Phonebank from home for Martha Coakley

[eridani]

Martha Coakley, NOW/PAC endorsed candidate in the Massachusetts special election to fill Senator Ted Kennedy's seat, is being bombarded by GOP and far right-wing attacks filled with lies and distortions. Not long ago Coakley had a promising lead, but now the polls are tightening.

Coakley, currently serving as Massachusetts Attorney General, won a landslide four-way primary in December, but her opponents aren't about to let that happen in the special general election on Tuesday, Jan. 19.

American Future Fund, the same group that did the Swift Boat attacks against Sen. John Kerry when he ran for president, recently bought $400,000 in ads to smear Coakley. The Club for Growth and Chamber of Commerce are contacting stations to place their attack ads and boost support for Coakley's Republican opponent, state Senator Scott Brown.

Terry O'Neill, NOW/PAC Chair, said, "These attacks are jeopardizing the history-making election of the first woman senator from Massachusetts, as well as the critical role that she will play in advancing women's rights nationally as she has been doing for years in her home state."

Massachusetts State Senate President Therese Murray, co-chair of the Coakley campaign, said, "Special elections have notoriously low turnouts and our phone from home program can make the difference to ensure that voters know the importance of securing a victory for Martha Coakley and women throughout the country. Activists can join the program by contacting Kate Foster at 617-241-0200 or kfoster {at} marthacoakley.com."

Bonnie Grabenhofer, NOW Executive VP/Political Director, praised the many NOW members throughout the country who joined those volunteering in Massachusetts to bring about Coakley's primary win. Grabenhofer said, "NOW members stepped up when they were needed because they know that they can make the difference in a close election with national importance."

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Why Should I Believe She's Better Than Brown?

Brown's clearly a cretin. But, frankly, since Obama told the staggering lie that he did not run on the public option for health care, I see no reason to believe anything out of any Democrats mouth unless they have a proven track record of advocating for the middle class. Which Coakly does not - but she does know how to hang with big pharma: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Coakley-in-trouble-Pharma-and-HMO-lobbyists-to-the-rescue-81067542.html

I think I'll sit this one out.

[pnwmom]

2. She doesn't support water-boarding. He does. Please don't sit this one out.

His record is terrible on civil liberties.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Are You Familiar With The Amirault Case?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fells_Acres_Day_Care_Center_preschool_trial#Post_trial

I was here in Mass at the time - it was absurd. Coakley's record on civil liberties ain't nothing to brag about.

[pnwmom]

5. Her record is better than his. He supports torture. What could be more

un-American?

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2010/01/14/browns_glossy_veneer_conceals_misleading_campaign/

SNIP

And he’s willing to tap into that familiar Bush-Cheney fear factor, which paints Democrats as soft and weak “I have to be honest with you, folks. . . I’m scared of some of the policies I’ve heard,’’ he said during Monday night’s debate.

You want scary?

Brown’s a lawyer. But he uses the term “lawyered-up’’ as an insult, instead of what it is - a principle that makes America different from - and better than - the rest of the world. Under the Bush administration, Richard Reid, who tried to blow up a transatlantic flight with explosives planted in his shoe, was tried in a civilian court; he will, as Coakley repeatedly points out, spend the rest of his life in prison.

Brown is also a judge advocate general, sworn to uphold the Geneva Conventions, who insists water-boarding is not torture. With that strange argument, he clashes with John McCain, the GOP presidential nominee who endorsed him.

SNIP

On edit:

I just read that case you cited. She wasn't even the prosecutor of the case -- she was appointed years later and came to an agreement letting the defendant out of prison.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. He Supports Torture. She Commited It.

Brown's a catastrophe. But I'm no longer voting for people who will likely harm me, even if they call themselves Democrats.

[pnwmom]

7. She wasn't the prosecutor in that case! She came in at the end and released

the defendant. Read about the case in your own link.

"In October 1999, the new Middlesex County District Attorney Martha Coakley and Cheryl Amirault LeFave reached an agreement whereby Cheryl would be sentenced to the time served and she was released from prison."

[MannyGoldstein]

9. When The Parole Board Voted 5-0 To Release Gerald Amirault

She demanded that he be kept in prison, and the (Republican) Governor acceded to her request. The plea bargain with the other Amiraults was when they were already out of prison, and it was to prevent Coakley from prosecuting them again.

This was awful stuff.

[pnwmom]

11. This one case cannot compare to Brown's advocating for torture

and against civil liberties, against lawyers for defendants!

I'm amazed that you would make this claim.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. But Why Should I Believe Anything That Coakley Says?

When Obama claimed that he never campaigned on the public option, it hit me like a ton of bricks - these people lie as easily as they breathe. Unless I have a good reason to assume they're truthful, I can only assume that they're not.

She could turn around and vote for torture in a few months, just like the Democrats keep voting for warrantless wiretapping and other injurious and/or unconstitutional stuff.

[pnwmom]

17. You KNOW what Brown has already said. That should be enough.

One person is a known supporter of torture. The other has spoken against it, but you're not sure you trust her.

The choice should be clear. Brown needs to be kept from a position where his views could do a great deal of harm.

[jmm]

8. I'm not voting for people who will likely harm me either

That's why I won't sit back while somebody who doesn't support my rights is running.

http://thephoenix.com/BLOGS/dontquoteme/archive/2010/01/04/scott-brown-s-abortion-problem.aspx?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PHXDontQuoteMe+(Dont+Quote+Me)

.....

...Brown, a state senator from Wrentham, picked up the support of the Massachusetts Citizens for Life in this race, based on his position on issues including abortion, stem cells, and federal health legislation. He also opposes federal funding for abortion, supports strong parental consent rules for minors, and supports the ban on what opponents call partial-birth abortion.

“We’re behind him,’’ said John Rowe, chairman of the group’s federal political action committee. “The pro-life vote is very important at this point. It can make a big difference.’’

The group did not support Brown in 2004, when, during his campaign for state Senate, he noted his support for Roe v. Wade. But Rowe said he believes that Brown’s position has evolved. “We always welcome people coming over to our side,’’ he said.

Brown declined requests for an interview to discuss his views on abortion, instead issuing a statement through a spokesman.

“While this decision should ultimately be made by the woman in consultation with her doctor, I believe we need to reduce the number of abortions in America,’’ he said.

“I believe government has the responsibility to regulate in this area and I support parental consent and notification requirements and I oppose partial-birth abortion. I also believe there are people of good will on both sides of the issue and we ought to work together to support and promote adoption as an alternative to abortion.’’

In addition to his sponsorship of the Women’s Right to Know bill, Brown sponsored an amendment to a 2005 bill on emergency contraception that would have let emergency room doctors or nurses turn away rape victims if they had religious objections to providing emergency contraception....

“There is nothing that I can see that demonstrates that he would support abortion rights,’’ said Dianne Luby, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, which also endorsed Coakley.
.....

[Forkboy]

10. You got to be kidding me.

Even if she sucks she's better.

[smalll]

15. Well for one thing, she fought tooth and nail to keep evil criminal George Amirault in prison

LONG after most everyone else realized he'd been railroaded into prison through the efforts of over-zealous, overly-media-focused prosecutors in league with dodgy mental health workers who could be ever-so suggestive with their anatomical dolls -- with toddlers -- given enough weeks of intense interrogation.

That's the kind of certain, stubborn, damn-the-torpedoes-of-justice, full-speed-ahead spirit we need in the Senate today!

;)

[MannyGoldstein]

16. +1 nt

[eridani]

4. You'd rather have a teabagger? n/t

[virginia mountainman]

13. How can you say she "supports civil Rights??

She has been endorsed in the past by Paul Helmke(R), and the Republican lead, and controlled Brady Campaign?????

Appearing with Cuomo in New York last week to deliver the Brady Campaign’s endorsement, Helmke said “rarely in the history of the gun violence prevention movement has there been a candidate for public office who has so thoroughly earned the movement’s support.” In California, former Governor and former Mayor of Oakland Jerry Brown, who aggressively challenged his NRA-backed opponent on the gun issue, was easily elected Attorney General. Martha Coakley, endorsed personally by Helmke in Boston last week, was elected Attorney General in Massachusetts.

To me, and many others, Paul Helmke's endorsement, may as well be the "kiss of death".. I don't like my Democrats to be endorsed by Civil Rights infringing Republicans.

Just because someone is "against water boarding" does not mean they are pro-civil rights, she wants to have it both ways....

Makes me sick to hear people like her, say one thing, than turn around, and take a position that is abhorrent to the Bill of Rights. I will never understand why people want to pick and choose over the Bill of Rights, like it is a cheap Chinese lunch buffet. It is ALL, or nothing

We have plenty of good, unconditionally, pro-civil rights Democrats, all over this nation. too put up with this sort of turn coat.

[pnwmom]

18. Her opposing candidate is a Republican who has a worse record than she does

on these issues. It doesn't matter how many other good candidates we COULD have. She's the one up for election and we'll be worse off if he wins.

This reminds me of the Nader supporters saying it didn't matter whether Bush or Gore were elected -- they were both the same.

[eridani]

14. For those who don't like her, there will be another primary in 2 years n/t

[pnwmom]

19. Exactly. n/t