This remains the top fight on the card in the US Senate Democratic tilt. It was just ten days ago (!) that Wendy Davis waded into a quiet primary and endorsed Alameel, surprising and disappointing a few of us pundits.
Not just that. There was no mention of Alameel's position on women's reproductive freedom on his Senate website, either. And his 2012 Congressional website had been taken down, and there were mumblings about an anti-choice YouTube from that campaign.
Then a week ago, Scherr pushed back. Then, day before yesterday, and in the midst of the Republican eruption over Wendy Davis' life story, Alameel revised and extended his remarks on several issues, including women's right to choose. Then yesterday...
And Scherr pushed back again.
The other candidates in the race for the Democratic nomination are getting drowned out in this wave of earned media by Scherr and Alameel. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing in one case.
While it would certainly be a smorgasbord of schadenfreude for the media, not to mention a boon for the third party candidates on the November ballot -- which include the Green, Emily Sanchez, one of three Libertarians, and the four independents -- if Steve Stockman and Kesha Rogers were the duopoly nominees, that would be a pretty horrifying development for Texans generally.
As mentioned at the end of this, Scherr and Fjetland appear to be the two most qualified Democrats to move on to a runoff. And Dr. Alameel is welcome to continue making his generous contributions from the sidelines of the arena, and not from the playing field.
Update: Via Socratic Gadfly, Dr. Alameel is a member of the Catholic Foundation's Advisory Board. The board gave a significant grant last year (.pdf) to the Catholic Crisis Pregnancy Centers/Birthchoice. That organization -- the one in Dallas, where the foundation is also headquartered -- is quite obviously not a women's clinic where pregnancy termination is an option.
Crisis pregnancy centers generally are not known for their pro-choice initiatives. I suppose if I were an enterprising journalist, my first question of Dr. Alameel might be: is there any internal conflict between the advisory board's awarding of this grant and your pro-choice views?
Update II: Alameel also lists the two most pro-life Democratic state representatives in the Texas House, Ryan Guillen and Joe Pickett, as endorsees. If Alameel is so strongly pro-choice... then that must have something to do with money. What do you think?
Davis did not mention abortion rights, the issue that was the focus of her 13-hour filibuster in 2013. That, and past contributions that Alameel has made to Republican candidates, has prompted some activists to question his commitment to abortion rights.
Not just that. There was no mention of Alameel's position on women's reproductive freedom on his Senate website, either. And his 2012 Congressional website had been taken down, and there were mumblings about an anti-choice YouTube from that campaign.
Then a week ago, Scherr pushed back. Then, day before yesterday, and in the midst of the Republican eruption over Wendy Davis' life story, Alameel revised and extended his remarks on several issues, including women's right to choose. Then yesterday...
On Wednesday, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade ... Alameel sent out a letter highlighting his support for a woman's access to abortion and decrying "the continued Republican attacks on choice."
And Scherr pushed back again.
Scherr added in a phone interview that she is skeptical of Alameel's current commitment to abortion rights.
“If he’s for these things, how come he’s given $1.6 million to the candidates and causes that have fought to block choice for women?" she said.
When asked about Scherr's claim, the campaign released the following statement:
“David Alameel is a longtime, proud pro-choice Democrat and strong supporter of Roe v. Wade, which the Supreme Court set as the law of the land decades ago. It’s unfortunate that some politicians feel the need to fling baseless accusations at fellow Democrats to score political points instead of working together to highlight Senator John Cornyn’s extreme, anti-choice record in Washington.”
The other candidates in the race for the Democratic nomination are getting drowned out in this wave of earned media by Scherr and Alameel. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing in one case.
Along with Alameel and Scherr, three other Democrats are running for U.S. Senate: businessman Michael Fjetland, Odessa physician Harry Kim and Kesha Rogers of Houston, a LaRouche candidate who favors the impeachment of President Obama.
While it would certainly be a smorgasbord of schadenfreude for the media, not to mention a boon for the third party candidates on the November ballot -- which include the Green, Emily Sanchez, one of three Libertarians, and the four independents -- if Steve Stockman and Kesha Rogers were the duopoly nominees, that would be a pretty horrifying development for Texans generally.
As mentioned at the end of this, Scherr and Fjetland appear to be the two most qualified Democrats to move on to a runoff. And Dr. Alameel is welcome to continue making his generous contributions from the sidelines of the arena, and not from the playing field.
Update: Via Socratic Gadfly, Dr. Alameel is a member of the Catholic Foundation's Advisory Board. The board gave a significant grant last year (.pdf) to the Catholic Crisis Pregnancy Centers/Birthchoice. That organization -- the one in Dallas, where the foundation is also headquartered -- is quite obviously not a women's clinic where pregnancy termination is an option.
Crisis pregnancy centers generally are not known for their pro-choice initiatives. I suppose if I were an enterprising journalist, my first question of Dr. Alameel might be: is there any internal conflict between the advisory board's awarding of this grant and your pro-choice views?
Update II: Alameel also lists the two most pro-life Democratic state representatives in the Texas House, Ryan Guillen and Joe Pickett, as endorsees. If Alameel is so strongly pro-choice... then that must have something to do with money. What do you think?
5 comments:
Who knows -- maybe he supports women having a choice on what sort of facility to go to.
Or believes that people of faith should have a choice to fund organizations consistent with their religious beliefs.
Oh, that's right -- the only choice you "pro-choice" folks support is one that results in a dead baby.
Read this s-l-o-w-l-y: Fertilized eggs are not people. Twenty-week-old fetuses are not unborn babies. Jesus said it, I believe it, and that settles it.
If we let you freaks have your way, we'd be imprisoning women for miscarriages. Dumbass.
You think Alameel is hoping Middle Eastern skin tone and a non-Anglo name will boost him with Hispanics? Besides your pro-life observation, that's the other thing I notice from his list of endorsees.
Alameel is married to a Latina and is active in LULAC.
Taken from David Alameel's campaign website. David Alameel believes in a woman’s right to choose and that politicians or the government should not interfere in these deeply personal decisions that should be made by a woman, with her family, her doctor and her God.
That is why Dr. Alameel will always fight to protect Roe v. Wade, which the Supreme Court set as the law of the land decades ago, from Washington politicians who are seeking to undermine the basic rights and freedoms of millions of Texas women.
Furthermore, in the United States Senate, Dr. Alameel will demand equal pay for equal work between men and women. In the 21st Century, there is no excuse for discrimination in the workplace or for U.S. Senators like John Cornyn who voted against the commonsense Lilly Ledbetter Act. David Alameel would be a proud vote in favor of this important legislation.”
Post a Comment