Login Here
I really just do not understand the endorsement by NARAL and Planned Parenthood of Joe Lieberman. From the NARAL website (screen shot above), one of the top three action items is -- Improve health-care services for rape survivors:
We need your help to make sure women who’ve been raped get the chance to prevent pregnancy.
Send a message to your members of Congress today to help pass the Compassionate Assistance for Rape Emergencies Act (“CARE”: S.1264/H.R.2928).
This bill would ensure that survivors of sexual assault are offered the “morning-after” pill in the emergency room. The morning-after pill, also known as emergency contraception or EC, prevents pregnancy after sex or sexual assault. Improved access to the morning-after pill could prevent 88 percent – approximately 22,000 – of pregnancies that occur as a result of rape.
Lieberman said he believes hospitals that refuse to give contraceptives to rape victims for "principled reasons" shouldn't be forced to do so.
"In Connecticut, it shouldn't take more than a short ride to get to another hospital," he said.
Local CT-NARAL head Carolyn Triess voted for Ned Lamont as a delegate at the CT Democratic convention in May. She's also one of the founders of Connecticut Choice Voice. From their "Five Reasons We Cannot Support Senator Lieberman":
#2 Rape Victims’ Access to Emergency Contraception
Joe Lieberman is on record as opposing the proposed legislation in Connecticut that would require all Connecticut hospitals to offer emergency contraceptives to rape victims. According to the New Haven Register, “Lieberman believes hospitals that refuse to give contraceptives to rape victims for ‘principled reasons’ shouldn’t be forced to do so.”
Meanwhile Evan Derkacz from AlterNet points us to Ned Lamont's Reproductive Freedom Page today, where Ned says:
I absolutely support women’s right to complete and appropriate health care and to reproductive freedom. I will fight to make the morning after pill available over the counter, to make emergency contraception available to all rape victims, and to support the nomination and appointment of pro-choice judges.
I would have led the opposition to the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Alito, since he fundamentally tilts the balance on the court and jeopardizes a woman’s right to choose. South Dakota recently passed a bill which outlaws a woman’s right to an abortion even in the case of rape and incest; this law is certain to be decided by the newly-reconstituted U.S. Supreme Court.
Ned was not even asked to take part in the endorsement decision making process.
Maybe this explains a bit about what we're dealing with here. Local blogger CT Bob, from the comments:
I called Planned Parenthood and spoke to their media person a few weeks ago; I forget her name, but she was very firm in her support of their decision to endorse Joe Lieberman. She admitted that the “report card” on voting records of politicians is somewhat flawed, but they didn’t have any other way of rating a politician.
I asked her if Lieberman’s vote against confirming Judge Alito was considered a good thing on their report card, and she agreed that it was. When I explained that Lieberman’s REAL vote on Alito was the vote for cloture, she claimed that there wasn’t any way to figure that into the equation.
That tears it. Really. They're not even capable of making a reasonable defense of the situation. You add a little box on the form and you check it. Quite simple.
Unless, that is, you're under the impression that Joe Lieberman deserves the endorsement of reproductive rights groups. Then obviously your cognative problems go much deeper than just an inability to operate simple word processing functions. Why the hell they did not just stay out of this particular race I do not know, because they have just told all Democrats it is okay to adopt Joe's position on emergency contraception and still get their Seal of Approval.
The damage they are doing to the cause they purport to champion is immeasurable.
Update: Matt Stoller has a post up about this topic, and suggests that "if you are a NARAL member, the feedback form is here and the telephone numbers are as follows. DC: 202.973.3000 CT: 860.524.1086."
Share This 
Spotlight
FITZ!
JANE!!
RAFE!!
KOBE!!
Mr. Lamont !
www.ConnecticutForLamont.com
Un the freak believable. Well, not really.
Does someone have a link to the Moschilla July 10 letter to Senator Schumer on NSA spying and the Hamdan decision?
I have a PDF of it that was sent to me, but have not found it online to provide a link. Maybe someone already did?
I sent NARAL some feedback after reading last night’s post. No response yet.
I think they need more feedback.
Has anyone called NARAL and asked them about this?
This is why I no longer pay attention to the recommendations of special interest groups, even when I support the basic values they espouse. Much better to simply look at what the candidate says about the issues and judge for yourself than to let others make those judgments for you, IMO.
Don’t forget our Miss Can’t well. She voted the same damn way RGjoe did. Naral supports her also.
Jane, excellent post.
Concise.
Documented and linked.
Hard-hitting.
Tragic.
Now, how do we get it actually in the face of the persons at NARAL who voted in the selection process, as well as sent out to NARAL members.
Is there a NARAL mailing list?
This whole equation BS is what gets me. I know they have to have some way to make their decisions, but it seems so brain dead to me. Why are they not getting with a group (like a board), going over all the decisions/votes/etc and making an intelligent decision based on all of the things the canidate has done. This “scoring” shit is ridiculous. Joe here is just another example of how politicans love to take advantage of that kind of blinded logic. It’s just stupid, but more importantly, it’s just flat lazy. We’ve got enough mental laziness in the White House, we don’t need it from the very groups that are supposed to be supporting our rights.
This is a full court press issue if there ever was one, and I can think of no one better to take the lead than our Jane.
Being deliberately obtuse about the meaning of a filibuster vote versus the final confirmation vote is not, perhaps, the best way they could be making their point. Is this really so tricky?
Fucked up equation.
the House Armed Services Cmte (chaired by Admin total-toady Duncan Hunter) has hearings on Hamdan on CSpan 3 now. Will Lemon Chicken be served for lunch today?
Is this the kind of thing Media Matters would look at? I guess not. It needs that type of coverage. What about national papers, who’s a feminist columnist or reporter? We need to make this a LOUD issue.
VERY fucked-up, meta — but still less so than Cheney’s take-per-KIA that cbl just calculated for us below.
I am sure most people have seen the post at MyDD about NARAL and Lieberman (which is, of course, entirely dependant on Jane’s fine work). If not, it’s definately worth a read. If so, it is worth reading again.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/7/12/02458/1634
check out gilliard’s post here:
http://stevegilliard.blogspot......-trap.html
i think he answers your question, jane.
Steve Gilliard nails it — The Single Issue Trap
http://stevegilliard.blogspot......-trap.html
I should add that Matt Stoller’s scenario for the next Bush appointment is so very likely to happen unless NARAL and other organizations decide that their mission is more important than cocktail weenies.
This is one of the strangest things I have come across. Either Joe has them in his pocket or Planned Parenthood is essentially incompetent.
-ck- I disagree with Gilliard in that NARAL no longer even sees its narrow interests as interests worth going to the mattresses over. Yes, identity/single-issue politics has its downside. But one of them should NOT be that the group representing a critical issue is not really representing that issue.
Ham Hock! Really loved your pundit post the other day. You nailed it.
Clearly the national organizations do not support Lieberman because he furthers the causes they lobby for, since he doesn’t. Therefore, they support him because …
Oh, hell. I give up. There isn’t a rational explanation for this behavior that doesn’t involve money under the table.
lotus, I’m in total agreement about cbl’s mind-shattering calculation. Wonder if Matt O could put that to good use?
Ajay Kalra at 21 — I jsut want to agin remiind folks that LOCAL planned Parenthood is very good, so great, and does amazing work in difficult circumstances. It is the foolish national structure that deserves our condemnation (and doesn’t deserve our dollars).
Tasty when Ham Hock and Mr.Mustard work together.
Nim, what meta said at 23 — great post!
meta 25, bet he’s working on that as we type.
Clearly the national organizations do not support Lieberman because he furthers the causes they lobby for, since he doesn’t. Therefore, they support him because …
They support him because it looks on the surface that they are doing what they say their mission is without really doing it. They want their cause to stay as an underdog because then they get money from us. If they won their cause, then we wouldn’t need to financially support them anymore.
I got a letter back from NARAL, praising my “activism” and explaining their whining. This was my reponse.
Dear Ms. Shipp,
I am not an “activist”. I am a clinical psychologist in private practice, a wife and a small business owner. I am concerned by the increasingly narrow choices my patients will face in their reproductive health. I am concerned that both NARAL and Planned Parenthood seem more interested in protecting the future of their organizatione than they are about protecting women’s rights. You had the opportunity to place real pressure on Senator Lieberman, even by the “threat” of supporting his democratic opponent, Ned Lamont, (who is an ideal candidate for these interests). You could have said, “If you don’t do this we will withdraw support” and then followed thru by backing a candidate who represents what you stand for. You failed in every way to make a real choice available to women.
I am not an activist. But my hard-earned dollars will be contributed to real advocates for choice. I am glad that at least NOW has taken the responsible step.
Signed, me
We’re not just fighting the Republicans, who are dominated by their corporo-fascist wing. We’re also fighting their enablers, whoever they may be.
NARAL and PP are enablers to this horrible regime, just as much as Lieberman is. We don’t have to purge people who aren’t “ideologically pure”…we have to purge all of the fascist enablers.
Ooo, imm and meta, do you have the link to that Ham Hock? I Mustard missed it.
Boy, some snarky, slimy comments at Gilliards, but as the second one said, and cuse the flame war. Can’t say Nader without it.
We are looking at more thunderstorms later, so I’m going out to the garden. Anyone want some fresh lettuce or rosemary?
Be nice, think good thoughts…(Fitz, Ned, Fitz, Ned)
Wonder what Carolyn Triess has to say NOW? I know it might be extreme, but perhaps she should speak up and out against the National Org and walk out if they persist in their ignorant ways.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Right, Colin Powell???
I’d like to know what individuals at NARAL are behind NARAL supporting Lieberman.
There’s nothing we can do about NARAL, but we can blog about these individual members of NARAL who hate freedom, hate women, and who love Lieberman and implicitly love Bush and his occupation of Iraq.
lotus, anything for you, dahling:
http://lerani.blogspot.com/200.....ndits.html
Thank you, meta. On the internets, everyone gets to be the millionth monkey at the millionth typewriter for 15 minutes…
After my “not one more dime” letter yesterday, I got one back from NARAL this morning - probably similar to shrin in SF #31 - I’ll post here so y’all can see their “reasoning”:
Thank you for contacting us. As an activist, your work is at the core of our mission. We want to hear from you and appreciate the support you have given us over the years.
I have read your note, and I know you are not happy with us for endorsing Senator Joe Lieberman. Here at NARAL Pro-Choice America, we’re very proud of our high standard for endorsement. That having been said, from time to time, it does occasionally occur that a pro-choice elected official will take a position against our recommendation - and when that happens, it’s always a disappointment. Senator Lieberman’s vote (and the same votes of other fully pro-choice senators) for cloture on the controversial Alito nomination is one case in point. And his comments about emergency contraception caused us concern, as they undoubtedly did you as well - but he has since clarified his position, to our satisfaction.
But taking all facts into consideration - including many years of pro-choice votes in the Senate - we believe Senator Lieberman has continued to earn the NARAL Pro-Choice America endorsement. With so many relentless attacks on choice, and an anti-choice president determined to see this right taken away from American women forever, we must prioritize our work, and we need all the friends we can get. We treat him no differently than any other pro-choice senator - Democrat or Republican. I know we disagree on this one point, but our challenge is so monumental that I hope we can continue to stand together against our real opponents: President Bush, congressional leaders, and anti-choice senators who oppose us on every single vote.
Again, I appreciate the passion of your commitment to the fundamental freedoms we cherish. You are always welcome to contact us — with agreements and disagreements. I hope we can count on your continued support as we roll up our sleeves to achieve the common goals we share.
(I’d sure like to know how Holy Joe “clarified his position” to their “satisfaction” - wouldn’t you?)
1.205 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOES ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hamsher:
I’ll take a shot at explainin’ the NARL and Planned Parenthood enigma…these 2 groups suffer from exactly the same problem that the national structure of the Democratic Party suffers (and many other “progressive” issue groups, as well) and that is the corporatization of funding sources and the nitching of the national issue organizations. This leads to the need of the organizations to perpetuate the problem they are organized ta solve in order to keep their organization alive. Look at the Sierra Club and AARP…they have had the same kinda problems in the last couple a years.
The disarticulation of the Washington leadership from the local membership is everywhere apparent, it’s not limited to the Democratic Party or to NARL or Planned Parenthood. But the structure of interdependence between these groups and the politicians is held together by a kind of merengue made up of self interest of the organizations, the politicians and corporations and foundations. Any challenge from either local membership or populist political movements puts too much heat on the merengue and it melts.
That’s what I think we’re seein’ on a larger scale in this country…all the old relationships of power and self interest are bein shaken and most are not gunna last to the end of the decade. I don’t wanna sound like an incurable romantic or a Pollyanna but I think the collapse of the social-political structure that developed in the 20th Century is inevitable and is happening right before our eyes. The Lamont-Lieberman battle and theProgressive reactionary battle in the Democratic Party are a reflection of this change.
So hang in there Jane, keep on keepin’ on and…
KEEP THE FAITH, WHAT WE GET MAY NOT BE BETTER BUT IT WILL BELONG TO US!!!
Oh zen, fresh lettuce……i am a freak for the fresh little buds. On a butter lettuce jag right now. I’m incredibly lucky to have fantastic produce at my fingertips all the time, but nothing beats going out to a little garden and picking it fresh. I get so jealous when I hear Christy and all of you talk about your gardens on the Sunday threads…..You have to work for Halliburton to be able to afford a garden in SF!
Is it realistic to think that we might get Planned Parenthood and NARAL to rescind their recommendation of Lieberman? If so, we should go for it.
Why not kill two birds with one stone and support Lamont against Lieberman while simultaneously applying pressure to the backwards-thinking advocacy groups that support Lieberman.
A bunch of the institutional problems - from DINO’s supported by their incumbent buddies to failed advocacy groups like NARAL - that folks here at FDL need to confront are wrapped up in front of us with a nice bow. Via the Lamont movement, can address them all at once in one simple package. This race is truly a microcosm of some of the primary problems that progressive Democrats confront on a national level. And, most importantly, Lamont is a great candidate who is on our side on the issues that matter.
Another important question: Have NARAL and PP announced that they will support Lieberman if and when he loses the primary? If not, at the very least, they need to be pressured to support the ultimate Democratic nominee for CT. It is the very least they can do.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out…
1,000 thanks, deah meta.
Hey! That’s what I got, everhopeful! You must be an activist too!
National
A taxi
Ride
Away
League
NARAL
(I’d sure like to know how Holy Joe “clarified his position” to their “satisfaction” - wouldn’t you?)
—-
Yep.
AND why they ignore his opponent who is on record AGAINST Alito CLOTURE, and other ‘occasional controversial’ positiions.
Ned’s clear on his stand.
You know, this one endorsement has just about whirled my Dervish. I don’t think I have ever been so angry. I have two daughters that I now have to make plans for to spirit out of the country if another Alito is confirmed and NARAL is actually helping to accomplish just such a thing. Are these people complete imbeciles? Have they not been paying any attention at all? Don’t they know how the votes in the Senate work? Do they understand cloture?
I have contributed to reproductive rights groups in the past but I will not contribute one penney to NARAL unless they immediately withdraw their endorsement of Lieberman and Chaffee. And as soon I get home and can make the call, I am telling their DC office to stop stuffing my mailbox with junk mail because at this point, that is exactly what it is.
shrin in SF #44 - yeah, I posted mine after I saw your comment ’cause I figured they were probably the same. Was yours signed by Elizabeth J. Shipp, Political Director 202-973-4210 too?
there’s ’support’ and there’s ’support’ — a simple endorsement statement is one thing but cash and volunteers and mailings are quite another. The more we holler at and about NARAL & PP, the less likely they are to throw too many resources into the CT battle. This’ll also help scare away Boxer from expending too much effort on Joe’s behalf …
IMHO it is CYA.
Same with many in the punditocracy who always passively or actively endorse him.
If LIEberman wins they are protected from his pettiness. If he loses they are secure in the knowledge that Lamont will support their causes and probably return their phone calls anyway.
I sent two messages first thing this morning, one to Naral and one to Planned Parenthood explaining why neither organization will recieve our families contributions to their organizations. The organizations have involved themselves in Connecticut politics and endorsed Leiberman before the August 8th primary. In the case of Planned Parenthood our family will stop all contibutions after over 35 years of support.
I suggest we keep our emails, calls and letters up and keep them civil..withdrawal of funds speaks volumes. If you are on their mailing lists request your removal from said lists.
Further, take the time to tell your sisters, mothers, and girlfriends to join us in letting these two single issue organizations know they have made a serious mistake in endorsing Lieberman. Keep it up as long as you can..send muliple messages pleeze!
everhopeful, thank you for posting that gem.
Hey NARAL, no you absofreakinlutely cannot continue to count on my support because you suck at logic. If you’re in the business of trying to put one over on us about how thoughtful and measured your decisions are regarding the person to whom you choose to throw your support, you are flunking miserably. Did you even speak with Ned Lamont, who could fill all of the requirements for being actively pro-choice on all counts? There is no rational explanation for this tripe.
wxyz — A bunch of the institutional problems - from DINO’s supported by their incumbent buddies to failed advocacy groups like NARAL - that folks here at FDL need to confront are wrapped up in front of us with a nice bow. Via the Lamont movement, can address them all at once in one simple package. This race is truly a microcosm of some of the primary problems that progressive Democrats confront on a national level. And, most importantly, Lamont is a great candidate who is on our side on the issues that matter.
Exactly. Hence I’m in CT.
Teddy, that’s brilliant. Total shame on them.
OK. If Local CT-NARAL head Carolyn Triess supports Ned, will she make campaign appearances; or get MoveOn.org ads aired, etc?
—-
Seems to me, the local voice needs to get a bully-pulpit/bullhorn.
Ajay Kalra –
It’s a little bit of both, but mostly incompetence. Non-Profit Orgs like Planned Parenthood and NARAL build their schedules around gala fundraisers and cocktail weenie schmoozefests.
The process becomes the mission of the org, while the meaning of the mission statement is forgotten. Of course, the mission statement is front and center in all fundraising initiatives — but fundraising is process, and the process is running the org.
Any organization in any sector leads to the creation of a bureaucracy, or at least a bureaucratic process.
In short lived enterprises like movie making and political campaigns, the bureaucracy is external to the process, but is in place to enforce bureaucratic norms. In a creative campaign like Ned Lamont’s, the bureaucratic inertia can be circumvented to some extent, but not entirely.
In long term organizations, care and feeding of the org’s bureaucracy invariably becomes the unstated mission. All of those event planners and spokespersons and executive directors are people with paychecks, who have a vested interest in maintaining the cash flow and polishing their resumes.
With all of this planning and organizing and fundraising and executive directing and huffing and puffing, it’s easy for the mission to be forgotten.
For the cynics among us, the planning and organizing and fundraising and executive directing and huffing and puffing are the mission of these orgs — and these outcomes are not a surprise.
Hamdan hearings: the Admin position is that Congress should simply ratify the Preznit’s current policies and move on …
Agreed, -ck- 56, and well said. Now that we see PP and NARAL (and HRC and no doubt many others) going the way of the Red Cross, we have to keep in mind Norske’s insight and keep up our own self-generation of political power to fill this vacuum we’re only now discovering in once-venerable organizations.
In response to #39 by everhopeful:
Ok, that letter just clinches it. They are the stupidest people on the planet. It doesn’t matter how much Joe Lieberman “clarified his position” to their “satisfaction”. The cloture vote is over. His public statement about emergency contraception is over. The damage is already done. What exactly *could* he say to them? “Oh, I’m sorry Baby. I promise I won’t do it again. Give me one more chance to make it up to you.”
Or was it something like, “Ned Lamont doesn’t stand a chance. I have more money than God and I am going to crush him with negative campaigning just before the primary. He won’t have a prayer. So, if you want *any* satisfaction in the Senate, you’d better stick with me or you’ll never get another appointment with my secretary.” It only figures since we already have him on record as willing to use extortion to get the Democrats to support him in case he loses the primary and has to do something they won’t like such as tying up all their financial resources to run as a thrid party candidate.
I hate them. I hate NARAL for doing this. It would have been so much easier for them to call his bluff. But they panicked and gave in. F%^&ing cowards.
OT–omg– Israeli UN ambassador on teevee now saying war has been declared on Israel and is holding all of Lebanon responsible.
Meanwhile, Condi is in Paris and Bush on his way to Germany.
NY Observer on Lieberman
http://www.observer.com/200607.....onason.asp
I know little about CT politics (I do have relatives there) and less about NARAL, but I wonder if #24 doesn’t have it right: “There isn’t a rational explanation for this behavior that doesn’t involve money under the table.”
OR: Have anti-choice forces infiltrated NARAL? Hey, it has happened to school boards ….
Jane, I live in New Jersey but I would be willing to visit CT on the weekends to help until the primary if you think it would help and the Nutmeggers don’t think it would be an intrusion. I mean, this is their primary after all. They have so much power right now. Do they realize that? Do the people of Connecticut have any idea how their little state could turn this nation around on one primary vote? Should I come to CT to help them know that? They can shake up the nation with one vote in August. It could be a second Revolution. I envy them.
EH: The very same.
*ilson at 57, That seems like such a non-starter in Congress, why would the Bush administration continue to support it? Are they hoping the House will do that and that the Senate will do something and that they will get what they want from the conference committee?
Seems unlikely right now, but the unpatriotic weakness of this Congress does not inspire confidence that it is impossible.
OT
Reuters/Yahoo/Raw Story:
Portia #59 - WELL SAID!
And I think Lieberwhore’s “clarification” was your #2 choice - touting his “inevitability” and adding a lot of extortion.
From today’s Ha ‘Aretz:
“Defense Minister Amir Peretz also said that the responsibility for the sharp escalation on Israel’s northern border lies with the Lebanese government.
Senior Israel Defense Forces officers said Wednesday that “if the abducted soldiers are not returned we’ll turn Lebanon’s clock back 20 years.”
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/737687.html
Jane at 53,
And thank you so much for being there in CT!
In case I wasn’t clear enough, I was by no means suggesting that you or folks here at FDL weren’t doing everything they could to help the Lamont effort.
On the contrary, I am floored by the passion and effort I have seen here at FDL and in the progressive blogosphere.
My post was simply aimed to highlight, once again, my astonishment at the “density” of this race.
As you are well aware, the Lieberman vs. Lamont race has brought together a rare confluence of events in which virtually all of the problems that progressives confront within the Democratic party are arrayed before us in perfectly crystallized form. I guess I posting about it because it is so amazing to me that this race has flushed out into plain view all of the anti-progressive forces within our party and our advocacy groups.
In the Lamont/Lieberman race we can now see clearly and definitively who is aligned on the side of progressive Democratic values and who is not.
Even in the event that Lamont loses the primary (which I doubt), this whole project has been well worth it for its pedagogical value alone.
CNN’s looking away from Lebanon as much as possible today, it seems.
What is the email address for PP?
When AARP sold out its mission and members, there was quite the blood-letting. Along with large-scale membership terminations I believe the executive cadre was tossed out. NARAL is a pointless lobbying organization at this point, but maybe Planned Parenthood needs to have new management.
Everhopeful 39
I got the same letter from Ms. Shipp in response to my “take me off your list” letter last night.
My reply:
There is no point in letting a candidate claim that he is pro-choice, and trumpet your endorsement while campaigning, then give him a pass for letting us all down when it matters. If there is no accountability, there is no down side to betraying women when it is politically expedient.
The conservative interest groups understand this concept. Take a look at how the NRA operates, or the furor from religious wingnuts over Harriet Meyers, and the resulting withdrawal of her name. When a GOP politician gets out of line, they bring the hammer down, which serves as a lesson and a warning to others. NARAL, on the other hand, delivers the message that “that’s OK, Joe, just vote with us when it isn’t too inconvenient.” Nonsense. Now he knows that NARAL can be rolled, and he will do it again when it suits him.
I have donated to Lamont from early on, not because of the Iraq war, but precisely because the confirmation of Alito was the Super Bowl of votes on choice, and Lieberman threw a big fat pass to the other side.
You say you have a high standard for endorsement, but you don’t say what it is. I look at what you have done in this case, and think you are fooling yourselves. Joe is definitely not going to respect you in the morning, and I do not respect the decision to endorse him.
I also was extremely disappointed in the limp, ineffectual and late effort to opose Alito. What is the point of all that fundraising if you don’t spend it when the real fight comes? There will be another Supreme Court nominee just like him or worse, if Bush gets another pick. If I see NARAL in the fight early and hard, I will perhaps believe that you have learned something. But Lieberman has learned nothing that helps women from your endorsement, and he won’t be there for you unless he thinks there is no cost to helping you. That is, if he is still in the Senate.
With any luck, his political hide on the wall will serve notice to other so-called pro-choice politicians that the voters will hold them accountable even if NARAL doesn’t.
E.T. — dont worry about Lebanon ! They’ll simply display their purple thumbs and George Bush’s “DEMOCRACY” will shield them from Israeli assault…
*ilson @ 57,
but the retired Navy JAG is the voice of reason, don’t you think? Of course, it’s three against one.
Wouldn’t it have been refreshing if NARAL (and Planned Parenthood) had issued a statement like:
“Connecticut Democrats have a primary election on August 8th which will determine which candidate will face the voters in the November general election, for the opportunity to represent Connecticut in the United States Senate. The record of Mr. Lieberman, the incumbent, and the views and positions of Mr. Lamont, the challenger, can be viewed at our website, or are available for mailing upon request. NARAL makes no endorsement at this time, pending the results of the primary election, but feels that, in general, both of these candidates have, or are, strong supporters of the right of all women to control their reproductive health and to make the personal and private decisions about their health.”
It’s hedge-y, and not altogether honest re: Lieberman (he supports the right to get Plan B, but narrows that right by making it optional for Catholic hospitals to provide it), but it would have sent a message to voters that NARAL was not prepared to make an unqualified endorsement of Lieberman. In fact, it may have been a wake-up call for Lieberman - one he sorely needs.
In Lebanon, 5 bridges had already been destroyed and a power station seriously damaged by 10 this morning. 30 military and infrastructure targets also hit. People already dead.
Just a small comment about the Israeli statements about Lebanon, its current actions destroying water purification capacity in Gaza and the idea that they want to “turn the clock back 20 years” for the people of Lebanon. I have a very personal and strong aversion to group punishments and the concept of collective responsibility. Mostly because some of my relatives, and relatives of family friends once lived in Lidice.
http://www.zchor.org/lidice1.htm
*ilson, you crack me up.
I wish someone could explain it period. it is unfathomable
the only thing that makes sense is bribery or extortion
Lidice is so pre-1967 !
O/T -
I read in a Lowry OpEd in the R-J this morning that we ostensible “lefties” are “McGovernites with modems.”
LOL!!! What’s a “modem”? I seem to remember those. Like, fucking far out, man! GROOOOO-vy…”
Hope a Connecticut paper will re-print both Meyerson and Conason this weekend. Those two guys are paying attention. I predict a cocktail-wienie deficit in both their futures.
Going against conventional wisdom really is tough inside the Beltway — you can smell Meyerson’s fear of contradicting the conventional wisdom of the chatterati. But “he columnizes,” as he says, thereby cleverly relegating the value of his opinions and those of fellow columnizers to the dead-tree dominance of the previous century.
A harrowing page, imm. I’m very sorry to know that it represents the experiences of your family and friends.
It is against the 4th Geneva Convention, imman. Collective punishment is against international law.
but we led with shock and awe.
wxyz — oh no, I didn’t mean to imply that. I meant you had cut right to the heart of the matter — it is everything wrapped up in one tight bundle.
I was just applauding you for being en pointe and succinct.
Lidice is so pre-1967 !
*ilson, you have diagnosed the root of all my problems:
I am so pre-1967…. Is there a time transport therapist to help me?
Let’s leave the French to punaise and the poodles, shall we?
“en pointe,” indeed!
sorry to go off topic
“IF THE PRESIDENT DOES IT, IT’S NOT ILLEGAL”
yes, bush is making the same claim…think progress has the video
One of the reasons I’m so in favor of Lamont winning (in addition to the obvious benefit of getting rid of the Bush-enabler Lieberman hehe), is how we can use the netroots victory as a stick to prod other Dems with. “Do you want to get Liebermaned?”
With a victory like this under our belts, we can scare the wishy-washy on the Hill into being more progressive-friendly. And while an organization like NARAL can’t exactly be voted out of office, the ouster of a Lieberman would send quite a strong message to them that we can get what we want done…and they might want to rethink their policies, or they might “get Liebermaned” too.
the last time I used a modem was when we at FDL were doing mass faxing concerning Alito …
I’m not a member of NARAL, but they sure as hell won’t get a dime from me, ever. I’ve contributed to Planned Parenthood for over 20 years — but not this year.
OT - Dick Cheney ahead of this weekend’s G-8 summit, calling his recent criticisms of Russia “an unsuccessful hunting shot,” according to a television interview being broadcast Wednesday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12355000/
Folks in CT: as wxyz pointed out up thread, the Lamont-Lieberman race is a model of the Democratic Party at large. What I’d like to know is what is it like among the rank-and-file attending regular local Dem Party meetings in CT. Is there a general consensus, or is there disagreement between old schoolers and netroots-grassroots folks?
My state definitely has some friction in its ranks about methodology, much less so about candidates, with a schism in the ranks on methodology roughly parallel to the wired/not wired divide. I’m wondering if there is some other meta-story playing out here in CT, not about bloggers but about direct representation and the nature of communications. Could be a generational shift, but not strictly in terms of age since Lamont and Lieberman are only 12 years apart in age. Being a businessman, Lamont is quite used to being wired, whereas Lieberman as an elected official has been reliant on less-wired communications.
Makes me wonder whether this is the crux of problems with single-issues organizations, too; are they less-wired than we think, and are they less connected to their local folks? Is their less-wired status showing up in the lack of granularity in assessments of candidates?
way, way OT but for E.T. — last night a spammer here used for an Email address Ivan@Susanin.com
OT - but just read this at Yahoo:
Chances of Voting Rights Act renewal dim
WASHINGTON - A conservative backlash to the massive street demonstrations over immigration is aggravating Republican leaders’ carefully orchestrated plans to renew the landmark Voting Rights Act before the fall elections.
(Huh? Anybody else have a problem with AP’s statement of “fact” that republican leaders want the Voting Rights Act renewed?)
I just called the numbers for NARAL (national and CT). Voice mail at national. The woman at the CT NARAL told me the state NARAL organizations have PACs chartered only for endorsing state level candidates, they cannot be involved in national races–involves overwhelming paperworkrelated to federal campaign laws, etc. etc.
This whole thing is just another example of why none of us should send money to national organizations of Democrats, or organizations such as NARAL. Send the money directly to the individual campaigns we support. Because if we don’t, we have no say over which campaigns the money will go to.
Go Ned!!
me to me -
“Prez is always right.”…
Funny that. That’s what I thought I heard. DAMN! (Soma, plz?)
BobbyG 82 — heh. You just made my point.
Like far out, man. Dig it.
twolf, MSNBC got that mighty screwed up. Here’s the Times of London’s version:
A very clever Democratic Senator was putting the DoD spokesman into a trick box by using the Preznit’s own words against the military. Consistency isnt one of Bush’s strong points. The DoD flack dodged the bullet of contradiction by quickly quipping “The President is always right.”
*ilson,
Did you get to listen to Glazunov’s 8th?
O.T. Jane, I see that Digby has caused some pearl clutching at TNR, for using the Cheney word.
The DoD flack dodged the bullet of contradiction by quickly quipping “The President is always right.”
Out of the frying pan, and into the meat grinder? :)
not yet… (nyet)
lotus - sadly, no mention of the beer that darth cheney admitted he was drinking in either article. Another fact that got swept under the carpet.
The moral of the story is: Never go hunting with Dead-eye Dick Cheney