Much has been written here and elsewhere about yesterday’s blog post entitled Congress, Abortion and District 19. The topic is whether Republican Nan Hayworth is worthy to be the top contender vs. progressive Democrat John Hall in this year’s Congressional race in New York’s District 19.
My attention was focused on Hayworth’s husband; Dr. Scott Hayworth because of his relationship with the political action committee “American Medical Group Association” and his position as CEO of Mount Kisco Medical Group (“MKMG”). I questioned whether these personal connections – via a money trail — would have an impact on Hayworth’s decision-making if she were to be elected to Congress.
Dr. Scott Hayworth gave a lengthy response to the assertions made in my blog post, and in all fairness, I urge you to read it so that you can see things from his perspective.
Yesterday, some alleged that my blog post was un-sourced, assumption based on assumption, contained misinformation and conspiratorial theories. I maintain all of this is false. Here are the facts:
A review of the on-line record of donors to the Hayworth campaign indicates that a majority of them are affiliated with MKMG either through a political action committee or individually, and while there is nothing illegal about this, the implication is that Hayworth is beholden to this medical group in whatever lobby they may be a part of.
The evidence shows that Hayworth has not received campaign donations from grassroots donors at any significant level. This is the same complaint that I received via a reliable source that someone at the National Republican Campaign Committee is concerned with. Hayworth is not resonating with the grassroots swell in the District and because of her “pro-choice” stance and OB/GYN husband this may pose a problem with the pro-life faction of the Republican Party.
I made the connection that MKMG and its related PAC could be pushing a pro-abortion agenda because I was told via a reliable source that the MKMG facility is known for abortions, but not so known for delivering babies, and because 80% of PAC donations (which is affiliated with MKMG) were allotted to “pro-choice” candidates totaling $50,000 in bundled funds, it’s easy to assume a quid pro quo developing.
I question the semantics surrounding the phrase “reproductive health“or “reproductive services” and submit that the medical industry and politicians have difficulty in calling abortion – abortion. They oftentimes hide behind more, softer sounding words like “choice” and “rights”. It is well known that fertility doctors (Dr. Scott Hayworth is one) frequently perform “selective abortions” on their patients, so I was surprised to learn that Dr. Hayworth says he does not do abortions. A selective abortion is when a woman is injected with fertilized eggs, and when too many actually implant, a removal– or the forcible killing of the unwanted embryo(s) — from the womb is common place. This is an abortion too.
Another issue is that the same “business as usual” attitude that pervades the Republican Party in New York State is exactly what New Yorkers are rejecting. Something is different this election cycle that some would like to ignore – the voters don’t want the same old – same old, they don’t like the Democrats and they don’t like the Republicans in Name Only (“RINO”). For many of us, Hayworth represents the RINO because she is socially liberal and has at least some personal ties to the medical group that is a major funding source to her campaign in what appears to be a conflict of interest. This, my friends, is baggage, not an invented theory out of thin air.
I make the case in Dede Déjà Vu? that Republicans in charge are about to make the same mistake they made in District 23 (the Dede Scozzafava vs. Doug Hoffman fiasco) where the Party supported the liberal pro-choice Republican instead of the pro-life conservative Republican and got burned by the liberal and lost the race to the Democrat.
I called out to State Chairman Ed Cox to ask him to see what is staring him in the face: The Tea Party movement is more analogous with the pro-life and conservative movement than the “pro-choice” big tent Republican one; Mr. Cox would be wise if he opened his eyes.
A couple of my readers complained I was in attack mode when I made the following comment:
“And, as you know, the truth usually falls somewhere in the middle, and I can’t help but think the Hayworths have blood on their hands.”
In response to such complaints, I repeat and reiterate the same now. If time reveals that the Hayworths are indeed embroiled in the abortion lobby and are calculating on using this Congressional seat to satisfy a personal agenda, the “blood on their hands” label is more than appropriate.
My message to the voters in District 19: There are people out there who are better qualified with alot less baggage than Nan Hayworth who can represent your interests in Congress. Be patient — more candidates will emerge!