Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 28 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Pandering Destroys Purpose

By       (Page 2 of 3 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.     (# of views)   1 comment
Author 80363
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Eric Lucas
Become a Fan
  (7 fans)

100%   Anti-Abortion and 100% Pro-Choice

 

Perhaps the clearest example of this kind of pandering occurred in a local race in our city in 2004.   On September 1, 2004 the Everett Herald ran a story entitled: "On abortion, lawmaker is on both sides: Everett lawmaker receives perfect ratings from pro and anti factions."

 

In the article, reporter David Olson revealed the controversy generated by Rep. David Simpson's efforts to gain the endorsements of Human Life of Washington, an anti-abortion group, and NARAL Pro-Choice Washington.   In completing their questionnaires he indicated support for both organizations.  

 

In fact, Human Life of Washington, was so impressed with his answers that "it endorsed him in the 38th Legislative District primary Sept. 14 against union leader Mike Sells."   He told them that he was "so strongly against abortion that he supports making it illegal in almost all circumstances."

 

Then both groups learned of the answers given the other.   To their surprise each group had given him their highest score.  Olson reported that Simpson "became perhaps the first political candidate in state history to get a 100 percent score from both organizations."  

When this was discovered Human Life CEO Dan Kennedy said he felt "burned" and that the group would "withdraw its endorsement."  In addition he stated, "I have never heard of anything like this.  It's disingenuous in the least, and extremely troubling."

When Simpson learned that his answers had been made public he stated that his response to Human Life's questionnaire were incorrect.  

 

Olson reported that Karen Cooper of NARAL was "miffed that Simpson apparently was trying to play both sides of the fence on the politically volatile abortion issue."   He quoted her as saying:

"To be 100 percent pro-choice and 100 percent anti-choice is a total contradiction in terms. I think this is about trying to please the listener and saying what the listener wants."     

 

Olson's article was published just before the 2004 primary election.

 

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

Must Read 2   Well Said 1   Valuable 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Eric Lucas Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Eric Z. Lucas is an alumnus of Stanford University (Creative Writing Major: 1972-1975), the University of Washington (1981: BA English Literature and Elementary Education) and Harvard Law School, J.D. 1986. Since law school he has been a public (more...)
 

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Black Lives Matter: The Problem of Citizenship

Create the Compassionate Society

Black Lives Matter: Voting Rights Are Not Enough

The Power of Sincerity

Redefining Citizenship Can End the War on Drugs

Demonization and Political Rhetoric