Buck Looks To Bury “Buyer’s Remorse” Catastrophe

UPDATE: The conservative Daily Caller helps roll out the new female-friendly Ken Buck:

Buck promises this video is merely be the first in a series of maybe ten, or so, he will release. And although they’re too long to air on TV in their current format, “at some point in time,” he avers, “parts of these interviews will be pulled out and ads will be created to set the record straight.”

For a candidate hoping to neutralize a predictable attack, having these testimonials filmed and in the can should go a long way. “I anticipate that once again the Democrats will create the ‘war on women’ narrative,” he said, “and these women talk about who I [really] am.”


2010 GOP Senate nominee Ken Buck.

2010 GOP Senate nominee Ken Buck.

T.M. Fasano writes for the Greeley Tribune today in a story shameless puff piece notably outside their usual paywall:

[Ken] Buck, the Weld district attorney and GOP frontrunner to run against Colorado Sen. Mark Udall in the U.S. Senate race, unveiled a two-minute video titled “Ken Cares: Stephanie’s Story.” Several other videos will be released over the next several weeks and months also showing Buck’s support from women…

When Buck ran for the U.S. Senate seat against Michael Bennet, and barely lost, in 2010, he was portrayed as anti-woman, something that annoys Buck to this day. [Pols emphasis]

“It’s terrible. It’s an absolute lie. I have a daughter. I have a wife,” Buck said. “I understand that politics is unfair, but at some point there has to be some basis in truth and the fact is that I have spent 25 years of my life trying to help the most vulnerable in our community. For someone to suggest that because I’m pro-life that I don’t care about the vulnerable is not logical.”

He added, “What the Democrats have done to me and to Romney and to dozens of others is to say that because we are pro-life we don’t care about women. Nothing can be further from the truth. We have a position on one issue. Look at the whole group of issues before making a decision. What the liberals have done is they have taken one issue and have tried to create a character trait based on that issue and it just isn’t true.”

Of course, there's an obvious bottom line underlying any effort to rehabilitate the image of Weld County DA Ken Buck with women voters:

Buck’s numbers in the latest Quinnipiac University poll has him trailing Udall by only 3 percentage points (45 to 42), but among women voters he’s trailing Udall by 21 percentage points (54 to 33). [Pols emphasis]

“I’ve never met someone who is as dedicated as Ken, so it’s very surprising to me to see the polls showing such little support for him over women’s issues,” [domestic violence survivor Stephanie] Drobny said.

During Ken Buck's failed 2010 campaign for the U.S. Senate, a race he unexpectedly lost principally due to a crushing lack of support from women voters, there were many incidents that hurt him–like during the primary campaign against Jane Norton, when he suggested Republicans vote for him because he does "not wear high heels." Buck also aggressively campaigned on a "no exceptions" platform of opposition to abortion, proudly volunteering that he opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest.

But the worst came for Buck when a story broke in early October of 2010 about a case of alleged sexual assault he had refused to prosecute, claiming the alleged victim had a case of "buyer's remorse"–this despite the fact that the alleged perpetrator was caught on tape admitting to the crime. The victim in turn had a recording of Buck's callous treatment of her during the investigation, which she released. Combined with a disastrous appearance on Meet the Press and already well-established anti-woman narratives about Buck from the primary campaign (see above), this event helped turn Buck's momentum toward likely victory at the end of September into a narrow loss to Sen. Michael Bennet by Election Day.

Recognizing what happened, Buck is smart to work overtime to repair the damage with women voters in 2010–the persistence of which appears to be his biggest impediment as the GOP's frontrunner for the nomination to challenge incumbent Sen. Mark Udall in 2014. The fact that women voters remember Buck well enough to favor Udall by twenty-one points means that Democrats did a very good job in 2010.

Still, Buck gets credit for recognizing this as his biggest challenge. Much like the hard-right Rep. Mike Coffman pulling a 180 on immigration, though, can Ken "Buyer's Remorse" Buck really make nice with the ladies? It's a tall order to say the least.

Photo: Owen Hill Speaks At Saturday’s Roe v. Wade Protest

Sunday's Denver Post included a story about protests that occurred Saturday marking the 41st anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision, which established the right of American women to abortion of unwanted pregnancies. The story goes into some detail about the fact that the battle over abortion in Colorado is ramping up yet again, with a Republican-sponsored bill to ban all abortions introduced in the state legislature, and yet another flavor of the "personhood" abortion ban headed for the statewide ballot this November.

For as much useful background on abortion politics that Christopher Osher's story supplies readers, he focuses almost exclusively on the protest organized Saturday by the Catholic Church–making only the briefest of mentions of another protest, organized by Colorado Right to Life, "at the state Capitol." The problem is, that protest was certainly the event more relevant to the political backstory Osher lays out. Frustratingly, we've not been able to find any coverage of the CRTL protest, not even on the organization's own websites and social media. If anyone has links to coverage of this event, please give us them in comments or email us, and we'll update this post.

What we do know is that hard core anti-abortion group Colorado Right to Life held a protest at the state capitol on Saturday, and that the keynote speaker at this event was none other than Republican U.S. Senate candidate Owen Hill. We know that only due to this photo, sent to us from the event via a passer-by:


With all due respect to Archbishop Samuel Aquila, shouldn't this be part of the story? Our guess is Hill is trying as hard as he can to pump up his pro-life credentials while Ken Buck and Amy Stephens flail away at each other. That said, it may honestly be that Owen Hill's so-far minor Senate candidacy just doesn't rate much coverage.

But somebody tell us what Hill had to say to that horrifying little doll, who is also nowhere to be found in news coverage.

Stephens touts her gender as asset but she shares Buck’s extreme anti-abortion stance

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

In an article yesterday, The Denver Post's Kurtis Lee reports Rep. Amy Stephens' response to Ken Buck's comment Monday comparing pregnancy with cancer:

"It's Ken again being Ken," Stephens, who is among several Republicans vying to unseat U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, insisted Thursday. "Just like in 2010, we have high-heels comments, we have alcoholism and homosexuality, now we've got cancer and pregnancy."

Buck in 2010 was the nominee for U.S. Senate against Democrat Michael Bennet. His statement on "Meet the Press" comparing homosexuality to alcoholism was considered the turning point in a campaign he had been expected to win.

Before telling Lee about "Ken again being Ken," Stephens was on KNUS' Dan Caplis Show Wed., where she made her opinion of Buck's candidacy even more clear, saying she does not believe Colorado Republicans will unify around Buck if he wins the nomination, and saying, based on what Buck's offered so far, it would be the "definition of insanity" to run Buck again.

Stephens @10 min: I am not convinced Ken has given us an argument as to why we should go down this path again. And I call the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over with the same results….

I also believe nationally, and I have heard this in my travels, that there is not going to be — You know, when somebody wins a primary, people rally, come around. The party goes, whatever. I do not believe that's going to happen should Ken be the nominee. I do believe this would happen should I become the nominee, because I think there will be a lot more interest in this race and a lot more support. [BigMedia emphasis]

Listen to Rep. Amy Stephens tout herself as a woman and slam Buck on KNUS 1-15-14

On the radio, Stephens went on to say that she'd be better able to "take on Sen. Udall on issues that they normally love to hit our men with, and I think as a woman, I have a very strong voice to speak about."

But as Caplis should have pointed out, Stephens' anti-abortion record, including ten years on the staff of Focus on the Family, sets herself up for the same criticism Buck has faced.


Nothing Learned: House GOP Introduces 2014′s Abortion Ban Bill

UPDATE: Karen Middleton of NARAL Pro Choice Colorado weighs in:

“It’s bad enough that this bill puts politicians and government in between Colorado women, their families, and their physicians, something Colorado voters have repeatedly rejected at the ballot box,” said Karen Middleton, Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado. “This bill could result in jailing doctors. A Class 3 felony is a minimum 4-12 year sentence.”

“This bill is  an insult to Colorado women and Colorado physicians, and out of touch with Colorado voters. Too many of our politicians still don’t get it,” Middleton concluded.


A metaphor.

A metaphor.

Making even many Republican strategists cringe, while Democrats marvel at their good luck–a press release moments ago from the Colorado House Democratic Majority announces House Bill 14-1133, a bill sponsored by a large group of Republican lawmakers that very straightforwardly makes abortion a class 3 felony:

Rep. Humphrey’s bill, HB14-1133, would ban abortions in Colorado. It was  introduced today with  the cosponsorship of Minority Leader Brian DelGrosso (R-Loveland) and Reps. Perry Buck (R-Windsor), Justin Everett (R-Littleton), Chis Holbert (R-Parker), Lois Landgraf (R-Colorado Springs), Daniel Nordberg (R-Colorado Springs), Kevin Priola (R-Henderson), Lori Saine (R-Dacono), Jerry Sonnenberg (R-Sterling), Spencer Swalm (R-Centennial) and Jared Wright (R-Fruita). 

The Humphrey bill says anyone who performs an abortion in Colorado commits a Class 3 felony, making no exception in cases of rape or incest. It would ban all forms of pregnancy termination, including Plan B, the “morning-after pill.” The bill also defines life at conception and would ostensibly establish “personhood” in Colorado’s statutes…

“Been there, done that,” Rep. Court said. “Colorado is not going to deny a woman’s right to choose or allow the government to meddle in the private relationship between a woman and her doctor. And similar measures in other states have repeatedly been ruled unconstitutional. The sponsors of these bills are setting a new standard for being out of touch.” 

Rep. Brittany Pettersen (D-Lakewood) pointed to statewide votes in 2008 and 2010 in which Coloradans decisively rejected proposed constitutional amendments to ban abortion. 

“Colorado is clearly a pro-choice state,” she said. “Rep. Humphrey and a large group of House Republicans are trying to overturn the verdict of the voters. The GOP just doesn’t get it.” 

“Colorado Republicans push extreme positions that disrespect the women of our state and trample on their freedoms,” Majority Leader Dickey Lee Hullinghorst (D-Boulder) said. “And then those same Republicans wonder why they lose elections.” [Pols emphasis]

Here's the text of the abortion ban bill as introduced. In the Senate, the bill is sponsored by Sens. Scott Renfroe, Kevin Grantham, Ted Harvey, Kent Lambert, Kevin Lundberg, Vicki Marble, and Mark Scheffel

If you were wondering if perhaps Republicans might be thinking a little more strategically about this year's elections in light of perceived Democratic weakness, and as a result maybe considering some moderation, affected or otherwise, to maximize their chances with swing voters…well, you can stop wondering.

It appears, at long last, that they just can't help themselves.

Radio host should have questioned Buck when he compared his bout with cancer to pregnancy

(Open mouth, insert cowboy boot – promoted by Colorado Pols)

POLS UPDATE: Salon picks up the story:

Fast-forward three-plus years later, and Buck’s at it again. The goal this time? Don’t say anything stupidly and overtly sexist. That shouldn’t be too hard, right?

Turns out, yep, that is too hard! Speaking on a talk radio show on Wednesday, Buck attempted to explain his anti-choice absolutism — he opposes abortion in all cases, including rape and incest — by likening a woman’s desire to control her own body while pregnant to how he felt when he had cancer.


Apparently trying to connect to women voters, who arguably cost him a U.S. Senate seat in 2010, Ken Buck appeared on a Denver radio station Monday and discussed the differences and similarities between pregnancy and his recent bout with cancer.

Asked by 560-AM KLZ talk-show host Randy Corporon about his abortion position, Buck, who's running again for U.S. Senate this year, said:

Buck: "Yes, I am pro-life. While I understand a woman wants to be in control of her body.–it's certainly the feeling that I had when I was a cancer patient, I wanted to be in control of the decisions that were made concerning my body–there is another fundamental issue at stake. And that's the life of the unborn child. And I hold that life dear and precious and believe we have to do everything we can to protect the life of the unborn." 

So Buck is saying that his successful battle with cancer is like pregnancy insofar as they both require decisions affecting a human body. But for a cancer patient like Buck, they are personal medical decisions, and Buck was glad to be able to make them. But for a woman who is pregnant, difficult as it may be, she shouldn’t be afforded the same freedom to make decisions affecting her body.

In 2010, Buck made no secret about his strong anti-abortion position, enthusiastically repeating his opposition to all abortion, even for rape or incest. In one radio interview, he expressed his opposition to abortion, even for a girl raped by her teen brother.

Now Buck drives his anti-abortion point home in the starkest of language by saying how happy he is that the government didn’t dictate his health decisions when he had cancer. But pregnant women should have no choice.


“Personhood” Claims Credit For Rivera Recall Win; Vows More

Personhood USA.

Personhood USA.

As the Colorado Statesman's Peter Marcus reports–you might not agree, but be aware of this spin:

Motivated by a grassroots uprising this summer that ousted two sitting Democratic state senators, proponents of a ballot initiative that would ask voters in 2014 to define an unborn child as a “person” say they are likely to target Republicans who don’t support their anti-abortion movement…

Keith Mason, president of Personhood USA, said his organization and its followers feel empowered after gun rights activists and liberty groups were able to take down Senate President John Morse and Sen. Angela Giron last month with limited financing compared to recall opponents. Similar to personhood, the efforts were assembled by a grassroots base that felt overlooked by state officeholders.

Mason points out that his volunteers inserted themselves into the recall elections, where personhood once again became an issue. Political attack ads highlighted the Republican successor candidates’ support for personhood. Bernie Herpin in Colorado Springs and George Rivera in Pueblo faced the assaults.

Herpin found himself on the defensive, vowing that he did not support personhood. But Rivera unapologetically stated his support for the drive.

In response, Mason said personhood supporters sent volunteers to Pueblo to help Rivera, but ignored Herpin in Colorado Springs because he rejected the initiative.

Supporters of the "Personhood" abortion ban constitutional amendments, which appeared on the ballot in Colorado in 2008 and 2010 and only narrowly missed the ballot again in 2012, have at times been quite belligerent with their fellow Republicans who express an insufficient degree of support. The reason is simple: the issue of banning abortions can be as damaging to Republicans campaigning in a general election as it is a litmus test in a Republican primary. The best example was probably the assault on U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer, who faced withering criticism for his failure to endorse the 2008 initiative–complicated by Schaffer's defense of labor practices in the Mariana Islands which allegedly included forced abortions on pregnant female workers. In 2010 and to a greater extent 2012, Personhood proponents softpedaled their criticism of Republicans who were by then in full retreat on the issue–at least publicly.

Well, folks, antithetical to the desire by most Republicans to keep themselves out of this toxic wedge-issue fray, the Personhooders evidently think the recent recalls prove they were right all along. Sen. George Rivera's victory in Pueblo, whatever the true reasons, seems to have persuaded the anti-abortion movement to double down–which means taking a public stand for or against Republican candidates based on their support.

However giddy with victory they may be, we know Republicans who will find that prospect absolutely horrifying.

Radio host should have pointed out that Buck himself, not the “liberal media,” hurt him most in 2010

(Wouldn't that be a shock? – Promoted by Colorado Pols)

During an interview on KNUS' Jimmy Sengenberger Show Sat., GOP Senate candidate Ken Buck explained what he learned from his 2010 loss to Democrat Michael Bennet.

Buck told Sengenberger that, this time around, he won't let the "liberal media" and "liberal candidates" distract him from the "issues that voters care about." Listen to Buck on KNUS Sengenberger Show 9.21.13.

Judging from what Buck has said previously about his failed 2010 campaign, he was undoubtedly thinking about his views on social issues, like abortion, which were widely viewed as his downfall last time around.

But the ironic part is, if you think back to 2010, the most damaging single utterance Buck made, caught on video at a conservative gun gathering, showed a shocking exuberance by Buck himself to talk about his opposition to abortion, even in the cases of rape and incest.


Westword interview offers illuminating national perspective on abortion issues in state elections

(Promoted by Colorado Pols) In a Westword interview published today, NARAL President Ilyse Hogue says Virginia's November gubernatorial race is "something of a test case" to find out if the anti-choice positions of a candidate prove to be his downfall, just as abortion issues tipped the electoral scales against 2010 Republican Senate candidate Ken Buck here in Colorado.

Westword's Michael Roberts reports:


Radio host should’ve corrected Herpin’s statement that he’d have no say on birth control

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

A radio talk show host should have corrected Colorado Springs recall candidate Bernie Herpin, when he denied yesterday that, if elected, he wouldn't have any power to restrict a woman's access to birth control.

Here's what Herpin said on KVOR's Richard Randall Show yesterday:

Randall @4:00: When they say, certain types of birth control, the implication is, if you elect an extremist like Bernie Herpin, you’re not even going to be able to get your birth-control pills in the state of Colorado.

Herpin: …Of course I’m not going to do anything to restrict a woman’s choice on birth control. That’s completely ridiculous, and I don’t even have that power. Jeez.

In fact, state government tries to restrict access to contraception because anti-abortion lawmakers consider some forms of contraception, like the morning-after pill, to be abortion drugs.

Herpin apparently missed the news, for example, that Oklahoma just passed a law requiring women 17 and over to show ID (and younger women to have a prescription) to buy emergency Plan B contraception. Last month, a judge stopped implementation of the law, which conflicts with recent FDA guidelines, pending a review of whether it violates the state constitution.

Judging from Herpin's past support for government restrictions to protect zygotes (fertilized eggs), you'd expect him to support such legislation, given that some believe Plan B potentially destroys zygotes. 


Chutzpah, The “Right To Choose” Edition

Laura Carno is terribly, terribly clever.

Laura Carno is terribly, terribly clever.

Next Saturday, a conservative women's group called the Colorado Women's Alliance will conduct a "Winning With Women Walk" to support the recall effort against Senate President John Morse. What's interesting about this is not the appearance of another Laura Carno-fronted "women's group" in a recall election already crowded with mercenaries, but the wording of their invitation:

Join us as "Winning with Women" takes to the streets to Get Out the Vote for the Recall Elections! Plain and simple, Senator John Morse's policies have hurt Women:  He has denied Women "the right to choose" how to defend ourselves, [Pols emphasis] his tax-and-spend policies have hurt our rural families, and now he wants to burden us with a Billion-dollar tax increase – the largest tax increase in Colorado history! Our families can't afford to have him in office a single day longer!

Morse…has denied women…"the right to choose?" That choice of words was a bit much for Cathy Alderman of Planned Parenthood Votes Colorado, who responded in an understandably irate statement late Friday:

"What Colorado families 'can't afford' is extremist right-wing special interests masquerading as women's advocacy groups," said Cathy Alderman, Vice President of Public Affairs for Planned Parenthood Votes Colorado. "Senator Morse has been a champion for women and women's health as long as he has been in office. Senator Morse deserves better than misleading attacks from conservative groups who don't care about women or the issues that matter to us." [Pols emphasis]

Particularly after the flap over SD-11 GOP recall successor candidate Bernie Herpin's strained parsing of the (not much) difference between his Pikes Peak Citizens for Life candidate questionnaire responses and the "Personhood" abortion/birth control ban initiatives, rallying women to march against John Morse for "denying women the 'right to choose'" strikes us as too clever by somewhat more than half. We don't care what district you're running in, more women voters are going to associate "the right to choose" with reproductive choice than "the right to choose" any gun your heart desires–especially since Morse didn't ban any woman's "choice" of any legally available gun. True, excepting those who commit domestic violence, but we don't think Laura Carno will find very many women up in arms about that.

Seven days and a wake-up, folks. Until then, expect no limit to what you're asked to accept with a straight face.

Pueblo Chieftain managing editor falsely writes that recall candidate’s abortion views are “irrelevant”

(Seriously? Is this a joke? – Promoted by Colorado Pols)

You want a columnist to have an opinion but only if the facts supporting it are actual factual facts.

Pueblo Chieftain Managing Editor Steve Henson got the opinion part of the columnist's job right on Sunday, but he dropped the ball when it came to the facts.

In his column, Henson asked if it should matter to Pueblo voters that Republican George Rivera, who's running to replace Democrat Angela Giron in a recall election, opposes all abortion, even after rape or incest.

In explaining why abortion shouldn't matter, Henson wrote:

First and foremost, the entire issue of where a candidate stands on abortion is irrelevant. The courts have controlled this issue for more than 40 years and that’s where the debate will end up in the future. Plus, no one state-elected official will have any control over what is a national issue.

Anyone who follows abortion issues knows that it's actually factually false to say that no state lawmaker has any influence on abortion issues.

States across the country have passed a volume of laws restricting a women's right to obtain an abortion. I mean, did Henson miss the drama in Texas just last month? The Guttmacher Institute has a handy dandy chart that Hansen might want to take a look at, summarizing the 9 categories of laws passed in each state. 


Thou Doth Protest Too Much, Bernie Herpin

A joint press release today from Colorado Springs GOP usual suspects Jeff Crank and Laura Carno, the latter being the head of a group that helped fund the recall attempt against Senate President John Morse, announces a complaint against the ad you see above, claiming the ad makes "reckless and false" statements about SD-11 recall successor candidate Bernie Herpin. Excerpt:

Jeff Crank and Laura Carno, with legal analysis in hand, today have asked four Colorado Springs television stations to remove television commercials that contain “false and reckless statements”.  These ads have been produced and paid for by “We Can Do Better”.

The ads in question contain false statements against Republican Candidate for Senate District 11, Bernie Herpin, stating that he supports the Personhood Amendment, when in fact, he does not.

“I’ve fought untruthful ads run by candidates from both political parties for many years now but it’s been a long time since I’ve seen such an absolute lie in a political ad.  People have little faith in politicians because of untrue, dishonest ads like this one.  The law is fairly clear that you cannot “knowingly” broadcast a lie,” said Jeff Crank.   “The group that put out this ad knows that there is no evidence that Bernie Herpin supported the Personhood Amendment yet they tied him to another candidate who does.  They lied and they knew they lied.  Under the law, these ads must be taken off the air and I call on John Morse and Angela Giron to have the guts to condemn these untruthful, despicable, exploitative ads.”

Laura Carno said, “This is about integrity in the public square. Politicians on both sides of the aisle, who lie in order to win, should reconsider their careers.  Voters want elected officials who tell the truth, and that includes telling the truth during their campaigns.”

This is an interesting development, but we don't think it was wise to challenge this ad for several reasons. First and foremost, as we discussed earlier this week, Herpin answered a Pikes Peak Citizens for Life candidate questionnaire just this past April, where he proudly claims to be pro-life, and says that we "become persons" at the "single cell" stage of development. As we noted, that's almost exactly the language of the "Personhood" amendments from 2008 and 2010. 2008's Amendment 48 stated that "the terms 'person' or 'persons' shall include any human being from the moment of fertilization." In 2010, Amendment 62's language was that "the term 'person' shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being." The negative effects of the "Personhood" initiative as described in the ad above are not enumerated in the one-sentence language of the amendments, but would be the net effect of passage.

Secondly, Crank and Carno appear to jettison the other recall successor candidate, SD-3's George Rivera, by claiming this ad "tied" Herpin to "another candidate" who does support the "Personhood" initiatives. Angela Giron's SD-3 is a Democratic stronghold, where support for "Personhood" is likely to hurt even worse than it would in Morse's swing SD-11. But not only are Carno and Crank unconcerned about Rivera, they're actually triangulating off Rivera and his unabashed support for "Personhood" and banning abortion.

In short, you've got a dubious challenge to a claim that, even if it's flawed and we don't think it is, inevitably segues into a conversation about abortion that Bernie Herpin doesn't want to have. Once Herpin is forced to explain these candidate questionnaire responses, Crank and Carno's claim that this ad is "false and reckless" simply breaks down. And to "save" Herpin from an allegation that actually does have basis in fact, El Paso County Republicans are throwing the Pueblo Republican recall candidate under the wheels.

Bottom line: we think they are genuinely worried about this.

Official website of new personhood initiative doesn’t mention “personhood”

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Reporters covering the signature-gathering campaign for the so-called Brady amendment, which would change the definition of “person" and "child" under Colorado law to include “unborn human beings,” might wonder whether to call it "personhood" initiative.

Apparently, anti-abortion activists have had the same question, prompting Gualberto Garcia Jones, who's listed on the CO Secretary of State's website as a "designated representative" of the initiative, to send an email July 24 to supporters clarifying the issue:

Some of our supporters have asked whether the Brady Amendment is a personhood amendment. The answer is yes! A personhood measure is any proposal that constitutionally seeks to recognize (without exceptions) that unborn babies are persons deserving of our love and protection by law….

One need look no further than the section of the Colorado law that deals with homicide to see how central the concept of personhood is: the homicide section is appropriately titled "Offenses Against the Person." The Brady Amendment recognizes that all human beings, not just those who are born, are persons and amends the criminal code to that effect! …

Whether it is a drunk driver who avoids facing any charges for the death of a baby that is just days from birth, or a hospital that avoids malpractice liability for the death of unborn babies in its care, or an abortionist who kills children in the womb for a living, the fact is that all three rely on the same reasoning: the baby in the womb is not a person and therefore his or her life has no value in the eyes of the law.

[Read Garcia Jones' entire email at the end of this blog post.]

But in contrast to Jones' email and Colorado Right to Life's recent comment in the Colorado Statesman, the official website of the initiative's backers doesn't mention "personhood" at all. It frames the initiative as a way to protect "pregnant mothers and their unborn children from criminal offenses and negligent and wrongful acts." 


Buck lost last time saying abortion doesn’t matter, and he’s saying it again

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

On KHOW radio Friday, U.S. Senate candidate Ken Buck said voters can "absolutely" count on him to vote his conscience. (Listen to Ken Buck @6:50)

Normally, you might think this would be a good thing. But when it comes to Ken Buck, and you recall his conscience-laden opposition to abortion, even in the case of rape and incest, you realize that Ken-Buck-voting-his-conscience may not be so great for women.

Given how desired women are by political campaigns in Colorado, it's astonishing that Buck is already doing what he did during the last election. That is, trying to say abortion doesn't matter; no one cares about it.

As Buck told the Colorado Observer when asked if his abortion position had changed:

Buck: You know, what I believe is Congress has voted to ban late-term abortions, and I’m one who opposes late-term abortions, and voted to ban federal funding for abortion, and I’m one who opposes federal funding of abortion. I’m tired of people talking about issues that are not relevant to the public. I’m a pro-life candidate.

How is abortion not relevant when pretty much everyone agrees Buck lost last time because of abortion and women's issues? 


Bernie Herpin, Time To Dance With “Personhood”

Bernie Herpin.

Bernie Herpin.

The GOP successor candidate in the SD-11 recall special election, former Colorado Springs city councilor Bernie Herpin, is pushing back angrily against the accusation that he is a supporter of the so-called "Personhood" abortion bans that have failed in Colorado over several consecutive election cycles. As the Colorado Independent noted updating their report on the matter after belatedly hearing from Herpin's campaign:

The Herpin mailer refers to his alleged support as city council member of the “personhood” movement, which seeks to outlaw abortion by granting full legal rights to fertilized human eggs, or “life from the moment of conception,” as supporters put it. Analysts have said personhood would amount to sweeping changes in the law, where countless statutes would have to be reworked and legal interpretations extended broadly and perhaps to absurd ends, where not only birth control would be outlawed but also where activities like drinking, smoking and raw-cheese eating, for example, could turn pregnant women into suspects or criminals.*

Herpin didn’t answer calls Thursday from the Independent seeking comment. But subsequent to publication, his campaign told the Independent that, although he is pro-life, there is “no evidence” that he has ever supported the personhood movement and that, in fact, Herpin does not support personhood [Pols emphasis] and has never signed a personhood petition.

First and foremost, the attack mailer the Independent's story this weekend reports on, and that Herpin is responding to above, does not allege he signed a petition to place any of the "personhood" ballot initiatives before Colorado voters. As our readers know, the "personhood" abortion ban campaign seeks a constitutional amendment declaring that human life begins "at conception," or at the moment an egg becomes fertilized by a sperm. The logical consequences that follow from that declaration, including a ban on all abortions and even birth control that could harm a fertilized egg, are not expressly defined in the amendment but fully understood.

With that in mind, where does Bernie Herpin actually stand on the underlying issue? For that, we turn to the Pikes Peak Citizens for Life city council candidate questionnaire from last April: