I first posted this in October of 2012. In the wake of RBG’s death, the post’s point is even more salient today: Cathy Cloutier will say anything to win the support of certain groups of voters. Even when they are on diametric opposite sides of the same issue:
Some things I simply cannot make up. I’ve written for some time that Cathy Cloutier has no core convictions or beliefs, and I’ve written that she will say anything to anybody (usually in ‘confidence’, as in ‘nudge-nudge, I’m really a Democrat’) to get their vote.
I have now discovered that Cathy Cloutier has somehow been endorsed both by Planned Parenthood of Delaware and the virulently anti-choice A Rose and A
ThornPrayer. You can’t earn Planned Parenthood’s endorsement if you oppose choice, and you can’t earn A Rose & A Prayer’s endorsement if you support choice. (Captain Obvious.)Let me just say that I consider this to be an ideological impossibility…unless someone responds to two different questionnaires in diametrically-opposite fashion. What? You say you don’t believe that Cloutier indeed WAS endorsed by both groups? OK, here:
http://www.araap.org/index.php/rosepac
http://www.pro-choicedelaware.org/assembly.html
Why do I consider it an ideological impossibility that Cloutier could be endorsed by both groups? Uh, go to the Rose/Thorn website, and you’ll find out that virtually their entire agenda consists of blasting Planned Parenthood’s agenda. Here’s but one example:
http://www.araap.org/index.php/getinformed/45-an-open-letter-to-our-legislators-refuting-planned-parenthoods-misstatements-about-hb-80
BTW, did I mention that the President of this virulently anti-choice organization is now Delaware’s Republican National Committeewoman? Yep, in a coup engineered by John Sigler and Greg Lavelle, pro-choice committeewoman Priscilla Rakestraw was ousted in favor of Ellen Barrosse, president of A Rose and A Prayer.
Gee, I wonder which side Cloutier was on. On that day, was she the ‘Really A Democrat’ Cloutier’ or the ‘Rose and a Thorn’ Cloutier? Doesn’t matter, it’s not as if she acted on principle.
My point is simple: Whether you are pro-choice or anti-choice, you cannot believe anything that Cathy Cloutier tells you. She’s only telling you what you want to hear in order to get your vote. When the chips are down, unless you’re the NRA, she won’t be there for you. She’s earned your distrust. She. Will. Disappear.
As she should in November. She’s got her legislative pension. Time for someone to, you know, actually be a Senator and stand for something. Or at least show up.
The links no longer work. But they worked in 2012. It was literally impossible to be endorsed by both groups unless you provided starkly different answers to each group’s questionnaire.
She’s doing it again. Claiming in her first lit piece that she has ‘championed’ gun reform when, in fact, she is on the official record as having voted to bury these reforms in committee. Because, as she admitted, the construction trades would have dumped her if she voted to release the bills to the Senate floor.
Maybe if you can somehow secure a ‘Cathy Chat’, you can ask her why she talks out of both sides of her mouth. Let us know what she tells you. Guaranteed: It will be 50% true. No more, no less.