Planned Parenthood Rips Gardner In New Ad

UPDATE: The Colorado Independent's John Tomasic:

Gardner is unlikely to come out ahead in the web war. His performance in his ad is stilted expository. He says he “changed his mind on personhood” but he hasn’t. He backed a slew of anti-abortion bills over the last decade and as an officeholder and he supported personhood ballot initiatives in the state two-election seasons in a row. More to the point, he still says he is adamantly anti-abortion and he is a current co-sponsor of the main personhood bill on the docket on the Hill, the “Life at Conception Act.” Gardner’s ad has the “I didn’t do it” feel of a man who has been caught and put against a wall and asked a question point blank.

The series of ads on Gardner and personhood — or women’s health more generally — poses a question: What’s to stop Udall from doing this to Gardner repeatedly on a host of issues? What’s next, immigration-policy reform? Gay rights? The prospect raises another question: What’s to stop all Democratic candidates in the state running in swing districts or for statewide offices from “Gardnering” their opponents this way on the same set of issues, where majorities of voters solidly embrace Democratic positions?

—–

A press release this afternoon announces Planned Parenthood's new ad, attacking Republican U.S. Senate candidate Cory Gardner for his sort-of-but-not-really reversal on the "Personhood" abortion bans–and noting that Gardner remains a co-sponsor of virtually identical federal legislation:

In the ad, which will run online across Colorado, the narrator reads: “Meet Congressman Gardner’s new favorite key,” as the camera scans a keyboard and settles on “delete.” The narrator continues, “Congressman Gardner is trying to erase part of his record,” highlighting his support for the Life at Conception Act. The narrator ends with “Congressman Gardner still wants to take medical decisions away from you, and your doctor.”

“Colorado voters won’t be fooled by Cory Gardner’s cynical attempts to whitewash his dangerous record on women’s health issues. When he went to Washington, Gardner continued his long-standing support for extreme measures that would interfere with a woman’s personal medical decisions — including the ‘Life at Conception Act,’ a nationwide so-called ‘personhood’ measure,” said Planned Parenthood Votes Colorado Vice President of Public Affairs, Cathy Alderman.
 
“One thing remains clear: Cory Gardner can’t be trusted. That’s why we’ll be working around the clock to make sure Colorado women and families know the high stakes for women’s health and rights this November. We know that Planned Parenthood advocacy and political organizations are a trusted source of information and that women listen to us when we speak out to them about issues that affect their health and rights. We know what it takes to win, and we’re in it for the long run,” said Planned Parenthood Votes Executive Vice President, Dawn Laguens.

Gardner's continued sponsorship of the federal Life at Conception Act, which contains the key similar language from the Personhood abortion bans about rights conferred "at the moment of fertilization," is one of the biggest reasons it is so baffling to see Gardner publicly defending his flip-flop on the Colorado Personhood measures. For Gardner to remove himself as a co-sponsor of the Life at Conception Act, a recorded action is needed–and without that, his flip on the state Personhood measure can be easily portrayed as thinly veiled deception.

There's nothing Gardner can do to honorably extricate himself. There are no principles on display here, only political calculation. Taking his name off the federal Personhood legislation at this point, after struggling with this self-inflicted wound for months, will only underscore what everyone knows: Gardner cares about saving his political skin, and basically nothing else.

19 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. ModeratusModeratus says:

    Doesn't your outrage apply to Hickenlooper and the mag ban too?

    Either way:

    • Curmudgeon says:

      It's driving you crazy, isn't it, that in spite of Hick's backpedaling, he's STILL going to win, and your little Scotty isn't even going to get to play?

    • BlueCat says:

      Well, Modster, you're certainly the expert on dead horse beating. See your constant stream of delusional posts proclaiming the sure victory of the guy far behind the number one and two spots in your party primary. And don't you see the lightest inconsistency with being against any degree of gun control and for controlling other people's personal family planning and health decisions?

    • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

      credit for the graphic, though, Moderanus, it's cute….

    • Diogenesdemar says:

      Nope.

       

      (But do feel free to continue beating that dead horse,  . . . or anything else you can . . . )

    • langelomisteriosolangelomisterioso says:

      Moddy- I'd ask first, does your outrage extend to Harry Reid's statement on his Irak vote?then something no gunsterbator has ever explained why would anyone need that many rounds, and an autoloader to deliver them? Hick has lots of room to maneuver both within his base and outside it. Gardner has almost no margin for error especially with your sort of raving lunatic supporters.

  2. Ralphie says:

    False equivalences again moddy?

    Whistling past the graveyard again moddy?

    • Early WormEarly Worm says:

      I think it is a relevant equivalency in one respect, but false in others. Both Gardner and Hickenlooper appear craven. But Hickenlooper can, and has, pissed off the left with no negative consequence.  He can apologize for the magazine limit all he wants and drink fracking fluid, but that is not going to make lefties or moderates vote for Tanc. Gardner on the other hand, has managed to alienate the left that does not believe he has actually changed his position, and the right that feel betrayed. The middle are not going to trust him, and they have very viable, if not exciting, alternative in Udall.

  3. Gray in Mountains says:

    Cory changed his position because he had a position that would sell well in CD4. He knows he can't sell it statewide. Who has any idea what he really believes? Except that he should have a job

  4. Charlie3637 says:

    So now we have the latest, desperate move to convince women he is on their side. Gardner, in the DP op-ed below is suggesting birth control pills are sold over the counter.

    http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_25995739/women-should-be-able-buy-pill-without-prescription

    He is incredibly ignorant and insulting to women. Female health care is complex and there is a reason they need doctors to help with birth control issues.  Once again, a man is trying to tell women how to control their bodies. Unbelievable. Viagra over the counter next please.  Now that would really be great.

    This guy is so desperate is is sending out fly balls left and right hoping someone will catch the bad throw.

    Weigh in women….do you want to buy a pill over the counter without knowing how those hormones are going to effect your body?  What strength, what type?

    Can't weight to hear from the Ob-Gyns on this one.

     

     

     

     

     

    • BlueCat says:

      Doesn't the full rights at conception crowd believe birth control pills are abortifacient? They aren't going to like that one bit.What I can't figure out is how it is most righties frown on most effective forms of birth control but don't have particularly large numbers of children. How does that work? Do as I say, not as I do or do they just stop having sex? Will some rightie with just a couple of kids help me out here?

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      Cory Gardner…..unbelievable, in every sense of that word. 

      So this is just a way to make contraception not covered by insurance…if it's "over the counter", then the individual buys it like aspirin. Gardner says that this would mean that

      we can protect the liberties of women to have easy access to affordable oral contraception at the same time we protect the rights of those with conscience objections.

      Have it both ways, in other words. Throw a sop to the religious base, make Big Pharm happy (because how likely is it that it really will stay cheap? Just like generic drugs, too much opportunity for obscene profits. )

      And, no, I don't think that it's a very good idea, healthwise. Some women with histories of certain cancers should never take any hormonal birth control. Someone also needs to be monitoring for side effects and making sure regular exams are happening. Being under a doctor's care is a good idea for any baby-making parts for either gender.

      • Charlie3637 says:

        And this guy has a daughter? So he has gone from wanting his daughter to never have pre-marital sex, or at least protected pre-martial sex to allowing an adult to purchase birth control for her without a doctor weighing?  Stunning change of heart. He will try to muddy the waters but I don't think women will buy this at all. Didn't he vote to defund Planned Parenthood where birth control is provided at low cost or no cost?  Women only need a check up once a year, not every time a prescription is filled.

        Polls must have him losing badly on this issue. 

      • gertie97 says:

        When he puts Viagra off insurance coverage, maybe I'll listen to him.

  5. FrankUnderwood says:

    But WHY???  He's now against the egg amendment.  Give him a few more weeks.  If the polls are still close, he support keeping Roe v. Wade while personally deploring abortion.  By the time this race is done, he's gonna make Beauprez like a man of uncompromising principles…..

  6. Tom says:

    Gardner is a bit like Mr. Potatohead, thinking that he just has to add the proper accessories to fit whichever part (also he kinda has a big head). Next he'll be a fireman, or maybe Darth Vader.

     

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.