Words and Actions

This week there have been a couple of  posts over at Intelligent Discontent about Jesse Laslovich and abortion rights.  One post, combined with some of the comments under it, says basically that a democratic primary “should not be about labels but issue positions“.  Another lauds Laslovich for making critical remarks about Ravalli County Republicans, for their refusal to accept family planning money.

These blog posts seek to immunize Laslovich from criticism that he is not fully pro-choice and that he is not as strong an advocate for women as Pam Bucy.

But facts are stubborn things.   Pam Bucy, Laslovich’s opponent and a favorite of mine, is a tremendous advocate for women and their right to privacy.  Bucy has been an attorney for Planned Parenthood.  As the Assistant AG to Mike McGrath and at the request of Jon Tester, Bucy wrote the AG’s opinion granting that insurance companies must cover birth control when they cover other prescription drugs–like Viagra, and the fact that Bucy has also  made financial contributions to choice organizations –more times than can be linked to here.  Jessie Laslovich has voted generally pro-choice throughout his career, but he is not on a level with Bucy in this regard.

In two separate sessions, in 2003 and again in 2009 and Laslovich took votes in the Senate in favor of what this session was a Keith Regier bill (the one in which Regier compared women to cattle), which gave personhood to fetuses and was vetoed by Schweitzer for its unconstitutionality.

I applaud Laslovich for speaking out against Ravalli Rs, but actions are what matter, not words. And when action was at hand, he voted for a right-wing pro-life bill.

So given this contrast, and given the fact that I started blogging primarily to give women a voice on the Montana blogoshpere where I did not believe we were sufficiently represented, I will side with Bucy as a far greater advocate for women and choice.

This is not to say that Laslovich isn’t a good democrat and strong on many issues important to us. But Bucy wins out on protection of women’s rights from a clear contrast.


59 Comments on "Words and Actions"

  1. Cowgirl, I have always been a fan, but you are getting way out of line here. Pam Bucy has NEVER had to take to the floor on votes. Pam Bucy has NO record. It makes me SO sad that you are going after Laslovich like this – it’s really hurting the credibility of your blog.
    You may be best buddies with Pam, but you need to stop the attacks and the smears.
    You talk about “action” but Pam has never taken real “action.” She’s never been held accountable to voters.
    Rumors and innuendo is not why I come to this blog.
    If Pam is such an advocate for women, why didn’t she write the op-ed? Maybe because she can’t see past the city limits of Helena.

  2. This is what makes me sad, Cowgirl: you’re attacking Mary Caferro. Everyone, stop what you’re doing. Now, google Mary Caferro. Now, ask yourself, “who’s a bigger advocate for women? Is Caferro right in saying that the most dangerous issue facing women is poverty?”
    Cowgirl has launched a vicious attack on Laslovich. She/he (or whoever Cowgirl is) has it out for him, but ask yourself (as I asked myself), “who is a bigger authority on women’s issues: mary caferro or the anonymous best friend of pam bucy?” This is blatant, political mud slinging, Cowgirl. YUCK.

    • Jennifer Davies | August 2, 2011 9:24 PM at 9:24 PM |

      Who is a better advocate for women? Well, lots of people, but that’s not the point being made, the point being made is voting the anti-choice votes of a Democratic candidate in a primary. Personally, the choice thing bothers me a great deal. Really though, this race will be decided on experience.

      And as for the “attacking Mary Caferro” claim? That’s pure garbage. Nothing about the woman is even in the piece. Strange though that you would make that remark.

      • Jennifer Davies | August 2, 2011 9:25 PM at 9:25 PM |

        Google the logical fallacy “straw man” then come back. Sigh.

        • Jennifer, click on the links. Cowgirl obviously has NO idea what Caferro was talking about.
          If you’re going to tell me that Mary Caferro is not a good judge on character when it comes to fighting for women, I’m going to tell you that you don’t know Mary Caferro.

          • Jennifer Davies | August 2, 2011 9:46 PM at 9:46 PM |

            Yeah you lost me here. There is nothing here attacking Mary Caferro on the links or this post. I see we aren’t on the same page here. No big deal. Hope you have a nice evening.

            • I agree with ChaFer. Caferro was talking about how Laslovich is a champion for women because we is the only candidate that has championed the most important issue facing Montanan women today: poverty. Cowgirl, through this post, is trying to pivot to a different issue and I agree: Cowgirl is simply being misleading about the issue at hand.
              In any case, and don’t get me wrong – I enjoy this blog, but since when has Cowgirl been a great “king maker”? McDonald? That turned out well.
              I’ll take my chances with Laslovich against Fox.

  3. Hmmm… You say Pam was an attorney for Planned Parenthood? Can you please state when exactly that was? I believe you may have your facts wrong, seeing as how there is no mention of Pam ever having served as attorney for Planned Parenthood… apart from your blog. If you are going to attack a candidate and support another, I’d appreciate it if you didn’t mislead or blatantly lie.

  4. I don’t know, I think voting record matters, and if Laslovich made these votes, he should be accountable for them.

    • You can’t cast a vote in the legislature and not be held accountable. So Paul please provide a link of Pam’s votes so we can holds her accountable…..oh wait, she DOESN’T HAVE ONE.

  5. Everyone in Helena and in the Capitol knows this blog is written by Eric Stern and, sometimes, Jess Rhoades. But, mainly, Eric Stern. Its odd that Eric feels it’s appropriate to post under the false pretense that he is a woman and can speak for women. Eric, you’re a government employee… don’t you have better things to do than attack Jesse? Like, say, earn my tax dollars?

  6. I for one am glad to see this issue come to the fore so that we can all remind ourselves that every vote matters, every session I get hundreds of emails from advocates working to stand up for women in the legislature asking for emails, phone calls and citizen testifiers. It’s hard work and these women should be commended. When I think of leaders on the issue, I think of them, or of the women who sponsored the bills to advance womens reproductive rights, and who I look to for leaders. Gail Gutsche was one. Every session she sponsored, not just voted for many bills for womens reproductive health, and she is also supporting Pam. This is a good discussion to be having, and I hope that legislators who waiver in the future on whether to vote with women or not remember this discussion if they have future aspirations. Anyway, thanks for the opportunity to discuss women’s issues and candidates!!

  7. Ope. Cow”girl” is censoring…

  8. How come none of these Laslovich supporters are defending his vote? That’s the question I’d be asking if I was undecided, though I am not. I based my decision on experience, but I respect these ladies right to bring up the issue.

  9. No doubt they can bring up the question, but they are also ignoring another key issue in this debate: Jesse has a record and Jesse had a record of fighting for poor women. Also, I noticed that no one has responded to Four Eyes’ comment…

  10. “Jessie Laslovich has voted generally pro-choice throughout his career, but he is not on a level with Bucy in this regard.”

    That’s easy if you NEVER CAST A VOTE! How could Pam be on a higher “level” with no record. This is ridiculous, and sad. We have important races to win in 2012 and cowgirl is busy slinging mud at another democrat in a contested primary. Typical inner destructiveness from the democrat party.

    Pro-choice issues are not as cut and dry as people like to think. The example I used last time cowgirl bashed Laslovich was parental notification before a minor can get an abortion. That’s not a very cut and dry issue for any parent.

    No matter the issue, it is easy to stand on the sidelines and write a couple letters. It’s another to actually be there, get the mail, the phone calls, and cast the vote you think is right. And be held accountable by your community.

    Cowgirls, you know Laslovich, you know that for Jesse to take those 2 votes over all these years, he had a good reason and the votes did not come lightly. Shame on you Cowgirls.

    Mary Caffero supports Jesse, so he must be pretty damn good on women’s issues.

    The fact that Pam may have worked for planned parenthood hurts her objectivity, and the fact that you admit Pam is a “favorite” of yours, this blog loses it’s objectivity.

    FYI, cowgirls, taking this public of a stance in a dem primary is not a good idea. Especially this one, more then republicans are getting angry this time. I don’t think it’s a good idea to make enemies out of your friends. But it might be to late.

  11. The reality is that we need to win AG and we need our best candidate. Laslovich is our best chance. Outside of Helena, most people say Pam Who?

    • And you think Laslovich has amazing name id because he was once in the Montana Senate? Poll Montanans and I’d be willing to bet they don’t even know who the recent Senate President was, let alone a kid legislator from Anaconda/Helena who served years ago. Fact is.. no one knows either of them- but that’s what campaigns are for.

  12. Attention Democrats, The only reason to splinter over any Candidates is when you got 2 Good Choices. We do here, But For all intensive purposes, this is only a Opinion question on Politics… and Cowgirls Opinion is justified. Woman Candidates who are Pro choice and have weathered that Position over a long period of time… Are better Pro choice Candidates period.

    Now, Let me clarify my opinion, Mr. Laslovich is the better candidate all round because of his vast government standing on all issues for a Democrat. And He has better public Visibility!

    Don’t ever complain folks as we start to attain Better Candidates for any Position in Montana Government, We need …more importantly to take back both Houses of Government in this state and raise the bar of Intelligence period. I am sick of of being two states from having the Dumbest Legislature in the Country! Bucy is a great gal in attaining a higher IQ Index of rights for this state, and for Championing women’s rights, in that regard, and I guarantee the working women in this state are gonna vote in large numbers this year becuz of the attacks on their rights, and their children and elders from the GOP!

    So lets look at all the facts a little deeper shall we? We have plenty of time before the Primary and we need as many stories out there about Good Democrats as Possible to help the disfranchised Independent voter to hang with us in 2012.

  13. My late take on this is that, once again, the Democrats are blessed with strong candidates for AG. We simply run better people for statewide office than the opposition.

    It’s totally fair to dissect each candidate’s record and resume, but I feel like the labeling that’s going on with Laslovich has been unfair. He was a reliably pro-choice vote in the Legislature, with an excellent MT-NARAL record. To compare him to Keith Regier is just unfair. I don’t think that was the intention of the post, but the juxtaposition was certainly striking. :)

    At the moment, I am leaning towards supporting Laslovich, but plan to attend an event for Pam Bucy as well. I hope everyone will do that–listen to each of the candidates and support the one you most support, while treating the other one fairly, because he/she could become the nominee.

  14. I find it curious that not one of the Laslovich supporters here have answered the very legitimate question this post raises: Why did he vote for a personhood bill when bills of that nature are clearly and blatantly anti-choice and aimed at throwing women in jail who abort their pregnancies? It’s anti-choice plain and simple. Jesse has an anti-choice vote- that’s a fact no one here has disputed. Maybe he’s since changed his mind, or maybe he simply didn’t understand the bill, we don’t know because he hasn’t said anything about it and his supporters would rather attack anyone who raises the question as opposed to enter into a real debate about it. They’re using Republican tactics here, and that’s very disappointing and, quite honestly, sadly immature.

    This is a Democratic primary, and primary’s are good and healthy for the Party, but they should not be nasty… and unfortunately the Laslovich folks are making it that way.

    • I think this was discussed by pogie previously and pointed out that the bill in question was amended and the anti-choice language taken out.:

      “Why didn’t (Laslovich) get a 100% in 2009? His vote in favor of SB 327. Had Laslovich voted for SB 327 in its original incarnation, critics would be right to be concerned about his commitment to abortion rights, as the bill, originally entitled AN ACT ADOPTING THE PROTECTION FOR MOTHERS-TO-BE ACT, was a clear attempt to undermine Montana’s protection for abortion rights. As amended, though, the bill struck all the anti-choice language and simply provided additional penalties for assaulting or murdering a pregnant woman.

      Maybe Laslovich didn’t pass an ideological purity test with that vote, but the bill wasn’t (as amended) some kind of radical assault on women’s rights. In fact, it a bill that I suspect most Montanans would support. I understand the concern about the bill, but supporting it hardly represents an anti-choice viewpoint.”


      • If this one bill is the single thing that is being trotted out to differentiate the candidates on their “pro-choice” credentials…thats not much.

        People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along? Can we get along? Can we stop making it, making it horrible for the older people and the kids?…It’s just not right. It’s not right. It’s not, it’s not going to change anything. We’ll, we’ll get our justice….They won the battle, but they haven’t won the war….Please, we can get along here. We all can get along. I mean, we’re all stuck here for a while. Let’s try to work it out. Let’s try to beat it. Let’s try to beat it. Let’s try to work it out

      • Pogie speaks the truth.

  15. Hey Cowgirl, The posters calling themselves Big Sky Beth, ChaFer, Adam, FourEyes, etc are all from Bob Funk, Jesse Laslovich’s campaign manager pretending to be different people.

    • I hope I am included in the “etc.”

    • In that case, they just made me a Firm Believer in Pam Bucy, Democrats trying to trick their constituents by not telling the truth, isn’t any better then the GOP we are trying to beat Now! Takes more then a D before their name to convince me anymore!

      • What does that mean? If an anonymous poster with absolutely no proof can change you vote, then you will be shocked to find out at how many of the posts on this blog are cowgirl dummy accounts.

        Sheesh woods, you’re better then that.

    • I sincerely hope that’s not the case.. but it does make a lot of sense given the visceral nature of the posts from those handles. I don’t know that kid, but if I were Jesse I’d reign in my staff.

  16. Cowgirls, It seems a little biased that the only special interest group you expect a legislator to get 100% is NARAL/Planned parenthood. You don’t expect anybody to have a 100% with the MCV nazi’s yet NARAL is the all important group. I can tell you NARAL/PPH are as conspiracy driven as the NRA nuts. They are about as rational too.

    It’s sad as you pick apart Jesse’s record and claim Pam is your hero, when Pam has never, ever had to make a tough vote. As a matter of fact, beyond a few nice letters for the AG she has never even been a part of the process.

    I would think it was funny if it was not so sad.

  17. I live in the beltway and know some Montana politicos. I am not this Funk you speak of and could care less about some down ballot race.

  18. Wow, in just a couple minutes, “bradass87”, you accused Pam of blogging anonymously (I hadn’t made up my mind on this election, but I’m guessing she has better things to do.), and you called people who care about the environment and are active with a well-respected group– the Montana Conservation Voters “Nazis.” You also referred to choice activists at NARAL and people who provide health care to women at Planned Parenthood as conspiracy theorists and irrational. Are there any other groups within the progressive base you would like to move on to next? How about members of the LGBT community? Teachers? Public employees? Small business owners? Family farmers? Really, please tell us what you think of us, and why your views are in line with Jesse.

  19. Cowgirl/Emma why don’t you accost Cris for his false accusation. He offered just as much proof. Also This site slams enviros and MCV more than my sarcastic post, so step off your horse mam.

    • bradass… after partaking in this discussion today I can honestly say that I’ve lost a lot of respect for Jesse Laslovich. And he can thank you for that.

  20. I actually am not much of a blog reader, and certainly not much of a commenter. However as a former MCV staffer and monthly giver, I take great offense to the ‘nazi’ reference. I feel that “great offense” does not even go far enough. I am a proud environmentalist, and proud of the work that the Montana Conservation Voters does to reach out to voters to educate them on clean air and water issues and how it relates to politics. “bradass” you owe MCV staff and members an apology. And frankly should be embarassed.

    • Christina, are you the Christina that works at the dem party? If so I will come up and apologize to you personally. But only you, I will not apologize to Ross P or any of my other MCV friends. And I do mean friends.

  21. So you’re saying that you think Chris made a false accusation, so you can too? That’s an interesting argument. Is there a post on this site that calls MCV Nazis? I honestly don’t know, so please do share. If you were just being sarcastic, I guess I don’t get the joke. And I’m not a cowgirl or the cowgirl or really any sort of cowgirl at all, just a regular girl. But it seems to me that if someone’s most important issue is choice, and that is their criteria for who they support in a race, then what’s wrong with that? To some women (I’d even bet many women), reproductive health and freedom is just that important. Luckily, it does seem that Jesse has a better record on choice than some of his blogging supporters would like. But maybe it isn’t good enough for some people who that is important to, and I don’t think that calling them irrational or Nazis is going to turn them to your side.

    • Your point is taken, and I’m sure you are right. I have only asked that cowgirl tell the truth, not the half truths they keep posting.

      BTW: I was being sarcastic.

  22. BLAH BLAH BLAH, the cowgirls are coming out in force.

    • Rope him, and tie him down ladies, he doesn’t know how much this all means to us.
      Bradass87, we have to be better then the GOP. And it has to start at state politics especially! If jesse’s people, are posting fraudulently, then how honest is his campaign? I would fire people who did that to me if I was a candidate. So if it’s true, he’s lost my vote. Because democrats on the local level need to be better than that the lousy opposition we have!

      • It’s common knowledge the cowgirls post as several different users all pretending to be individual Pam…Pam whatever supporters. As a matter of fact Pam and 2 of the cowgirls are good friends, and now cowgirl uses her website to slander a fellow democrat that they know personally. That is no better than the GOP, as a matter of fact its a play right out of their playbook. That is far more disturbing to me then some random poster typing names and claiming that all Jesse supporters are the same person with absolutely no proof.

  23. Is anyone else not concerned that the “highest law enforcement officer” in the state continues to lie about his residency, even after years of doing so? “From Anaconda” while receiving mail, living in, working in, registering cars, and paying taxes in Lewis and Clark County? If you lie about where you sleep, what reassures me you’re not lying about your policy positions like choice?

    … Especially when causing letters to the editor to appear that label Ms. Bucy “a Helena insider”. You can’t both brag about your legislative experience with residency in Helena and not be considered an “insider”.

    And do we really need to get into whether or not he’s legally qualified to run? 5 years is 5 years, not 4 years and 360 days.

    Glass houses, people.

    • This is ridiculous, Jesse never lied about anything. Read the law Charity, it says nothing about where you sleep. Only where you own a residence. Jesse never lied and he was cleared by political practices. Most people in Anaconda knew about Jesse’s living situation and they still elected him. So just because you are slanted against Jesse and grasping and straws does not mean you opinion should usurp the majority of Anaconda residence voted for Jesse.

      BTW: Bucy is a Helena insider. It’s Helena insiders maintaining this page, it’s Helena insiders that approached Bucy to run, and Helena insiders attacking Jesse.

      As a matter of fact I talked to Jesse over the weekend and since everybody knows who at least 2 of the cowgirls are I told him should stop by their office and confront the cowgirls for their slander. I also called my local legislator and told them of cowgirls actions.

  24. Disappointed no one ever responded to my comment (see above). As I said earlier, I don’t think the public appreciates cowgirl lying about Pam’s credentials just to try to gather support.
    Also, not sure who you think I am, and I don’t know who you are “Chris,” but I’m a young female attorney currently writing this on my smartphone as I do some yard work. Plain and simple.
    I just want to say one more thing: this primary is off to an awfully poor start in the blogosphere. Maybe we can all take a deep breath. We have ten months to decide who we’re voting for.

  25. Foureyes. If you really want to know, why not ask the candidate. It’s not that complicated. http://pambucy.com/

  26. I find it strange that with all the outrage at the Laslovich abortion post not a single commenter addressed the merits of the post. It’s actually a very straightforward thing. Laslovich voted for a bill that would have increased the penalty for murder if the victim was carrying a child. It’s not a terrible bill, as anti-abortion bills go, though it’s definitely one that abortion rights advocates always oppose, as they see it as a chink in the armor if it passes. But why haven’t we heard a single response to the assertion, factual assertion, that he voted for the bill? Where is the Laslovich campaign on this blog, or Laslovich himself, responding on this blog and explaining his vote?

    • The issue was addressed very clearly by Pogie and Jack Ruby in this thread.

      Also why would Jesse ever post here. He can be assured that cowgirl will post as several different users and accost Jesse in the name of her friend Pam…..Pam whateverhernameis.

  27. If you really want to know why not ask the candidate its not that complicated: http://www.laslovich.com

  28. abortion is a non-issue…
    gay marriage is a non-issue…
    they are distractions designed to keep voter eyes off real issues (poverty,jobs, education, war, international standing etc)…
    and tracking the rapidly disappearing money.
    ever wonder why those great mob bust stories of the 60s and 70s disappeared?
    the mob went legit…
    now their members are elected by you.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | August 9, 2011 10:30 PM at 10:30 PM |

      Thank you, rleeh, for saying what I’ve been saying for a long time. The mob went legit. They started grooming young men of promise for judgeships YEARS ago. Now, they’ve achieved even a supreme level of corruption so to speak. They realized that that was the future.

      And with the Kennedy coup, they immediately started bringing the criminal element into the government. Hell, look at Nixon. EVERYone he brought in was either right out of the CIA or organized crime. NEVER had such slimeballs been recruited into the highest levels of government. Erlichman, Halderman, E. Howard Hunt, etc. And most of all, the BUSH crime family. And how bout those Big Kockhs?

      We have a government of criminals. Now, what do we do about it? Democracy may be a goner I’m afraid, especially since the greatest generation is gone. The ancient Greeks had a belief that each successive generation was lesser than the previous one. I’m beginnin’ to believe that.

Comments are closed.