Dan Maes’ LG Tambor Williams is Not Pro-life

Colorado RTL Reports: Tambor Williams is not pro-life and the 2010 Republican candidate for Governor Dan Maes is misrepresenting his choice for Lt. Governor. See below CRTL’s Election Night Warning, CRTL’s Apology to our Constituency, and first, Tambor Williams record summarized in five bullets.

On Tambor Williams

* Opposes Personhood Amendment 62: Williams refused to sign the 2010 pro-life personhood petition. And her “respected” exceptions, by which she means that she supports the killing of some unborn children, also demonstrate why she refuses to endorse Amendment 62, the most important item on Colorado’s 2010 ballot, which Maes himself supports.

* Fights to Fund Abortion: In contradiction to Maes’ opposition to abortion funding, he selected a running mate who as a state representative urged Gov. Bill Owens to provide funds to Planned Parenthood. Tambor Williams attempted this in spite of two hard-fought pro-life election victories amending the state constitution which now “prohibits the use of public funds… to pay or otherwise reimburse, directly or indirectly… for any induced abortion.” Yet Williams acted as though money is not fungible and urged funds to go to Colorado’s primary abortion provider.

* Opposed Colorado’s PBA Ban Effort: Even 80 Democrats in the U.S. Congress, many of whom were pro-abortion including Tom Daschle, found a way to vote for the PBA “ban” (which was utterly toothless anyway). In another argument against regulating the killing of unborn children, a federal inquiry would be needed to ascertain the real reason that Williams voted to kill Colorado’s PBA ban. Republican “pro-lifers” who fight for Planned Parenthood funding often don’t oppose regulations head-on, but raise procedural or highbrow objections. So when Williams wrote a column to explain why (see scan or text) she helped kill the PBA bill, she:
– refers to a “constitutional right” to abortion without ever rejecting the validity of such
– falsely implied she would support equating abortion to homicide
– falsely implied she would support charging not only the abortionist with a crime but the woman also
– claimed the state is not “complicit” in abortion because it doesn’t fund abortion, but later
– went on to fight to fund Planned Parenthood.

* Still Not Sure If She’s Pro-Choice: To the very day that Dan Maes announced her as his Lt. Gov. running mate, Williams says that she doesn’t know whether she’s pro-life or pro-choice. By default, that makes her pro-choice as proven by her record.

“Am I pro-choice? I wish it were that easy. I will probably say I am pro-life, with the exceptions that we have come to respect … I think there are times when pro-life has to give way to the best of choices…”
-Tambor Williams, Aug. 17, 2010

This is how Dan Maes vets people?


Tambor Williams is “pro-choice,” only with Republican political ambition. Colorado Right To Life is shocked that Dan Maes would choose someone who is opposed to protecting the life of every child. He chose a running mate who opposes him on Planned Parenthood funding, on “exceptions,” and on the most important issue on the November ballot, Amendment 62 and its recognition of the personhood and God-given right to life of every child.

* I Supported It But I Didn’t Vote For It: Tambor echoes John Kerry’s infamous: “I voted for it before I voted against it.” Regarding Referendums C and D, which Maes and conservatives opposed as a veiled effort to raise taxes, Tambor Williams said, “I supported it but that doesn’t mean I voted for it.” Like Bill Clinton’s “I didn’t inhale,” and “It depends on what the meaning of is is,” Williams assumes that her supporters want to be lied to. As evidence of her tax and spend record, the Colorado Union of Taxpayers annual rating of Williams fell to as low as 33%, and the conservative Wilberforce Center gave her a career 32% rating on her 83 actual votes on budget and taxes. Worse, in his effort to portray a liberal as a conservative, Dan Maes is willing to undermine what it means to be pro-life by writing, “She is pro life… She is opposed to late term abortions. She supports parental notification. She supports de-funding Planned Parenthood.” What, since Tuesday? That’s when she was asked if she supports Maes in his call to defund Planned Parenthood, and Williams said, “I guess I just can’t answer that for you now.” And the Roe v. Wade ruling itself did not permit late-term abortion on demand. That doesn’t mean that Roe was pro-life. Thousands of pro-abortion liberals have supported countless abortion regulations. That doesn’t make them, or Tambor Williams, pro-life. She opposes the God-given right to life of each unborn child. So CRTL rejects Maes defense of her.

CRTL Issued Election Night Warning

Dan Maes’ behavior illustrates exactly why CRTL issued a warning to pro-life candidates on the night of the primary election:

CRTL Warning to Pro-life Candidates: As America’s very first “Right To Life” group, Colorado RTL has a long memory. We’ve seen many election cycles where Republicans campaign in the primary as conservative pro-lifers, and then they become moderates in the general election, and then they govern as liberals once in office. With these encouraging primary results, Leslie Hanks, Colorado Right To Life’s sponsor of the personhood Amendment 62 stated, “Unlike Jane Norton, Ken Buck says he wants to protect all unborn kids, even the child fathered by a criminal. Now if Ken Buck stands strong, we’ll stand with him. And Scott McInnis lied about not even being a member of Republicans for Choice, when in reality he led them promoting abortion. In contrast, Dan Maes was first to endorse Colorado’s personhood Amendment 62, and we see Dan as a man who will keep his word to protect every child.”

CRTL Apologizes to our Constituents

Prior to selecting a “pro-choice” running mate, and just hours after winning at the state assembly, Dan Maes told a pro-abortion media outlet:

“People are overestimating the personhood amendment. It simply defines life as beginning at conception. That’s it. Who knows what the intent of it is? They are simply making a statement. That is all I see it as. Do they have another agenda? I don’t know… Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, and people tend to forget that. I would not try to undo that.” -Dan Maes

In a private meeting shortly after making the above statement, Maes’ said that he misspoke and “took it back.” We at CRTL should have had more wisdom. We know that “pro-life”  politicians typically tell us whatever they think is necessary to get our support. With Maes, we lowered our guard, hoping that a grassroots, tea-party-endorsed, self-proclaimed pro-personhood Republican candidate could be trusted. We see now that we were gullible. We apologize. With the fallen human nature, grassroots and tea-party candidates learn quickly, and can obviously be as deceptive to their base as any establishment politician. Dan Maes selecting a “pro-choice” Lt. Governor shows the apparent truth in his claim that he would not try to “undo” the bloodshed unleashed by Roe. Politicians who cared more about themselves then abolishing slavery held similarly hypocritcal positions. Yet Jesus said, Let your yes be yes, and your no be no. Even if Maes acknowledged the travesty of his LG selection, and dumped Williams, it is hard to see how he could be trusted. But still, for his own conscience’ sake, he should do the right thing.

See also CRTL’s criticism in the Colorado Statesman.

How emphatic does CRTL have to be before our “pro-life” politicians get the point? The only justifiable abortion policy is zero tolerance for child killing.