Former Sen. Dan Coats picked up the National Right to Life
Committee PAC’s endorsement in the race to succeed retiring Sen.
Evan Bayh (D-IN). NRLC’s political director, Karen Cross, issued
the following statement:
As a member of both the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S.
Senate, Dan Coats was a leading champion for pro-life policies.
Dan Coats was the author of key pro-life amendments, including
a law that prevents the government from penalizing medical
training programs for refusing to provide training in abortion.
In addition, he was part of successful efforts to curb federal
funding of abortion and an early supporter of the successful
pro-life campaign to ban partial-birth abortion.
His opponent, Brad Ellsworth voted to enact President Obama’s
pro-abortion health care legislation - legislation which will
provide government funding for health plans that pay for
abortion on demand, and also contains multiple provisions that
will promote the rationing of lifesaving medical treatments.
Dan Coats can be trusted to protect our most vulnerable
citizens - our unborn children. Dan Coats’ exemplary pro-life
record should earn him the support of all voters who are
concerned with the right to life and with the protection of the
most vulnerable members of the human family.
While this endorsement isn’t surprising, it does represent
something of a blow to Brad Ellsworth’s attempt to brand himself
as a pro-life Democrat. Indiana Right to Life’s PAC has already
announced it will not endorse any Democrats during this
election cycle and endorsed Coats — along with three of his four
opponents — during the Republican primary.
W.L. Barton| 5.30.10 @ 3:55PM
Still putting on the "poor babies" shtick?
You running out of babies to sell, since Guatemala and Russia have put a moratorium on the baby selling rackets you phonies run?
You do not fool anyone, except retartded cult members. You and your ilk make around 30K profit off each baby you sell to rich and upper class yuppies.
You force poor women to have children, then disappear if they have older kids, because they do not sell very well on the adoption scam rackets.
Wonder why you can not find a way to help poor inner city and rural kids, not enough profit?