California group using deceptive "report card" on pro-family issues
The California branch of the "Campaign for Family and Children" has issued a "report card" on the candidates, in which the give Huckabee and Paul top scores, while giving the other Republican candidates that they choose to notice, bad scores. But once we look at the criteria they used, the report card itself deserves an "F" for Fraud.
Let's compare the grades of Huckabee and Thompson and the supposed criteria used to determine those grades. Remember an undecided counts as a no, so unless CCF concludes the answer is yes, it counts as a no.
On Homosexual Marriage Huckabee got a point for being against it, while Thompson didn't because CCF claims he is undecided. But both candidates support a Constitutional amendment against homosexual marriage. As governor of Arkansas Huckabee claimed he opposed it for his state, but was never asked if he believes the issue should be taken out of the hands of individual states. In fact, that he claimed to want to prevent it in his state might be seen as a desire for governors and state legislators to be free to do so, unhampered by Federal involvement. Thompson, however, was not asked as a governor, but as a Presidential candidate, and gave an appropriate answer that acknowledged the limitations that are supposed to exist on the powers of the Federal government. He said, "But, at the end of the day, if a state legislature and a governor decide that that’s what they want to do, yes, they should have, they, they should have the freedom to do what Fred Thompson thinks is a very bad idea." In other words, he opposes it, but acknowledges that the President is not a dictator, and states have the right to determine things for themselves without the Federal government ramming the decision down their throats.
To say Thompson is not for protecting marriage would be the same as saying Operation Rescue and National Right to Life are ambivalent about abortion, because they currently are only working to overthrow Roe v Wade on the Federal level, rather than demanding a Constitutional Amendment to ban abortions.
On Domestic Partnerships. In 2006 Huckabee said, “I would tend to leave (the question of civil unions) to the state, as long as they wanted to not call it a marriage. Now if they’d call it a marriage, then I’d have a problem with it.” Then later to the same publication, he said, “I’ve never supported civil unions, and I don’t. I don’t know, honestly, how I said what I said (in 2006) other than, ‘Hey, that’s something New Hampshire has to deal with.’ ”. In other words, by saying it's something New Hampshire has to deal with, he's acknowledging their right to decide without having the decision forced on the by the Federal government. Yet CCF gives him a solid "Yes", for being against it, but acknowledging the states have the right to decide for themselves.
On the other hand Fred Thompson has been uniformly consistent that he while opposing the idea of "civil unions" as well as opposing any Federal legislation allowing them, he maintains the states right to do so if they choose. It's not a matter of being for or against "civil unions" but of recognizing the Constitutional limitations of the Federal government.
Yet Huckabee is given a point for this, and Thompson isn't. The exact same position on the issue, but Huckabee's counts as a yes and Thompson's counts as a no.
On Adoption by Both a Father and a Mother, which is an odd way of labeling homosexual adoption, since single individuals adopt all the time. I know of a single woman who adopted a special needs child. Had she not, the child would have remained in the system, without a mother or father, so obviously there are exceptions to a blanket idea that all adoptions should be to heterosexual, married couples.
Anyway, Huckabee, when asked, expresses opposition to allowing homosexuals the right to adopt, which gives him a "Yes".
The easiest way to make sure Thompson is given a "No" (which by now should be clear is what CCF wants to do) is to simply not ask him, and count that absent answer as a "No".
So Huckabee is given a "Yes" and Thompson, is given a "No" because he's not been asked the question. Somehow that's considered accurate and fair?
The rest of the questions and the warped method they were judged can be viewed at http://www.savecalifornia.com/ReportCardSources_010208.pdf.
It's sad that a group like this is using it's status to support a candidate while pretending not to. They should stop offering "report cards" on candidates while they themselves aren't willing to do their homework.
Posted by Danny Carlton at January 4, 2008 7:47 AM