Oklahomans for Life post candidate questionnaire responses

It's disappointing that so few Democratic candidates bothered to respond to Oklahomans for Life.

Disappointing perhaps, but not surprising.

Pandering for votes promising you're "looking for the little guy", all the while attempting to justify infanticide as the correct platform confuses even the thickest of voters...

This is no surprise to me.

I remember when Al Gore ran for president in 1988. He ran as a pro-life Democrat. Of course we all know that when he became the running mate for Bill Clinton he switched his view. A few years back he said that he was always pro-choice. I was waiting to see if any in the mainstream media was going to expose his lie. They did. He did this because he really got no support from the party leadership from what I remember. He compromised his convictions for political power. He wanted to be president and knew he would not get any support from the party unless he declared publicly that he was pro-abortion.

The Democratic party leaders will not even allow a debate on the matter. During he meeting where they were deciding who would run the Democratic party or whatever Howard Dean's position is, It was clear for all the world to see that people that sincerely wanted to allow a civil discussion with those Democrats that are pro-life were not wanted. They were shut down so quick. I believe the fellow's name is Tim Roemer, a Catholic man. I do not remember if he is a Senator or a HR. He was a member of the bi-partisan committee that reviewed the events that led up to 9/11. They had hearings on this. Just for making the suggestion he was castigated beyond belief. It was the biggest exposure of how intolerant they really are. You saw just how ugly national politics was behind the scenes.

I think it is more than just pandering just for votes. The love of money and power is another reason Democrats will not go public with how they feel. I may be wrong but at this point I would not be surprised that some of them that refuse to respond to those questionnaires are pro-life. They value their position more than taking a stand on a controversial issue. They will never publicly answer questionnaires like this. Tthere are a good number of Republican leaders that we know about that are pro-choice. I guess they did not feel that exposing that would hurt their chances in the party even though the Republican party is known for being pro-life.

I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. So it seems to me that your criticism doesn't go far and wide enough.

I would think that Oklahomans for Life would be equally dismayed by unopposed (and other) REPUBLICAN candidates who take their support for granted and don't bother to fill out a survey, e.g. Senate Districts 23 and 39.

Do these Republican candidates think this survey only has utility for THEM, i.e to bash a Democrat or Independent opponent?!? In reality, these surveys are designed to aid the organizations who submit them, i.e to gain information on the candidates and hold them accountable once elected.

There is no excuse for a candidate not responding to any election survey from a bona fide advocacy organization.

I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. So it seems to me that your criticism doesn't go far enough.

I would think that Oklahomans for Life would be equally dismayed by unopposed (and other) REPUBLICAN candidates who take their support for granted and don't bother to fill out a survey, e.g. Senate Districts 23 and 39.

Do these Republican candidates think this survey only has utility for THEM, i.e to bash a Democrat or Independent opponent?!? In reality, these surveys are designed to aid the organizations who submit them, i.e to gain information on the candidates and hold them accountable once elected.

There is no excuse for a candidate not responding to an election survey from ANY bona fide advocacy organization.