Wolfgang Mum On McMahon’s DOMA Reversal, Murphy Pounces
by Christine Stuart | Oct 10, 2012 5:30am
(6) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Civil Liberties, Congress, Election 2012, Equality
U.S. Senate candidate Chris Murphy questioned his Republican opponent Linda McMahon’s support of abortion rights Tuesday following her debate performance Sunday where she reversed herself on the Defense of Marriage Act.
“She may pretend to be pro-choice, but she’s not,” Murphy said Tuesday in a conference call with reporters.
News that McMahon would now vote to repeal the Defense of Marriage prompted Peter Wolfgang, executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, to post a comment on his Facebook page saying his initial endorsement of her is “no longer accurate.” But he said he is still voting for her “because her victory could mean the end of Roe v. Wade.”
Wolfgang, who met with the McMahon campaign Tuesday, declined to comment Tuesday beyond what he posted on his Facebook page.
Murphy questioned what McMahon told Wolfgang to make him so confident that she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade if elected to the U.S. Senate.
“Did she commit that she would support Republican leadership and support their efforts to put conservative anti-choice judges on the Supreme Court? These are all really important questions for Connecticut women,” Murphy said in a conference call with the national political director of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
“We already know Linda McMahon pretends to tell the Tea Party one thing, and social conservatives one thing, and Connecticut voters something different,” Murphy said. “She needs to be clear with the people of Connecticut why Peter Wolfgang is so sure Linda McMahon’s election to the Senate could result in the overturning of Roe vs. Wade.”
Todd Abrajano, McMahon’s spokesman, said McMahon is an “independent, pro-choice woman,” and to try and define her as anything but that is ridiculous.
He said Wolfgang made his position on DOMA public and McMahon talked to him today about why she’s evolved and believes it’s a matter of fairness.
“Sometimes people agree, sometimes they don’t,” Abrajano said. “We’re happy to have Peter’s vote.
Wolfgang was able to give McMahon a pass on her stance regarding abortion saying in his endorsement that “Linda is not pro-life. But she knows the pro-abortion movement has gone too far and she has the savviness to know that most people agree with her.“
However, it’s unclear exactly how he’s able to maintain support for her when she would repeal one of the most important pieces of legislation on his organization‘s agenda.
Wolfgang declined comment Tuesday.
Tags: chris murphy, Linda McMahon, U.S. Senate 2012, DOMA, Peter Wolfgang, dh
(6) Comments
posted by: Noteworthy | October 10, 2012 7:58am
Murphy pounces on a DOMA change? Why? He should congratulate her. Frankly, I’m still waiting on Murphy to spell out his plans for saving Social Security which has a life span of less than 20 years; or how he will balance the budget and pay for what he has voted to support all these years - from Obamacare to the continued wars to Gitmo. Is he ever going to give us details on entitlement reform?
By the way - I just saw another ad from Murphy - with his voice and face - saying McMahon makes her own rules to benefit herself. Really? And using his connections to get new mortgages while being a deadbeat is not making his own rules to benefit himself? Houston: You have a problem.
posted by: JamesBronsdon | October 10, 2012 9:59am
Who else is on the ballot? “None of the Above” should definitely be an option.
posted by: MGKW | October 10, 2012 10:03am
Noteworthy….just drinking the KoolAid…her debate performance tells it all…her stumbles, her defensiveness, her utter lack of command of the language (scripted),,,tells it all…she would be a follower not a leader despite what she says…amazing what a little porn and violence can do when marketed in the right way….
In Ignorance there is Bliss
(Corey that is!)
posted by: NoNonsense2012 | October 10, 2012 10:26am
@Noteworthy: And you are making up your own facts.
As for McMahon, her spokesman says “McMahon is an ‘independent, pro-choice woman,’ and to try and define her as anything but is ridiculous.” No, trying to define her as ANYTHING is ridiculous. She is following Romney’s playbook—tell whatever audience she’s addressing whatever they want to hear. So who knows where she REALLY stands on anything?
posted by: stellathecat | October 10, 2012 12:06pm
I have no doubt on how Murphy stands on any of the issues. I also have no doubt that a pro choice Linda will have no problem trying to get more conservative anti Roe v Wade judges on the court.
posted by: Lawrence | October 10, 2012 8:07pm
“We’re happy to have Peter’s vote.”
You should run screaming. To say you’re ‘happy’ speaks volumes about McMahon’s descent into all that is hatefilled and indecent in modern life, which pretty much sums up Wolfgang’s Homophobia Institute.
BTW, love all the WWE bad news stories polluting the airwaves lately. Drug-addled Divas? Vince’s sidekick slapping fans? Yes, your ‘business experience’ is certainly something to be proud of, isn’t it, Mrs. McMahon?