RMG Comment of the Week:

A late Sunday night entry by RMG’s Founding Father gets this weeks Comment of the Week.

In Brock’s post on Dan Winslow’s Abortion…stance, Patrick makes a detailed summary of Winslow’s finger in the wind politics.

Winslow also spoke here about the MCFL endorsement.

There’s a video.

“If Republicans want to win in June, if Republicans want to be relevant to women and millennials,” said Winslow, “Republicans have to make sure they stand for choice, that they preserve a woman’s right to choice.”

I’m curious if Winslow is really prochoice deep down or if he is just comporting himself to what he sees as the most politically expedient position.  That seems to be his suggestion as to what Republicans should do on this issue, cast off any actual objections they have about abortion and do their best to bend with the political wind (to win and to be relevant).  

Winslow has done something similar before by associating with Americans Elect, a political organization that believed in nothing and trumpeted that fact.  Garrett Quinn had a good write-up on that organization here.

I think it’s possible that Winslow is mistaken in what he presumes to be the attitudes of millennials on this issue.  The younger folk are much more nuanced on the issue than their parents and they support precisely the types of restrictions that Sullivan does and that Markey and Winslow do not.

Now the Chiaroscuro poll – and other recent polls – still find that older Americans are more likely to describe themselves as “pro-life.” However, the differences among age cohorts are not nearly as dramatic as they used to be. More importantly, young people are actually more likely to support various incremental pro-life laws their older counterparts. The Chiaroscuro survey found that adults under 40 were statistically more likely to support waiting periods, parental involvement laws, and providing information about options and risks to pregnant women prior to the abortion.

It should be noted that other recent polls have found similar results. Last summer, the National Right to Life Committee commissioned a poll which showed that young adults ages 18-44 were actually more likely to favor the Pain Capable Abortion Prevention Act, which would ban abortion after 22 weeks of gestation. Furthermore, ever since 2000 the General Social Survey (GSS) has consistently found that young adults, ages 18-29 are more comfortable restricting abortion in a range of circumstances than older Americans.



“That it ceased to exist, I’ll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said.” – Metropolitan (1990)

by: Patrick @ Sun Mar 24, 2013 at 10:50:33 AM EDT

About Paul R. Ferro

Paul R. Ferro is Senior Editor at RedMassGroup.com. The 9th registered user of RedMassGroup.com, Paul has been with RMG from it's inception. He's also a former 4-term Marlborough City Councilor and currently serves as Chairman of the Marlborough Republican City Committee. You can follow him on twitter @PaulFerro

RMG Comment of the Week

I’m going to try to highlight a particularly insightful comment made here on RMG by a member of our community every Monday.

John DiMascio has a lengthy and, frankly, devastating summary of Gabriel Gomez’s verbal gymnastics and political contribution history in our discussion of the resignation of 2 of 3 co-Chairs of ‘Women for Gomez’  (Note: It’s lengthy, so there’s more ‘after the jump’  Check the whole thing out).

May not be technically a liar…. but certainly a politician

To paraphrase William Jefferson Clinton, ‘it depends on what the meaning of the word “support” is.’

Gabriel Gomez may  indeed not have lied about who he voted for in 2008. However, what he is really lying about is that he’s not a politician. The fact is he is parsing words words exactly like a typical politico that needs a GPS to find his “Political Private Parts.”

Here is Gomez entire contribution history.

2002 ——Mitt Romney …..$  100(GOP)

2004 ——Kerry Healey…..$   75(GOP)

2004 ——Bush/Cheney …..$  250(GOP)

2007 —-Obama/ Biden….$  230 (Dem)

2009 —-Alan/Khazei ….$ 1,000(Dem)

2012 —-Shuttleworth….$   250(Dem)

2012 ——Romney/Ryan …..$ 2,500(GOP)

So let’s pull together the history of Gomez’s comments on the subject.

I

When he appeared on MSNBC Hardball to talk about the anti-Obama “Swift Boat Type” video (in which he appeared), he mentioned his contribution to Obama. He said it was a matter of public record that he’d contributed to Obama. I think he may have challenged people to go look it up.   He said this to dispute that he had participated in the anti-Obama ad for political reasons. The implication clearly was that he supported Obama’s politics, but only opposed Obama for taking credit for getting Bin Laden. He didn’t say whether or not he voted for Obama in 2008, but he sure left it out there to be naturally extrapolated. Again, he was clearly doing this so as to appear objective and give credibility to his participation in the this anti-Obama video.

II

He tells the Boston Republican City Committee that he only donated to Obama at the request of a friend. But he said he voted for McCain. So he down played the contribution. The problem here is that know one followed up and asked: OK how do you explain away your contribution to Uber-Liberal Democrat Senate candidate, Alan Khazie the same year Scott Brown was running on the Republican side ?

III

During the first debate at Stonehill, he was asked who he voted for. He avoided mention of his contribution and said I voted for the Navy guy. Again, none of the panelists were smart enough to follow up asking him by asking about the Khazei contribution in 2009. For that matter he also contributed to Virginia Democrat Bruce Shuttleworth running for Congress in a 2012. Granted Shuttleworth was a fellow Navy veteran;  perhaps they even served together. Nonetheless, we have 3 consecutive contributions to Democrats. Two of them we know are extreme leftists.  So we have pattern here that is worth pressing Mr. Gomez on.

Let us accept for the sake of argument that Gomez told the truth about only contributing to Obama only to appease a friend. After all, our recent MA-GOP Chair used a similar rational to explain his contributions to Chuck Schumer and Deval Patrick. Then I would think that Mr. Gomez, a self-made millionaire, would have sufficient funds offset his contribution and then some by making a contribution to the Navy Guy he claims to have voted for!

Looking at Mr. Gomez’s history of contributions we see some contributions to Republicans early in the last decade. Then all of a sudden we see a most radical shift in the politics of those who chose to give money to. Then all of a sudden we see his biggest contribution on record going to Mitt Romney.

Judging from Mr. Gomez’s own words, we can almost assume that this 2012 contribution to Romney doesn’t represent a political “Metanoia”.  In fact, we read in his letter to Deval Patrick that Mr. Gomez offered to go to Washington as a Senator to fight for certain Obama policies. Not to mention the fact Gomez lavished Deval Patrick with praise.

Hence all this tells me is the despite Mr. Gomez’s insistence that he’s not the typical calculating politician, that is precisely what he is. His contribution to Romney in 2012 was to back up his performance in the anti-Obama video. Further, we have to ask if his participation in that project was not all about self-promotion. It’s pretty obvious that Mr. Gomez had his eye on an eventual run for office as a Republican. His contribution to Romney doesn’t represent his views, so much as it was covering his tracks. His letter to Patrick? Again self-promotion and more proof that he is a typical politico, which he so vehemently denies being. Gomez will say whatever he needs to say to further his political aspirations. What a surprise!

Mr. Gomez has a habit of hedging his bets. And that’s how he’s made his millions. He is a hedge fund operator. If he thinks a stock is gonna tank he goes short. If he thinks it’s going to go up, he buys long. Well that’s perfectly legal and fine when we’re talking about the stock market. But this sort of behavior will eventually catch up to you in the world of politics. For Mr. Gomez — eventually is now!

by: John DiMascio @ Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 05:59:24 AM EDT

About Paul R. Ferro

Paul R. Ferro is Senior Editor at RedMassGroup.com. The 9th registered user of RedMassGroup.com, Paul has been with RMG from it's inception. He's also a former 4-term Marlborough City Councilor and currently serves as Chairman of the Marlborough Republican City Committee. You can follow him on twitter @PaulFerro