit the governor's desk.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:01:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I meant "ever" not "never" (0.00 / 0)

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:01:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

TLCWeld File Photo (0.00 / 0)

He's getting there, but I think after another comment or two, Karl will finally prove how the Baker/Tisei position of being "to the left of Obama" and having a 100% NARAL voting record is actually being more conservative on this issue.

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:56:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You and Brent need to read a bit better (0.00 / 0)

I said they shouldn't have endorsed anyone. Not Patrick. Not Baker. Not Cahill. They are all pro choice, right? Well how can a Pro Life group support any of them? It makes no friggin sense.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:59:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It makes sense, Karl... (0.00 / 0)

If the organization believes that two of the candidates will actively pursue a pro-choice agenda.

Cahill may be pro-choice, but he won't crusade for it.  You can't say the same for Deval, Baker or Tisei.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:03:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Show me one instance (0.00 / 0)

where Baker has said he is going to actively pursue a pro-choice agenda. The only thing Baker is going to actively pursue is job creation and government reform. Stop making things up.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:08:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Left..... of..... O.... B.... A.... M....A.... (0.00 / 0)

Its not a threat, its a promise!

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:09:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That doesn't mean he's going to act on it, jackass. (0.00 / 0)

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:13:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, his choice for LG (0.00 / 0)

"actively pursued" enacting the Bathroom Bill.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:15:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey leave the facts out of this jackass! n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:18:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How's Paul's vote on gay marriage working for you? (5.00 / 2)

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 23:59:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

But there are other ways to get a liberal, activist agenda enacted in MA (5.00 / 1)

See the Supremem Judicial Court.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:49:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So, while Governot Cahill may not be able to enact these laws... (0.00 / 0)

He will be able to prevent ultra-liberal pro-choice legislation or court decisions from becoming the law of Massachusetts.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:57:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Out of the Six Governor/Lieutenant Governor nominees... (0.00 / 0)

Paul Loscocco is the only one who is pro-life.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:28:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One out of Eight (0.00 / 0)

Bob Hedlund for Minority Leader.

---

by: Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:09:55 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ask Barbara Anderson and Chip Ford (0.00 / 0)

And has this group lost its credibility due to endorsing a Pro Choice candidate.

Barbara Anderson and Chip Ford have been criticized for endorsing Richard "I have a CLT Rating of 43%" Tisei.  Some even went so far as to coin a nickname for Chip ...... Chip "The Dip" Ford.  

 

"Paula Jones was and is trailer-trash" -SomervilleTom

http://bluemassgroup.com/2012/...

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:45:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Makes Perfect Sense (5.00 / 2)

And this endorsement matters.  A lot.  Baker's RMG spin machine can try to minimize this all they want to, but anyone that knows anything about MA politics, and Baker HQ, knows this is a huge problem.  As I've been writing about for some time now, this is the election where conservatives are calling the Republican liberal establishment's bluff.  Traditionally, the role of social conservatives has been to get pissed off at the nominees far left social positions, complain for awhile, then "be reasonable" and vote for the establishment candidate.  As I've written about, this game of chicken has been going on for years, and this year social conservatives aren't going to flinch.

Baker would have gotten away with his social positions and waltzed into the corner office if he'd picked a conservative, or even a well-liked moderate, as his running mate.  Tisei, however was too much.  Everyone on this website knows whether they admit it or not, that Tisei is Baker's fatal mistake.  It was pure arrogance that led him to make that decision.  It was a direct insult to many activists, and even rank and file Republicans have been coming to the conclusion that Richard Tisei just can't be left to take the reins of the Republican Party.

MCFL is a respected and credible organization that made a reasoned and thoughtful decision here.  Cahill may enforce Roe v. Wade, but he clearly wants to make the practice of abortion rare.  Loscocco has a 100% rating from MCFL.  Compare that to Baker that is staunchly pro-choice and to my knowledge hasn't filled out the questionnaire and Tisei with his 100 PERCENT NARAL RATING!!!!!!  Tisei, the man that is one heartbeat away from the corner office and is the governor nominee in waiting if Charlie were to win.  This is a smart decision for a mission vs. Party driven organization that has been largely ignored, used, and "tolerated" by the Republican Party for the last couple decades.  Best case scenario for MCFL is Cahill/Loscocco catch fire and win, appoint some non-activist judges, and pursue policies that limit abortion.  But if nothing else, it sends a message, and it is one that the Republican Party needs to hear.

Add this to the list of reasons I've written about as to why Baker can't win this race.

---

by: massgop5 @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 03:45:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Granting the above... (0.00 / 0)

..for the sake of argument, let me grant you've previously stated.

All that having been said, I do find myself in a MCFL dilemma.  As a pro-life person, I generally value MCFL's endorsement quite a bit.  However, it does seem to fly in the face of sheer logic - especially considering evidence of Tim Cahill's very recently past positions.

Moreso, it seems that MCFL endorses tickets rather than individuals.  That's fine, but that does change the math.

Ultimately, that last quibble is just that... but more problematic for me, and for endorsements in general, is why & how they're done.  As for me?  I endorse a candidate based upon his or her own merits and not simply because they're "not" someone else."  I'm not ignorant of other, negative, factors but my endorsements have always been "for" someone rather than "against" another.

So yes, congratulations to Tim Cahill for scoring a good headline.  I'm not going to even try to attack the MCFL but simply ask them to continue their good works.  As far as this endorsement goes, I do believe it was an honest mistake & that issuing no endorsement may have been more appropriate & sincere.

MCFL,

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 10:31:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

So much for (0.00 / 0)

sending a donation anytime to this group. Pathetic.

Alex S.
Chairman of the Springfield RCC
Mandate to Lead!!! lol

---

by: SpringfieldGOPSec @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 18:54:44 PM UTC

Yes Springfield, (0.00 / 0)

They definitely should have endorsed Baker/TISEI or Patrick/Murray.... Please get over yourself, I know you're having difficulty reconciling the fact that one of the guys you supports is 100% NARAL rated, but don't disparage MCFL.

As it stands Paul Loscocco would be one of the first pro-life constitutional office holders we've had in a long time. That's a big deal to them, as it should be to those of us who care about the issue.

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:48:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why? (0.00 / 0)

Baker is pro-choice like Deval and Tim are. MCFL should not have endorsed ANY of the above. Why support a pro-life group when they won't stick to pro-life candidates?  

Alex S.
Chairman of the Springfield RCC
Mandate to Lead!!! lol

---

by: SpringfieldGOPSec @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:05:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Careful (0.00 / 0)

you might get told to sit down and shut up too.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:06:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Isn't the larger issue... (0.00 / 0)

The fact that Baker-Tisei cannot thumb their noses at social conservatives, keep running further and further to the left, and then be surprised when Cahill picks up the endorsement of conservative groups?  

And maybe they're not surpised, or don't care, but you can't deny that Cahill has outflanked them to the right on these issues.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:12:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

if (0.00 / 0)

conservative groups wants to act ignorant and support a non-conservative like Cahill, by all means, be stupid. There is no conservative running for the governor's deat so let's focus our efforts in supporting state rep/senate candidates who support our values.

Alex S.
Chairman of the Springfield RCC
Mandate to Lead!!! lol

---

by: SpringfieldGOPSec @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:16:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And Social Conservatives (0.00 / 0)

make up how much of the electorate? 2%? Baker is running on government reform and job creation. What, you don't like government reform and job creation? You're going to vote on social issues only? 90% (my guess) of the voters care about jobs and taxes. That's where this election is going to be won.

So kudos, you're to the right of Baker. How far will that get you in "ultra liberal" Massachusetts? You think social moderates and Pro Choice voters in this state won't take notice of this endorsement? "He wants to force me to get an ultra sound before I chose to have an abortion? Who the hell does he think he is! This is my body and my choice damn it!" Yeah that'll play well.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:21:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Is that a herring? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:33:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's a red herring alright! (0.00 / 0)

"Paula Jones was and is trailer-trash" -SomervilleTom

http://bluemassgroup.com/2012/...

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:56:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In a Three-Way Race (0.00 / 0)

2% here and 2% there will be the difference in the race.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:47:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Its the politics of subtraction at Fargo Street (0.00 / 0)

Who needs Western Mass, who needs social cons, who needs anyone else but the country club set?!

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:50:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Joe, I'm going to send you guys this CD for the HQ (0.00 / 0)

It's obviously Tim's theme song,

I'm a man without conviction
I'm a man who doesn't know

Yep fits him to a Tee

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 21:44:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

As a wise man once told me... (0.00 / 0)

In every election, there is a certain group that will vote pro-choice, and a certain group that will vote pro-life.  In Massachusetts, these groups may be 5% each.

The pro-choice vote was always going to Deval.

The pro-life vote will not be going to Baker.

How can Baker keep losing chunks of conservative votes and still be considered viable in this race?  Scott Brown got, what, 96% of the Republican vote in January?  Baker won't come anywhere near that number.  While he doesn't need the total majority that Brown did to win a three-way race, he can't win the race without an overwhelming percentage of the Republican base.  And he simply doesn't have it.  Hardcore social cons and pro-lifers won't vote for him, and polls have shown that Cahill has taken a portion of the Republican vote.

How does Baker win?

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 22:50:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hopefully (5.00 / 2)

those pro-life voters will realize soon enough that Cahill is lying to them to get their votes.  That's what politically opportune chameleons do.  

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 23:27:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Suppose you should have criticised them when they endorsed a pro-choice Scott Brown too n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:08:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

in all honesty? (0.00 / 0)

If I knew about it. Yes.

Alex S.
Chairman of the Springfield RCC
Mandate to Lead!!! lol

---

by: SpringfieldGOPSec @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:09:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If I had known about it (5.00 / 1)

I would have. What's this groups motto, "We're Pro-Life unless there isn't a Pro-Life candidate."? Strong principles there.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:11:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Disagree (0.00 / 0)

Despite my dissapointment with a Cahill endorsement over not endorsing, the Massachusetts Citizens for Life stand up for a principle - a Culture of Life - that transcends petty partisan politics and always deserves whatever contributions you & I may or may not afford to give.

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 10:33:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

it is apparent (0.00 / 0)

with their recent endorsement, that they do not stand for what I thought they did.

Alex S.
Chairman of the Springfield RCC
Mandate to Lead!!! lol

---

by: SpringfieldGOPSec @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 21:01:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One would think that an organization committed (0.00 / 0)

to ending abortion would NEVER endorse a pro choice candidate for anything. They should've sat this one out.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 22:07:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed (0.00 / 0)

The problem here for me is that the MCFL should have taken a pass here or issued a statement of non-endorsement as none are fully pro-life.

Hypothetically, I can see why a pro-life organization may favor one less-pro-abortion candidate over another but an "endorsement" is a much stronger statement.

I disagree that we should entirely throw the baby out with the bathwater here, to intentionally use a bad analogy, but I agree that MCFL made a mistake here.

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 00:19:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Other responses? (0.00 / 0)

I would be interested to see how the other two candidates responded.  Would be nice to know which answer(s) tipped Cahill over the top.

Marc

---

by: msc22777 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:38:33 PM UTC

So, calling himself "to the left" of Obama on social issues... (0.00 / 0)

Didn't put Baker over-the-top with these guys?

I'm shocked.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:46:18 PM UTC

They should've (0.00 / 0)

just sat this race out and retained some credibility. The title is Massachusetts Citizens for Life. Cahill is still Pro Choice even with this endorsement.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:49:05 PM UTC

But clearly not the liberal activists Patrick-Murray and Baker-Tisei are... n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:51:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You can't call yourself (5.00 / 1)

a Pro Life organization and endorse a Pro Choice candidate. I'm not saying they should've endorsed Baker or Patrick. I'm saying they shouldn't have endorsed anyone. What is the foundation this group stands on? Abortion is indefensible right? Well they just endorsed a Pro Choice candidate. That's indefensible.

Why is President Obama's Justice Dept. running guns to Mexican drug cartels, and possibly MS-13 too?

Karl (TLC)Weld

---

by: TLCWeld @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:54:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Totally agree (0.00 / 0)

They never should have endorsed Scott Brown either and in the process really make a significant impact on that race for their cause....

Karl, you lost this one. Sit down and shut up.

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:02:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Improbable but not impossible (0.00 / 0)

I don't know the expressed religious profession of MCFL (even if they have one, which I don't believe they do) but for us Catholics even Pope John Paul the Great allowed for the theoretical political support of one pro-choice candidate over another in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life).  The particular reference is paragraph 3 of section 73.

Basically, a pro-life person could support pro-choice legislation when it would at least be more restrictive & thus more pro-life than the alternative. This generally covers situations say as in 2000 when George W. Bush & Al Gore had Pat Buchanan as a third party candidate.  Considering Buchanan (A staunch pro-lifer) was not a viable candidate then the more pro-life vote was George W. Bush & thus morally acceptable.  Ditto with Alan Keyes over Bush in the primary.

Personally, I don't think that Tim Cahill quite rises to the exemptions of His Holiness in this gubernatorial race.

A particular problem of conscience can arise in cases where a legislative vote would be decisive for the passage of a more restrictive law, aimed at limiting the number of authorized abortions, in place of a more permissive law already passed or ready to be voted on. Such cases are not infrequent. It is a fact that while in some parts of the world there continue to be campaigns to introduce laws favouring abortion, often supported by powerful international organizations, in other nations-particularly those which have already experienced the bitter fruits of such permissive legislation-there are growing signs of a rethinking in this matter. In a case like the one just mentioned, when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and public morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_fat...
 

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 10:41:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

windage and elevation (0.00 / 1)

big deal.this and a charlie pass gets you a ride on the t.

---

by: right wing @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 19:54:15 PM UTC

The question that comes to my mind is..... (0.00 / 0)

"Why the hell did Tim Cahill belong to the Democrat party for all those years?".  

It's kinda like Barack Obama who sat in the congregation of Rev Wright and listened to him spew hateful, racist verbiage for 20 years.  Then when it is discovered he pretends like he didn't know the guy.  

Tim Cahill sat in the Democrat congregation all those years allowing the left to push the abortion issue so far that it offends anyone of a reasonable moral nature.  Heck, Barack Obama is willing to allow living babies, breathing on their own, to be put to death for the sake of protecting the 'rights' of the mother.  Abortion is baby killing!  Now that Cahill is running for the Governor's office he is pretending to be a social conservative.  Wasn't the act of killing babies enough to force him out of the Democrat party long ago?

There is something suspect about Tim's conversion here.  Either, he isn't really as socially conservative as he says - or - he didn't have the gonads to speak up against the murderous sacrifice of innocent children before.  So which is it Timmy?

If you disagree with me you are a racist homophobe.

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:35:41 PM UTC

Did Baker speak up? (0.00 / 0)

Or does he get a pass just because there is an (R) next to his name?

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:38:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

To answer for V3PN... (0.00 / 0)

Apparently.

V3PN,
Its not as if Cahill had much of a home in the GOP either if he was a moderate on the issue. Care to tell me who the most senior republican official in MA is and what his NARAL rating is?

Richard Tisei. 100%.

---

by: South Shore Republican @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:43:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The article was about Cahill, so that is who I addressed. (2.00 / 1)

Trust me though, the idea of supporting either Baker/Tisei or Cahill/Loscocco makes me throw up a little in the back of my mouth.  I will never support Devoid Patrick.  I may have to support either Baker or Cahill.  

Does anyone know of a Constitution Party candidate?  Give me some family values and morals and fiscal responsibility.  That's all I want in a candidate is a few basic family values and morals and fiscal responsibility.....Damnit, why is that so hard to find.....

If you disagree with me you are a racist homophobe.

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 23:48:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Big Picture Question (0.00 / 0)

Can a Republican run a winning campaign for Governor of Massachusetts without the pro-life vote?

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:35:58 PM UTC

windage and elevation (0.00 / 0)

yes.even when the cause is a lost one.

---

by: right wing @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:39:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Pro-life vote" (0.00 / 0)

I don't deny that there is a "pro-life vote" in MA politics, my uncle among them. These are people who will board a bus in January in a snow blizzard to go down and protest Roe v Wade in Washington DC every single year.  But he and many of his traditionalist Catholic friends are such hard-core opponents of abortion that they could never embrace a pro-choice candidate like Cahill. My prediction is that this "pro-life vote" will sit this one out. I don't think that affects Baker much because it's such a small group-- but if Cahill is counting on ardent pro-lifers to keep his flailing campaign afloat, he's in big trouble because they have zero tolerance for degrees of difference on this issue and they answer to a higher authority than the MCFL.  

Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. - H. L. Mencken

---

by: MiracleGirl @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 21:42:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bottom Line, Miracle Girl (0.00 / 0)

Without the pro-life vote, Baker can't win. Period.

And I don't think the pro-life vote is as "small" as you think it is.

---

by: Brent041 @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 21:53:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Red herrings... (5.00 / 1)

1. MCFL figured they'd endorse Tim Cahill now while he's still in this race...just barely treading water...the Cahill-Loscocco financial reports aren't looking too good!

2. No one is or should be shocked by this. Pro-life Baker supporters like me knew that we were ceding this issue to Cahill all along (even though he's pro-abortion!), but we're willing to do that because we know that the Governor has no power to overturn Roe v. Wade.

3. Let's focus on the issues that the Governor CAN influence. When it comes to ensuring that the children of the Commonwealth receive the top-notch education that they deserve, the Governor has a HUGE impact, as we're seeing right now-- he can appoint a whole new Board of Education that will hold the line on high academic standards, assessments, school choice, and equity in school funding. Charlie Baker is the only candidate in the race seriously defending those high standards, while Cahill is out there defending "first and secondary education" (will someone please buy him a CLUE??? It's ELEMENTARY not "first").

In short, the whole issue of abortion is a red herring when it comes to the race for Governor of MA. Let's focus on the real issues that the Governor can influence-- taxes and education. Becoming myopic over an issue he cannot really impact is downright foolish.

Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. - H. L. Mencken

---

by: MiracleGirl @ Tue Jul 20, 2010 at 20:55:01 PM UTC

Judges (5.00 / 1)

Judicial appointments are the largest area of influence, but by no means the only one.  If you read the MCFL questionnaire, those are actual legislative items that could be signed or vetoed by the governor.

We can say that the legislature won't do "X" or "Y" but we need to apply that same logic to all issues.  "Laura's Law" may have a better chance of passing the legislature than a repeal of the Pacheco law does.

Bob Hedlund for Minority Leader.

---

by: Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:17:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Endorsement (0.00 / 0)

The endorsement will not change my voting intention but there are those I know who will at least take a second look at Cahill as a result.  I would wonder how Baker and Tisei responded to the MCFL survey.

---

by: yankeepundit @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 00:13:22 AM UTC

As a pro-life voter... (5.00 / 1)

...and someone who spent the weekend before the Scott Brown Election canvassing Churches with the MCFL endorsement, I'd like to think this will make a difference.

I don't think it will.  I base that on 10+ years of the MCFL endorsement not bringing in the vote for Republicans for the simple reason that it's still an irish Catholic Democratic organization, still holding out hope for the second coming of Ray Flynn, Tom Finneran, or Ed King.

Tim Cahill is no Ed King.  Eabo already pointed that out.

So I think this endorsement gives people like Sheehan second hope that he's not selling his soul, but I doubt it will have much effect on the election outcome.

Brent said elsewhere 2% can make a difference.  When you endorse the third place guy polling at 9%-14%, you're not making a difference.  The only result from this is a Deval win, and that doesn't help protect unborn children.

I wish it wasn't true, but it is.

Follow me on Twitter?  Sure, why not.  www.twitter.com/paulferro

---

by: Paul R. Ferro @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 01:49:58 AM UTC

The Facts (0.00 / 0)

In his first major decision in his campaign for Governor, Tim Cahill picked as his Lieutenant Governor Paul Loscooco, a staunch pro-lifer.

In his first major decision in his campaign for Governor, Charlie Baker picked as his Lieutenant Governor Richard Tisei, a man with a 100% rating from NARAL and a clear liberal activist agenda.

How can any of you be surprised by this endorsement?

---

by: Brent041 @ Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 13:46:24 PM UTC

Wrong Fact..... (5.00 / 1)

Actually, the first major decision Tim Cahill made was realize he couldn't beat Deval in a primary, and switch parties after being a 20-year democrat.

Every decision after that was based on being "independant"

Grease Fire

---

by: PitBullGOP @ Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 02:11:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yo! Whats-your-name (0.00 / 0)

You that guy closer to Jill Stein in the polls. I'll vote for abortion before I'd vote for you.

---

by: billxi @ Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 13:30:29 PM UTC