Karen Handel Set For Pro-Life Candidacy

This week’s Courier Herald Column:

As Georgia media outlets were breaking the news that Jack Kingston was moving his “unofficial” candidacy for the US Senate into a formal and official campaign last week, Karen Handel was sending out an email reminding Georgia voters that she too is officially an unofficial candidate.  In the note, she said the following:

“What we need is clear: a proven reformer that brings new perspective, someone who isn’t afraid to ‘shake things up,’ and a fighter that stays true to conservative values no matter the political cost.”

While those words may seem like generic campaign speak, you can expect a Handel for Senate campaign to emphasize those last words – true to conservative values no matter the political cost – a bit. And, as has been her signature, expect the campaign to work outside some of the expected conventional norms.

Both of these concepts have been visible during the last two weeks as Handel has enjoyed the relative anonymity of remaining in pre-campaign mode.  While the now announced three members of Congress worked as many of the state’s 14 GOP district conventions that logistics would allow, Handel was boarding an airplane to fly to…Oregon.

Most potential candidates wouldn’t miss the opportunity to shake the hands of a few hundred of the most partisan activists gathered in one place, Handel had a speaking engagement three time zones away – to Oregon Right to Life.  A few days later, she was in…New Jersey.  She shared a stage with Georgia’s 2008 Presidential Primary winner Mike Huckabee at New Jersey Right to Life’s banquet dinner where she and he were the keynote speaker tandem.

She has an engagement with Wisconsin Right to Life on her calendar, and will be featured at the Susan B Anthony List’s Southeastern Regional Campaign for Life event in Atlanta in a couple of weeks.  In addition, National Review tapped Handel for an Op-Ed regarding Planned Parenthood and their ability to use taxpayer money to lobby for more taxpayer money for the organization – one which she gained firsthand knowledge of their tactics during her tenure with the Susan G Komen Foundation.

That time between the governor’s race and now led to her book, Planned Bullyhood, and has given her the opportunity to speak about the current state of the pro-life movement – and it’s fierce and well organized opposition – to groups around the country.  She’s been able to not only demonstrate true pro-life credentials, but demonstrate tangible actions – and personal costs – for the cause.

Back at home, there is still the matter of Handel, the 2010 Governor’s race, and Georgia Right to Life.  During that campaign, Handel’s pro-life credentials were openly derided by the organization with special emphasis given to the fact that she was the only candidate for governor not endorsed by the organization.

Now almost 4 years later, Handel is clearly welcome as a leader of the pro-life movement across the country.  The one who was criticized by GRTL as being too liberal and “pro-choice” has become a national pro-life figure.  Meanwhile, GRTL has devolved into a public spat with Georgia’s House Speaker over their inability to move their own legislation.  It remains to be seen how the Georgia organization plans to handle Handel this time around, given that she seems to have a superior record of accomplishment and national acceptance on the issue.

And yet, much like the way she worked around an entrenched establishment to go directly to the voters in a 2010 race where most experts wrote her off – only to have her come within roughly 2,500 votes of the nomination – Handel’s actions may have largely made GRTL’s stance on her candidacy irrelevant.

For GRTL to pick the same battle over her potential candidacy again would be to declare that the other state chapters and the National Right To Life organization are flawed.  The dual keynote with Mike Huckabee makes the gymnastics a bit harder for GRTL, as he was the unquestioned favorite for Georgia’s social conservatives in 2008.

Handel, should she decide to undertake another state wide run will clearly have to develop her own message and strategy to deal with not only this, but other issues that will be of interest to Georgia’s Republican primary voters.  With regard to waiting for Georgia Right to Life to define her again, Handel has set her own stage.

She does not need to wait to see if they choose to endorse or not.  Rather, she has earned and exhibited her pro-life credentials and taken them directly to the voters.  It is now more of an academic observation for the inside baseball political class to see if Georgia Right to Life chooses to ratify what is self-evident, or if they will choose another showdown.  Given that they almost lost a Governor’s race to the only candidate they didn’t endorse 3 years ago, it would seem that it is their organization, rather than Handel, that may have more at stake with regards to the political side of this issue.


    • tdk790 says:

      Who said she’s doubling down on being Pro-Life? No one.

      The point, which I think Charlie makes quite eloquently, is that gone are the days where certain groups and individuals get to define Handel’s Pro-Life credentials. She’s clearly Pro-Life and to state otherwise is counter-intuitive.

  1. shoshanna says:

    She LOST the race because of GRTL’s opposition. They will oppose her again. She will lose again because more of the prolife base knows of her belief that ” a child is NOT a child UNTIL she implants in the womb.” She believes children should be executed based on their manner of conception.

    GA is prolife. 66% of GA’s republican’s voted in July of 2012 that human life begins at the moment of fertilization and that it should be reflected as such in our GA constitution. Handel does NOT! GA’s voters will reject her deceptive claim.

    • pettifogger says:

      I’m pro-life, but I’m not voting for anyone who makes abortion a #1 issue. Not because I’m shy about it, I just think it is a futile political argument at this point. The only way to move people on this issue is to show yourself to be a person of character and influence, and steadily bring people around to your views on the subject. Plus I’d like for our senators to be competent on other issues, as well.

      • James says:

        And that’s my point — Handel is a one-trick pony who can’t even get the trick right.

          • James says:

            The only thing she is known for is the Komen / Planned Parenthood debacle. She’s completely uninteresting / unqualified otherwise. One-trick pony.

            • TheEiger says:

              She was elected as Chairman of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, Secretary of State and came in a very close second in the Governor’s race well before the Komen/Planned Parenthood issue. So you are wrong. She was well known before the liberals attached her for her work at Komen.

              • James says:

                Chairman of Fulton County Board of Commissioners: Does Nothing.

                Secretary of State: Does Nothing.

                Lost to a very uninspiring Nathan Deal: Pathetic.

                No college degree: Was she raised by wolves?

                Planned Bullyhood: Unreadable.

                I’m sorry — you were saying something about something?

                • TheEiger says:

                  Are you really that dumb?

                  As Chairman of the Fulton Board of Commissioners she oversaw budgets in the hundreds of million of dollars. To say that is nothing makes you sound ignorant.

                  As SOS she ran an agency with over 500 employees and oversaw Georgia’s elections. Again, ignorant to say that is doing nothing.

                  She lost by 2,400 votes in a statewide election with half a million votes cast. To call that “Pathetic” shows you are not the sharpest tool in the shed.

                  “No College Degree.” Why does this matter? Are you mad that she is more successful than you and you have a little piece of paper saying your parents paid for four to five years of drinking and fun for you?

                  Planned Bullyhood – I’m sure you have read it.

                  “I’m sorry — you were saying something about something?” Right back at you my friend!

                  • James says:

                    Eugene Walker of DeKalb County Schools oversaw yearly budgets in excess of half a billion dollars. Are you saying that guy is qualified to run for Senate? Being elected to the top of a local bureaucracy does not make one a qualified candidate for national office.

                    She’s 51 years old, which means she is very slightly less than half my age. I would hope that she’s “more successful” than me. But the funny thing is that I don’t think she is, no matter how you slice it.

                    • Noway says:

                      James, you can[‘t argue the fact that she’s held high county office as well as a statewide one, pretty good for GA elective politics. She’s got tons of juice, the question is will it play in the general.

                    • TheEiger says:

                      You’re a 100 years old? “She’s 51 years old, which means she is very slightly less than half my age.” I’m just glad you can turn on a computer. I’ll give you a pass on not being able to argue your point in a coherent way.

                    • James says:

                      Touche. You got me on that one. Obviously, slightly less than “double” my age. It’s been a long day of doing, you know, real work.

              • pettifogger says:

                She was, but there was a pretty serious divide within the state GOP ranks regarding her, and along pretty distinct lines. Without being too broad, nearly everyone I know that is dedicated to GOP social issues supported her. Nearly everyone I know in the professional crowd thinks the GOP social issue influence is at least somewhat problematic, and went against her.

                Anecdotal for sure, but I think representative still. In other words, Palin people like her, people annoyed by Palin don’t.

                • tdk790 says:

                  Were you even around in 2010?

                  GRTL, Nathan Deal and every other GOP candidate for Governor’s go to attack against Handel was that she WASN’T socially conservative ENOUGH. She wasn’t pro-life enough because she had exceptions for rape and incest. She also didn’t hate gays enough because she had spoken to gay Republicans.

                  Yet you’re saying that people that DIDN’T care about social issues sided with Deal, the candidate that actively ran on social issues.. and not Handel, the candidate that got actively attacked on social issues.

                  Come on, man. Facts are silly things, but at least try to use them.

                  • pettifogger says:

                    I gave you an anecdote, which was absolutely accurate.

                    I have no doubt that everyone tried to out-conservative the other candidates. Most GOP elections consist of that. But do I think all the academic-right sided with Handel while all the Palin crowd went to Deal? Absolutely not. The total opposite in my experience.

                    Now, perhaps it was split up with the far far right (perhaps less interested in a female governor and unhappy with the minutiae of KH’s abortion position) going for Deal, the rest of the religious right going for Handel and everyone else also going for Deal. But most of the self-proclaimed Tea Party/Palin crowd that I know personally went for Handel. I’m trying not to lump dumb voters in with evangelicals, or label non-Palin voters as automatically moderate. But again, I don’t know any professional/watch the sunday morning shows type who voted for Handel.

                    • tdk790 says:

                      This feels futile, but where do you think the non-Palin crowd lives? What about the “academics”? Professionals?

                      Handel won nearly every metro area (Atlanta, Columbus, Macon, Savannah) in the state, most by wide margins. Deal won most of the rural parts of the state. Perhaps you should step outside of your anecdotal existence and inform yourself about things before you speak on them.


    • John Konop says:

      ……….They will oppose her again. She will lose again because more of the prolife base knows of her belief that ” a child is NOT a child UNTIL she implants in the womb.” She believes children should be executed based on their manner of conception…….

      HUH? Are you calling “In Vitro Fertilization” an execution? In little early in the day for happy hour…….

      • shoshanna says:

        John, here is the position statement on SUPPORTING IVF on the GRTL PAC website:

        While GRTL empathizes with the many couples who turn to IVF as a treatment for infertility, we caution that some commonly used procedures surrounding this practice can cause the deaths of children at the embryonic stage. Any IVF procedure which leads to the destruction of human life at any level of development is opposed by GRTL. To protect both mothers and children, GRTL calls for parents undergoing the in vitro process to limit the number of human embryos created in a single cycle to the number to be transferred in that cycle. In IVF, as in any other means of procreation, the responsibility of parents to protect and nurture their children begins at fertilization.

        Karen Handel has said to GRTL that children are NOT children at the early stages of development. “NOT until they implant in the womb.” This allows destructive stem cell research, human experimentation, cloning and a host of other deadly life threatening actions.

        • John Konop says:


          In all due respect, an overwhelming amount of people would disagree with you……Going after couples with fertility problems is not very smart, for the long term health of your organization……

          Stem cell research is a cornerstone in fostering quality of life…….. Also it is a major industry in Georgia via Georgia Tech and Emory…….

  2. Melanie says:

    Georgia Right to Life’s (GRTL) mission is to promote respect and effective legal protection for all innocent human life from earliest biological beginning through natural death.

    GRTL only endorses candidates who completely meet that standard, with no exceptions except to save the life of the mother and then only when everything has been done to save the life of both.

    GRTL does not set the standard based on political winds, popularity or expediency. Our standards are based on the Word of God and they will not change just because others oppose or disagree with that standard.

    GRTL always leaves the door open for people to become educated and change their position. Our hope and prayer is that more and more people would do just that.

    If a candidate meets that standard, then they are eligible for our endorsement. If they don’t, then they will not be endorsed.

    Melanie Crozier, GRTL PAC Director

    • tdk790 says:

      Does not meeting your standard also make candidates eligible to be attacked or called “desperate” and “barren”? Or is that done on a case-by-case basis?

      • Melanie says:


        I appreciate your response. I understand that you have been led to believe that Mr. Becker called Mrs. Handel “desperate” and “barren”. That actually couldn’t be further from the truth. Jim Galloway, AJC, recorded the interview with Mr. Becker when he allegedly called her these things. In fact, Mr. Becker was referring to something totally unrelated to Karen Handel and having to do with a situation at his church. Feel free to contact Mr. Galloway and ask him to clear up this matter – he has the recording. Again, I appreciate the response and I hope I have been able to put this untruth to rest. Mr. Becker was able to explain this to Mrs. Handel as well recently, in my company. I pray she saw his sincerity.

        • TheEiger says:

          If he didn’t say those things about Karen then why would he say no comment when given the chance to defend himself?

          • Melanie says:

            That is a question you will have to ask Mr. Becker. I never asked him that, because I knew the entire story and didn’t think an explanation was necessary. I am sure he would be happy to answer that question!

        • tdk790 says:

          Years later, the best you can come up with is “out of context”?

          I suppose your attack on Sarah Palin’s son was “out of context” as well? Or was it truly just what it appears to be..a disgusting and offensive lie that damaged the pro-life movement and your organization’s less than pristine reputation.

          • Melanie says:


            Thank you again for your question. I did not attack Mrs. Palin’s son. I referred to him when mentioning children born with downs syndrome. I would never attack anyone in that way and I apologize if that was how it came across. I have personally discussed this issue with Mrs. Handel and she has accepted my apology for not articulating my position with the clarity it deserved. If you would like to discuss this with me personally, I would be more than happy to do so. You can reach me by phone at the GRTL office. Thanks!

            • TheEiger says:

              You saying that Karen would have killed Sarah Palin’s son and Dan Becker’s out of context statement, I’m not sure in what context it is ever okay to call a woman barren and infertile, have destroyed the reputation of right to life movement in Georgia. The only people who feel that GRTL speaks for the majority of people are the folks in Screven County how voted for Ray McBerry. The rest of us see you for what you truly are. A hate filled group who hides behind the banner of what was once a great organization.

              • Ghost of William F Buckley says:

                Eiger, I don’t disagree with your statement above, yet GRTL is more than “… A hate filled group who hides behind the banner of what was once a great organization….”

                Sadly, GRTL endorsement means votes, lots of votes, to any candidate. GRTL is able to connect with many on the abortion issue – Most people don’t really see the connections between GRTL and the IVF/scientific research/bio-science business angle.

                John Konop thank you for making that connection clearer.

                Tent-Shrink is a GOP anathema, of our own making, and is highlighted by GRTL’s stated policy of taking on the “personhood” battle in each State. Roe v. Wade cannot be overturned without changing the Supreme Court makeup, even then, doubtful.

                The previous Statewide ‘personhood’ ballot referendum gives huge validation to GRTL.

                Ms. handler did not get GRTL’s sanctimonious blessing in her failed gubernatorial bid which may have cost her the election. In my view, when Karen insulted all lawmakers by impugning their ethics, she sank her own battleship.

                Georgia won as a result.

                We did not have to endure the drama of Karen v. General Assembly whilst trying to balance our budget, make progress on water wars, etc.

                The lady is a lightening rod, but I still don’t see what changes she has ever brought to the table. If Karen runs, the crowded GOP field will feed upon
                itself, like cannibals in a BBQ sauce factory…

    • John Konop says:


      What shocks me is reading the nasty comments from you and your supporters, from a group, who is so-called, based on Christianity….. You guys throw stones just for fun………………You should take deep breath, look in the mirror, and ask yourself some questions about what you are doing…….Jesus = LOVE………….you and your friends comments = spewing hate!

      • Melanie says:

        Mr. Konop,

        Thank you for sharing your frustration with me. I couldn’t agree more. We can all certainly disagree without using “nasty comments” and “spewing hate”. I hope that if I have done this you will show me the comment, as I always try to respond with grace and love. However, I can only take responsibility for my comments. Just as I cannot be held responsible for every statement made by any republican, or any Christian – I also hope I am not held responsible for the poor taste of every person that may consider themselves “pro-life”.
        Again – I agree with your comment and if there is a time that I have done this I will certainly do everything I can to correct that action.

        • John Konop says:


          Accusing Karen of supporting execution of children for having an IVF procedure is rather rough…..Beyound this thread Mr. Becker has made some very inappropriate comments…..I appreciate how debate can be heated, but walking on the shoes of other people is also important…..

          Treating people with fertility problems, rape victims, incest/ rape victims……as if they are crimalinals, murders…..is not demonstrating LOVE in my opinion. I respect your view, and have even been financially supportive of the pro-life movement in the past……but the present nastiness has caused many like me to turn a blind eye to your cause……most of us as we age realize life is gray at times…….Jesus was about the concept of forgiveness, not judging verse strict laws, walking in shoes of others, not casting stones…..ie love….. In my opinion being humble is tough but very good medicine……..part of being humble is to do the above……especially having kids can make you very humble…….

          I have and had employees that are gay, rape victims, mental health issues……you realize fairly fast they need love over judgement……..I have always attempted to be supportive, and I let GOD do the judging…….that is what Jesus ment about casting stones…….the reason I have been very outspoken about the above issue is the bullying tactics used against them flies in the face of what I believe……

          I hope you take the comment in the right spirit……

          • Melanie says:

            Mr. Konop

            I appreciate your comments. I agree with them wholeheartedly!! The only thing I would like to clear up is that I did not say that having IVF is “executing children”. On the contrary. I realize that IVF can be the answer for many couples that are struggling to conceive. Once those eggs are fertilized you have full fledged little humans and they are precious. The process of IVF is not “executing children”, but is creating them. In fact, I have many special little friends that would not be here today if not for the IVF procedure. The issue GRTL has is not with the process of IVF, rather it is with the unregulated process of IVF. Right now in GA there are no restrictions on the IVF procedure. This means that families can discard tiny humans if they aren’t the right sex, if they have disabilities (like downs syndrome and others), or if there are too many. GRTL’s position on IVF is not that we are against IVF, only that we oppose IVF when it is used in an unregulated fashion that causes the destruction of embryos. Quite simply, we would like to see some common sense regulations on the IVF procedure that will protect all the little humans that are created in the process.

            We have volunteers, board members, staff members, and other supporters (as well as myself) that have helped women in crisis situations (including rape victims) as well as couples with fertility struggles. I know how important it is to walk in others shoes, and although that may be difficult, God’s Word will always points to helping those in need. In fact, Jesus himself said in Matthew 25, ” ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” I try to practice that daily in my personal and professional life. Have I failed? Absolutely – I am certainly not perfect. I appreciate people in all areas of my life that keep me accountable to God’s Word.

            It seems maybe we agree more than we may have thought. I think this dialogue has been extremely constructive and I appreciate you taking the time to express your concerns. As I mentioned in one of the other posts above, if you would like to discuss this in more depth with me personally you can reach me by phone at the GRTL office. Thanks again!

              • John Konop says:


                I respect her view on IVF……not sure if I agree, but the tone of the debate is about the subject, not personal attacks……we should have more debate like this……in my opinion…..

              • Melanie says:


                I think this is a great question!! I personally know of two families that have adopted embryos through an embryo adoption agency called Nightlight. This is a great solution for the embryos that aren’t implanted. Also, I think it would be wise to limit the number of eggs that are fertilized to only the number a couple is willing to implant. This would save millions of “little humans” from being discarded.
                Just my thoughts – and again, great question.

                • Ghost of William F Buckley says:

                  Melanie: You are suggesting that GRTL should insert themselves between the doctor and patient relationship, which is absurd on it’s face.

                  Medically, IVF is a very invasive procedure that carries significant risk.

                  Doctors do limit the number of eggs that are fertilized, to allow for the bodies natural rejection process. You fail to acknowledge that IVF does not lead to pregnancy 100% of the time. In fact, the only reason for collecting ‘little humans’ is to avoid having to repeat the dangerous IVF procedure.

                  Further, only 50% of fertilized eggs implanted naturally lead to pregnancy.

                  That Conservatives here are actually getting involved in this discussion, once again, shows how little was learned in the 2012 election cycle.

                  Programs like Nightlight are fine, I suppose. It takes an amazing couple to implant a strangers DNA into their body to save a totally unknown ‘little human.’ That is some kind of commitment and should be applauded.

                  Policy and politics rarely find equilibrium.

                  The GOP should avoid IVF and leave it as a private family matter. It is not winnable as a political position.

              • Melanie says:

                John – I was just told that today is your birthday – so Happy Birthday. You share this day with my eleven year old daughter.

            • tdk790 says:


              Many people opposed the 2009 bill because they thought it placed too severe limitations on IVF. That doesn’t mean the same people are opposed to any regulations or common sense reforms. Is that possible for you? Or is it another black and white issue for you?

              • Melanie says:


                I am not sure what bill you are referring to so I can’t really comment on that specifically. I, personally, would like to see the number of eggs fertilized limited to only fertilizing those which will be implanted in that same cycle (if you fertilize 4 eggs and they all survive, then you would implant all 4 – if you only want to have 2 children, then only fertilize 2 eggs, etc). I would also like to see restrictions on PGD (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis). I see this as a seek and destroy mission for children with disabilities. This is where you do genetic testing on already fertilized eggs to determine if they have any genetic disabilities. Generally, if a genetic abnormality (like Downs Syndrome) is found, these embryos are destroyed. These are a few areas that are non-negotiable with me. If you could be specific with the regulations you felt were too severe, I could comment more specifically on that.

                • Ghost of William F Buckley says:

                  SEE ABOVE, Melanie you are not speaking from any sense of medical knowledge. In fact, you continue to harm your position by spreading misinformation about the most personal of family matters.

                  S H A M E!

  3. Jackster says:

    I’m pretty sure campaigns are good for book tours and speaking engagements; this positioning and strategy before she even announces sounds like she hired a reality TV producer to build a brand.

    Of course, I would like to hear the one lady up there tell other ladies why it shouldn’t be up to them to do choose best for them, rather than an OB/GYN (in a non medical capacity), another non medical doctor’s opinion, and some guy from savannah.

  4. George Chidi says:

    Handel sure makes this interesting, though. Perversely, I think she opens the door for a meaningful Democratic run at the seat.

    If the dynamics of the race shake out similarly to the 2010 governor’s race, she’ll end up being the choice of moderates because of her Atlanta connections, the fact that she’s a woman (of the moderates in the GOP, a disproportionately large number are women) and her high recognizability crowding out lesser-known statewide candidates like Kingston. She can raise money.

    She won’t run as a moderate, of course, but that’s almost beside the point.

    Moderates Republicans cannot win a statewide nomination in Georgia. They’re simply outgunned. The only chance one has is with significant Democratic crossover support. But Handel can take this race to a runoff in a crowded field — same as in 2010. If all that’s left in the field with all the moderates gone are hard-core, rightmost-15-percent-of-America Republicans … then Broun starts to look viable to either have first or second place in the primary.

    And Broun is so far out there that he could lose a general election, even in Georgia. I’m not saying he would lose, only that of the candidates in the field, he is the most vulnerable to a serious opponent.

    • Noway says:

      I still say the Dem spot is perfect for Max Cleland. He’d be that serious candidate you mention, George.

  5. Jane says:

    It will be hard to raise money. Karen will not be able to raise as much as the Congressmen and she does not have the ground troops that Paul Broun will have. So I do not think she will be a factor. Kingston will have the money advantage, but he is from the wrong part of the state. This leave Gingery. If he does not run a bad race he might be a very strong candidate. On the other hand, Dr. Broun could out social conservative him, and Jack Kingston could out fiscal conservative him. This could push Phil to third.

    As to the Dem’s having a chance. Like the Republicans they are their own worst enemies. The Dem’s will not be able to field a complete first tier team running statewide next year. So, it will be very difficult to win anything with an incomplete field running against more than a half a dozen reasonably popular incumbents. Look for some token Democrats to be recruited to run, think one of the Martin brothers.

    • TheEiger says:

      Saying that Karen Handel will not be a factor is ludicrous. She was out raised almost three to one in the 2010 Governor’s race and barely lost by 2,400 votes. She had a better grassroots organization than anyone else in the race. Paul Broun will be chasing her when it comes to local ground troops. Lets do a little research before we say Kingston will out “fiscal conservative” anyone. Not that that really makes since. He has spent two decades in DC voting for bloated appropriations bills and handing out earmarks. Not sure what your definition of fiscal conservative is, but Jack Kingston is not it.

      • Salmo says:

        Karen Handel will be a factor because she has Erick Erickson running her campaign (unofficially, of course) for her. He’s been setting it up for weeks now by bemoaning the lack of a non-crazy, bona fide conservative. Now he’s starting to make references at the possibility that she could be the savior. When she does announce, he’s going to spend almost every show for a month talking about how much better she is than all of the other options. No other candidates can even come close to buying the amount of media time in the Atlanta market that he’ll give her.

        I’m just wondering what he’ll get out of all of it. I suppose I can see liking Handel (I don’t, personally), but I can’t see anyone being so enthusiastic about her as to sacrifice his journalistic integrity as he did during the gubernatorial race. If he wants to come out and say he’s in her camp, so be it, but to try to editorialize and pass it off as neutral observation rubs me the wrong way.

  6. Harry says:

    Wow – next year’s primary should be a great opportunity for raising awareness, educating voters, and building GOTV.

  7. Napoleon says:

    Right now I would not be leaning toward Handel, simply because there is another candidate in the race I prefer. I like Handel. At times I’ve voted for her. At times I’ve not voted for her. At times I’ve even volunteered for her. I know her personally and have known her for a number of years, before she was on the FuCo Commission.

    I just don’t understand this cult of personality of supporters that, in some cases, could give lessons to some of Ron Paul’s more ardent supporters.

    By the way, what does having a college degree matter when your job is to argue with 99 other Senators? I don’t think Karen Handel needs a piece of paper that shows she can regurgitate on a test what was in a text book. For goodness sake, will some college give her an honorary political science degree so we can end this stupid and irrelevant talking point?

  8. Three Jack says:

    Let see, another futile abortion debate with the usual beckerheads attempting to make this an issue yet again or maybe we can spend time actually debating real issues. I hope GRTL endorses everybody but Karen again, so what?

    I look forward to all the candidates ignoring this non-sense while addressing pressing matters like how to avoid the impending ObamaRobertsCare disaster, taxgovernment reform, etc. Let’s just abort debate about abortion now.

    • Napoleon says:

      Unless things have recently changed, GRTL will only endorse a candidate whose views are abortion is only acceptable to save the live of the mother.

  9. Karen Handel will not receive Georgia Right to Life’s PAC endorsement unless she changes her position on the exceptions and on when a child becomes a child, which is conception and NOT implantation, as she stated. The last time around, she did not received the Susan B. Anthony List’s PAC endorsement either. Unless they’ve lowered their standards or she has changed her positions, she should not receive it again this time. Georgia Right to Life followed the model of Right to Life of Michigan more than a dozen years ago, by becoming a no compromise organization. As a result, the state of Georgia has been transformed. They went from being ranked 50th by Americans United for Life to being ranked 2nd last year, with a Gold Star rating for passing pro-life legislation. Setting a steadfast standard has made a real difference so that pro-life legislators are pro-life leaders. Settling for mediocrity results in mediocrity. And, Karen Handel thinks children like me deserved the death penalty for the crimes of our fathers. That’s too bad. I really hope she does change her position. It’s never too late.

Comments are closed.