I hope that everyone saw the stinging blurb in Roll Call yesterday on our wayward friend, Senator Vitter, and his adamant support for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. If not here's an excerpt:
The lover of family values (and, apparently, escorts) was one of the chief backers of a bill to reauthorize the program that gives states money to conduct abstinence education. A letter he and a handful of colleagues sent to the committee working on the bill includes this line, rendered particularly relevant in light of the Senator's Monday confession: "These programs have been shown to effectively reduce the risks of out-of-wedlock pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases by teaching teenagers that saving sex until marriage and remaining faithful afterwards is the best choice for health and happiness," the letter reads.
Let's see if we follow this. Vitter is saying that being faithful is the best way to avoid STDs and out-of-wedlock pregnancy. Might HOH suggest another method of doing just that—namely, not hiring call girls?
As the comedians like to say, "you can't make this stuff up!"
Like This Story?
Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.
If hypocrisy were an Olympic event, Senator Vitter would get the gold medal. And he wouldn't be the only "family values" champion lining up for the gold. Remember Randall Tobias, former AIDS Czar and defender of the abstinence-only ideology at PEPFAR? Didn't he tap into the same Madam's services as Senator Vitter?
And how about Mr. Wolfowitz at the World Bank? At a time when he was trying to undermine support for international family planning programs, wasn't he also arranging "sweetheart deals" for his live-in (as in not married) girlfriend? And who can forget the Administration's abstinence-only-until-marriage "enforcer", Claude Allen, who resigned after being charged with felony theft. And, of course, there was the famous family values champion—and two-time adulterer—Newt Gingrich.
I suppose this would all be very funny were it not for the real damage these "family-values" hypocrites have caused to real young people through their championing of discredited abstinence-only programs.
Which brings me to our Democratic "friends" in the House who just yesterday staked out their own claim in the hypocrisy Olympics by passing an appropriations bill that increases funding for these failed abstinence-only programs by 25 percent—more than the Republican House was ever able to do. And this is supposed to represent the Democratic vision of "prevention first"? Infuriating!
Darryl Glenn, an anti-choice Colorado Springs County Commissioner, defeated a pro-choice GOP rival and three other anti-choice Republicans in the race to take on pro-choice Sen. Michael Bennet in November.
In Colorado’s Republican senatorial primary Tuesday, Darryl Glenn, a conservative county commissioner from Colorado Springs, scored a decisive victory over Jack Graham, a former Colorado State University official, who stood out from the GOP field of five candidates for his atypical pro-choice stance.
Asked about the speech by conservative radio host Richard Randall, Glenn said, “Well, that wasn’t me. That was the Holy Spirit coming through, just speaking the truth.”
“Seriously?” replied the KVOR radio host.
“Absolutely,” Glenn replied on air. “This campaign has always been about honoring and serving God and stepping up and doing the right thing.”
Political observers say Glenn’s position on abortion, coupled with his other conservative stances and his promise never to compromise, spell trouble for him in November’s general election against Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.
“Glenn’s stance on abortion isn’t necessarily disqualifying,” Jennifer Duffy, senior editor of the Cook Political Report, which offers non-partisan election analysis, in Washington D.C., told Rewire via email. “Colorado has sent pro-life Republicans to the Senate. But, the cumulative effect of all Glenn’s conservative positions on social, economic, and foreign policy, as well as his association with Tea Party-affiliated groups and his lack of funding make it very, very difficult to see a path to victory for him.”
Glenn’s ties to the right wing of the Republican Party drew criticism during the campaign from GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. He criticized Glenn for accepting the endorsement of the Senate Conservatives Fund, which gave Glenn $500,000.
“Darryl Glenn’s support for ‘personhood’ puts him on the wrong side of Colorado voters’ values, including many pro-choice Republicans and unaffiliated voters,” said Karen Middleton, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado, in an email to Rewire. “Support for reproductive freedom crosses party lines in Colorado, as demonstrated by the landslide losses by three ‘personhood’ ballot measures. Glenn’s chances of beating pro-choice champion Michael Bennet were already slim. This puts it closer to none.”
Glenn did not immediately return a call for comment.
Gardner threw his support behind Glenn Wednesday, reportedly saying to Roll Call that Glenn has fundraising challenges ahead of him but that he’s “winning when nobody expected him to.” And that, Gardner was quoted as saying, “bodes well for November.”
UPDATE, June 15, 12:40 p.m.: U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) was defeated in his campaign for re-election in Tuesday’s primary, leaving state Del. Scott W. Taylor (R-Virginia Beach) as the Republican candidate for Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District. The loss marks “the second time in two weeks that redistricting played a role in felling a Republican House member,” reportsPolitico.
Virginia Rep. Randy Forbes (R) announced last week that he would switch districts, a move apparently intended to increase the odds of his re-election after a court ruling against Republican gerrymandering made his own district less friendly to him. But seemingly absent from reporting on the shift is any note of Forbes’ stances on abortion and LGBTQ equality, positions on which he would almost certainly continue a legacy of extremism should he remain in Congress.
Forbes’ decision to run in Virginia’s 2nd district, where there is “easier terrain for a Democratic challenger” instead of the 4th, which he currently represents, “is an acknowledgment that [Forbes would] face a tougher path to reelection if he stayed put,” according to the Hill.
Forbes is not required to live in the 2nd district in order to represent it in Congress.
Like This Story?
Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.
That “tougher path to reelection” comes after a federal appeals court reaffirmeda ruling that 2012 redistricting efforts conducted by the Republican-controlled state legislature unconstitutionally redrew election lines according to race in order to make the map more favorable to electing GOP politicians. The court found that Virginia’s 3rd district, which was already represented by a Democrat, had been packed with more Black voters to give adjacent districts a greater shot at electing Republican, thus violating the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case after Republicans filed an appeal against the lower court’s decision, but congressional candidates only have until March 31 to file for the June primary. Earlier this month, the Court announced it will allow the election to move forward with the newly redrawn congressional lines.
The new districts changethe demographics of Forbes’ 4th district, increasing both the share of Black residents of voting age from 31.3 percent to 40.9 percent of all voters, as well as the number of Democrats.
Comparably, the 2nd district offers a more favorable environment for Forbes as he seeks to claim the seat being vacated by the retirement of Republican Rep. Scott Rigell.
Forbes has carved out a niche for himself as a member of the House Armed Services Committee, but even more notable has been his work advocating for his ultra-conservative viewpoints.
In 2005, Forbes foundedthe Congressional Prayer Caucus in the House of Representatives to “formally acknowledge the important role that prayer plays in American life and history and to monitor and work to guard the right of individuals in America to pray.” Now, the caucus has extendedto the rest of Congress, boasting 90 members from both the House and the Senate.
As Al Jazeera Americareportedof the Congressional Prayer Caucus in 2013, the group and its founder have both been vocal opponents of LGBTQ equality and abortion:
The CPC has consistently framed its issuesas a fight for religious freedom under siege. It opposed overturning the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy and continues to maintain that its repeal infringes on the religious freedom of service members who believe homosexuality is a sin. It has sought to have Congress declare a Spiritual Heritage Week and a Ten Commandments Weekend and to take action to “protect the symbols and traditions of Christmas.” It has accused President Obama of not mentioning God enough.
Forbes recently saidreligious freedom is becoming a “second-tier right” and that opponents of same-sex marriage and abortion are marginalized. He has arguedthe government is imposing “a state-created orthodoxy” that “deems support for traditional marriage unacceptable,” “discredits those who believe that life begins at conception” and “creates a regulatory framework to prevent them from fully participating in the public square.”
The caucus is backed by the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation, a nonprofit organization foundedto “work alongside the members of the Congressional Prayer Caucus in order to build a network of like-minded government leaders who are committed to prayer and action.” Among the key issues listed on the foundation’s website is its work advocating for Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRA), which have been used by conservatives around the country to restrict access to contraception and discriminate against LGBTQ individuals.
Forbes’ extreme record extends far beyond the group he founded. According to the anti-choice organization National Right to Life, Forbes has consistently votedwith the organization on all key votes scored. Upon his election to Congress in 2001, National Right to Life PAC Director Carol Tobias wrotethat the anti-choice community was “smiling broadly,” noting Forbes’ “solid pro-life voting record” during his time in the state legislature.
In 2011, Forbes co-sponsoredthe “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” which would have banned federal funding for abortion, essentially codifyingthe Hyde Amendment permanently into federal law. This particular iteration of the legislation was most notable for having attempted to redefine what kind of sexual assault would merit an exception to its ban on abortion funding, claiming that only “forcible” rapewould qualify. That language was eventually droppedfrom the legislation, which passed through the House before dying in the Senate.
In a statementon the bill, Forbes touted his anti-choice credentials and promised to continue to fight against abortion during his time in Congress. “I am, and always have been, pro-life,” claimed Forbes. “As a public servant, I feel I have a special obligation to protect innocent, young life. You can be certain that throughout my tenure in Congress, as was true throughout my tenure in the Virginia Senate, I will be a strong advocate for the unborn.”
Forbes championed Hobby Lobby in 2014 as its case against the Obama administration’s birth control benefit made its way to the Supreme Court. Leading the chargewith Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO), Forbes helped gather 16 senators and 72 congressmen to file an amicus brief defendingthe craft store chain on the basis of religious freedoms.
“No American should be forced to choose between following their faith and complying with a burdensome government mandate,” Forbes said in a March 2014 statementahead of the case’s oral arguments. “America has a deeply held tradition of respecting the freedom of conscience, and our laws should not force individuals or businesses to violate these beliefs just to operate a business or access health insurance.”
More recently, Forbes participated in a House investigation of Planned Parenthood based on the deceptivelyedited videos produced by anti-choice group the Center for Medical Progress, whose leader has now been indicted on felony charges. During one of those hearings, Forbes blatantly admittedthat the “purpose” of the investigation was to call into question the morality of abortion, not to investigate alleged wrongdoing on behalf of the reproductive health organization.
A list of Forbes’ “accomplishments” in “American Culture and History” on his websiteoutlines several more attempts to push anti-choice views through Congress, including co-sponsoring legislation to reinstate the “Mexico City Policy,” which blocks international family planning organizations that perform abortions from receiving federal funding, co-sponsoring the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, which would ban minors from traveling across state lines to receive an abortion, and co-sponsoring the Positive Alternatives Act, which would have allowed states to use federal funding meant to help low-income families through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to promote anti-choice counseling and services.
Forbes’ “Family Values” page similarly detailsanother laundry list of anti-choice and anti-LGBTQ equality measures he has supported or co-sponsored, including a variety of actions staunchly opposing same-sex marriage.
Given Forbes’ record, at stake in Virginia is much more than a Republican’s seat in the House—the congressman’s re-election would mean the continuation of a legacy of opposition to abortion access and LGBTQ equality.