FITZ!

JANE!!

RAFE!!

KOBE!!

Mr. Lamont !

http://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

When people properly blame Ralph Nader for turning progressivism from concerns for social justice to middle class comfort and consumerism, one of the things they should note is that is his leadership led the way to interest group politics. Instead of broad alliances, there are narrow factions. …

I am constantly amazed that people expect NARAL and Planned Parenthood to see a bigger picture. Why should they? They have been trained to be single issue advocates. And those kinds of organizations are dedicated to schmoozing in DC and hiring Hill Rats. It is rarely about what the local members want or a larger picture.

Why risk pissing off Lieberman who can help you on the Hill over prinicples? Lamont has no vote.

Nader and his disciples eschewed regular politics for a bizzare form of technocratism. They wanted to have experts make political decisions, more importantly tactical decisions. And when Al Gore wouldn’t submit to Nader’s often cult-like leadership, he was an enemy.

Instead of talking about abortion rights as social justice, it became a technical debate about the law. Lawyers and researchers being outplayed by a right wing which made the debate a social justice debate and got heard. By taking the heart out of the discussion, NARAL got hammered and outmanuvered time and again.

Nader set the model: top down technocratic leadership. Which was fine until 1980. But the GOP played to people’s emotions. Abortion was murder, not the most performed medical procedure in the US. Pro-life was cast as saving babies, not oppressing women. Groups like NARAL took the heart out of an emotional debate and got beat for it.

The local members of NARAL and these other interest groups must seize control from Washington. As long as they don’t, this failed top-down management style will continue. …

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:

Republican says US readying crackdown on leaks
By David Morgan
Tue Jul 11, 8:32 PM ET

The Bush administration is preparing a crackdown on intelligence leaks to the media and will try to pursue prosecutions in some recent cases, the chairman of the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee on Tuesday.

Michigan Republican Rep. Peter Hoekstra … also suggested some unauthorized leaks could have been deliberate attempts to help al Qaeda.

“More frequently than what we would like, we find out that the intelligence community has been penetrated, not necessarily by al Qaeda, but by other nations or organizations,” he said.

“I don’t have any evidence. But from my perspective, when you have information that is leaked that is clearly helpful to our enemy, you cannot discount that possibility,” he added.

. . .

“There will be a renewed effort by the Justice Department in a couple of these cases to go through the entire process … so they can prosecute,” Hoekstra said in a speech to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

Justice Department officials were not immediately available for comment.

Hoekstra also said the newly-installed CIA director Michael Hayden was conducting aggressive internal investigations against leakers.

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise Dyck declined to comment on investigations but said Hayden believes greater communication within the agency could eliminate staff frustrations that lead to leaks.

. . .

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

Justice Department Lawyer To Congress: ‘The President Is Always Right’
The Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday heard testimony from Steven Bradbury, head of the Justice Department’s office of legal counsel. When questioned by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) on whether the President’s interpretation of the Hamdan case was right or wrong, Bradbury replied, “The President is always right.”

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:

. . .

In February Mr Cheney sprayed an old friend with shot while out quail-hunting, an accident that caused the former Halliburton boss huge embarrassment and forced him to break his aversion to TV interviews to make a fulsome on-screen apology.

This incident appears to have been at the forefront of Mr Putin’s mind when he reproved Mr Cheney for presuming to comment on the democratic deficit in Russia.

In a speech delivered in May in the former Soviet republic of Lithuania, Mr Cheney had accused Russia of cracking down on religious and political rights, and of using its energy reserves as “tools of intimidation or blackmail”

Mr Putin rejected the criticism. “I think the statements of your Vice-President of this sort are the same as an unsuccessful hunting shot,” he said, in an interview with a US television news channel, whose transcript was published today. “It’s pretty much the same.”

. . .

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

FWIW, people, I spoke to my source at the Quinnipiac Polling Institute last night. He said they just completed the NYC poll and thought CT would be next. He was told that they’ll be doing two polls for CT prior to the primary.

Once he’s begun polling CT, he has promised to notify me. Hopefully, that will be tonight.

I have already informed Planned Parenthood that our charitable foundation will no longer make contributions to support its work. We will have to find another organization that behaves rationally.

I have written NARAL….snail mail. No way are they simply going to hit a Delete button and ignore me.

I recommend everyone send a snail mail. And maybe mention the number of women who now are going to remove NARAL from their wills. I can replace with NOW.

I love NOW…the only group that fights for women!

Go Jane!

Mr. Greenjeans (I love writing that) –

That is the type of political power NARAL and Planned Parenthood understand.

as I said earlier: the more we hammer NARAL and PP, the less enthusiastic their level of support for Lieberman will be …

Prof-

Moschella letter here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/…..05rept.pdf

The “FIVE REASONS WHY WE CANNOT SUPPORT SENATOR LIEBERMAN” are the best argument I have seen for replacing him, and ” WHY WE SUPPORT NED LAMONT FOR U.S. SENATOR” is the best argument I have seen for making Ned Lamont his replacement. People may disagree with the issue positions outlined by these statements, but they cannot disagree with the logic of the arguments. This election really is about choice–the choice whether or not to stand up for what you say you believe in. I hope the Connecticut Choice Voice organization makes its position widely known in Connecticut.

The inability to “see the big picture” seems to be a national disease. You can see affecting most organizations, corporations, congress & this administration. Our parents try to teach us when we were growing up to see that what we do has consequences; good, bad or negligible. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that but why? No imagination, indifference, incompetence or just plain deliberate are probably all factors. This whole country needs therapy.

Can I just repeat my simple request of Senate Dems?

A “hold” on every judicial nominee, please.

Every. Single. One.

Hamdan shows the legal reasoning of this Administration to be at odds with American and international law. No Administration holding these views has a right to appoint to our courts the legal enablers — or in the case of Haynes, the authors — of these views.

A “hold” on every judge.
Every. Single. One.

Got link(s) for those, neuro?

Joe can have fun harping on his endorsements from NARAL and PP.

Joe loves his endorsements.

But Joe he is so big on endorsements, why is he telling everyone that he doesn’t care about the single most important endorsement of all – - the endorsement of the Democratic voters of the State of Connecticut?

Joe can have the advocacy group endorsements, as long as Ned Lamont gets the one endorsement that actually counts for something!

I got an almost immediate response from NARAL defending their decision with regard to Lieberman but did not say a word about Chafee

Sorry, wrote my post above too fast.

Meant to say “If Joe is so big on endorsements”

BobbyG

don’t bogart the “modem”, dude

TeddySanFran

“en pointe,” indeed!

yes – let’s toe the line around here

I feel so nauseated by this “decision” of NARAL’s, where to begin? For me, it seems that stubborn types are clinging to this shaky turf that’s eroding underneath them as justifiable grievances against Lieberman come pouring in. I suspect there are so many faultlines between cocktail weenie elites and say, regular pro-choice folks, again where to begin.
But when someone is so “firm” in their decision in the face of surmounting evidence, it makes one a little suspicious, non? I say shine the light of day on their stupid practices.

I gave my way more than 2 cents worth of analysis the last time this came up.

It is a simple calculation. The expectation is that incumbant’s always win, and that if you fuck with the incumbant you will lose “access” and “influence,” whether real or not, whether effective or not. And the lobbyists’ jobs depend on that access, and if they get it wrong they will lose their jobs. It has nothing to do with whether HoJo really supports women’s reproductive freedom, it has to do with the eternal self perpetuation of the never-ending cocktail party of Washington insiderdom.

They can’t figure out a better way than some rigged “report card” to figure out who to support? That’s nonsense: They don’t want to. They want and need the system to be rigged in favor of incumbants and, most importantly, in favor of themselves.

If they really represented the issue they claim to represent, they would do just that – its not like its difficult to figure out who is for you and who is against you in Washington.

Naral is about Naral. It really isn’t hard to figure out.

And now I will return to studying.

SharonW thanks for the news. i was wondering when quinnepiac would do another poll.

Bobby G, I’m trippin’.

it’s Katy barre the door — Punaise is here

OT: You know that ToL story I threw in earlier re Bush’s positioning Merkel to replace Blair as his BFF in Europe? We-ell . . . now comes this:

Lord Levy arrested over cash-for-honours
By Times Online and agencies

Lord Levy, the Labour fundraiser and one of the Prime Minister’s closest allies, has been arrested over the cash-for-honours scandal, it was reported today.

The peer was held by Scotland Yard detectives investigating claims that wealthy donors were asked to lend rather than donate money to the Labour party and were then recommended for honours, Sky News claimed.

. . .

Lord Levy plays tennis with Tony Blair and is nicknamed Lord Cashpoint for his role in raising funds for Labour. He is also Mr Blair’s special envoy to the Middle East.

Alex Salmond, the leader of the Scottish National Party, which reported its concerns over cash-for-honours allegations to the police, said: “The water is lapping up the beach, it’s round the ankles of the Prime Minister.

“This is Tony Blair’s personal friend, bagman and fundraiser. I think we can say that Tony Blair’s personal pack of cards is starting to tumble down.”

did deveryone catch Meyerson’s good piece in the WaPo?

Kos: “Harold Meyerson offers an education to the (wilfully?) ignorant dolts who insist on misinterpreting the dynamics of the Connecticut Senate primary.”

OT and fairly strange:

“Israel ‘is using chemical ammunition’
By Duraid Al Baik, Foreign Editor

Dubai: A doctor at a Palestinian hospital has accused Israel of using a type of chemical ammunition which causes burns and injuries in soft tissue and cannot be traced by X-ray.

Chemical or depleted uranium could have been used in producing the new type of ammunition according to Dr Jomaa Al Saqqa, head of the Emergency Unit at Gaza’s main medical facility, the Al Shifa Hospital.

In a telephone interview, Al Saqqa told Gulf News that operation Summer Rain was not just the code name of a military operation launched by Israel against Gaza since June 26.

“It is a live exercise on a new ammunition that, so far, has resulted in killing 50 Palestinians and injuring 200,” he said.”

http://www.gulfnews.com/region…..52824.html

uranium of any isotopic concentration whatsoever is extremely X-ray opaque and would show up instantly on the plates …

Meyerson (and Conason) rawkin’ today, punaise, my-oh-my yez!

All these national fundraising machines are sooooo 20th century.

Support your local family planning service provider and help Repeal the South Dakota Ban on Abortions.

Sit down, everybody.

Ready?

CT-SEN: Lieberman Will Face Another Anti-War Candidate – A Republican
By Rachel Weiner
Joe Lieberman won’t be alone as he travels around Connecticut gathering petitions. The Courant’s Kevin Rennie informs Hotline that Republican state Rep. Diana Urban is preparing for an independent run. Urban will run as an anti-war candidate; Hotline describes her as “a Republican version of Cindy Sheehan.” . . .

*ilson @ # 130,

good point. The Gulf News sometimes promotes easily debunked stories. sort of like some of our newspapers.

*ilson & Ed*ard Teller — WP, perhaps?

HA!

Matt Stoller says, “I’m sympathetic to Planned Parenthood, because they provide medical services to women all around the country. NARAL though is a lobbying shop only.” After the Alito vote, I resolved never to give money to NARAL, but I agreed with Stoller’s argument in favor of Planned Parenthood. Now I am having to reassess my position, because Planned Parenthood is actively intervening in a state Democratic Primary on behalf of a candidate who actively enables appointment of hyperconservative Supreme Court justices.

Since Lieberman did so in the case of Alito, what reason is there to believe he would not do so on the next Bush nominee, however bad? Do the worthy services that PP provides really excuse them from culpability in supporting a candidate like Lieberman?

They should have stayed out of the race if they weren’t willing to stand up for their principles.

And with regard to Supreme Court appointments, there is much at stake in addition to choice. Lieberman’s support for Alito was wrong for so many reasons.

I’m tired of Lieberman.

Just wondering, why would chem weapons necessarily be uranium based?

We used something in Fallujah that was latter day napalm, iirc.

lotus here is the link to the local announcement for another challenger in the CT senate race
http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?…..1debc02447

meta says:
July 12th, 2006 at 9:10 am

Bobby G, I’m trippin’.
______

Don’t Bogart the fuckin’ roach, man…

OT – houston’s mayor collapsed at ken lay’s service

Well, pete, that’s a fascinating article and it’s a free(ish) country. Thanks for the link.

Former Houston mayor collapses at Ken Lay’s funeral service.

He looked very alive on the stretcher, so that’s nice.

Lotus at 133, Holy Crap! I have no idea what to make of that. I wonder if the anti-war Repubs would go in her direction. The war is immensely unpopular here therefore it can’t be merely Dems and Indys who are against it.

My gut reaction isn’t a bad one though. This might actually help Ned.

Hmm.

Conason really hits the point…with those oh-so-trubblin’ facts. And the timeline. Gawd, they’re a nuisance.

J-Lie sleeping with the lobbyist…. shades of Delay tactics for fattening the family wallet.

But then, I guess he’s got “principled reasons…” It’s that old, old Washington story. It’s the stuff that’s legal that makes your stomach turn.

angie — WP = white phosphorus

Supposedly used for its incendiary effects and not for its chemical toxicity. All depends on your interpretation and perspective, I guess.

But he’s 81 yo.

http://www.chron.com/disp/stor…..42140.html

the “anti-war Republican” may very well be a Lieberman-encouraged ’stalking horse’ put into the race to draw votes away from Mr. Lamont … we will be seeing the hadballest of hardball politics in this CT race

rwcole, focus!

SharonW, sounds as if she may have a mighty steep hill to climb to get on the ballot — but I think you’re right, it can’t be good for JoHo.

holy joe is the only CT senate candidate that is for the war. even the repub nominee shlesinger is against the war

thanks, Rayne, now I see your reference to WP (willie pete– such a cutesy name, eh?)– it does indeed depend on one’s interpretation and perspective. i wonder if whatever it is was manufactured by us.

still, injured is injured and dead is dead.

just curious – is Lieberman having any trouble getting his signatures?

now, wouldn’t that be the corker if he can’t get enough?

Lotus, well, she doesn’t look or read stupid. Helluva background.

http://www.housegop.ct.gov/members/urban.asp

Call them! Use the feedback form!

It works for the nutso right wingers – you bet it’ll work for us.

Just what I was thinking, SharonW.

Meanwhile, back in DC, Pat Roberts been bizzy-bizzy-bizzy:

Delayed Senate Iraq Report Unlikely to Land Before Elections
By Justin Rood – July 12, 2006, 12:15 PM

Senate intelligence committee chairman Pat Roberts (R-KS) announced new deadlines for his panel’s fabled “Phase II” of its now-epic investigation into prewar Iraq intelligence — but the final report is still unlikely to come until after the November elections, Congressional Quarterly reports today. …

OldCoastie says
July 12th, 2006 at 9:37 am

just curious – is Lieberman having any trouble getting his signatures?

now, wouldn’t that be the corker if he can’t get enough?
______

Rove will take care of that. Whatever real ones they can’t get will be supplanted in sufficient quantity to meet the requirement.

Pete, Schlesinger is anti Iraq war, too? I’ve heard next to nothing about him. All I heard was last night on WTNH that he’s laying back before spending money advertising. That and the fact that he only polled at 8% on the last June poll.

lotus – Pat Roberts playing the delay game? I’m floored. so out of character for him….

You think you’ve got it bad? How about THIS!!! – an AIDS org having Jamaican Reggae “artits” who call for the torture andurder of gay men to sing at a benefit!

AND THE MOTHERFUCKERS WON’T BACK DOWN!!!!!!

Old Coastie, didn’t Lieberman already file his papers………see prior post where he declares his NEW party.

Apparently, NARAL and Planned Parenthood have relocated to Dumbfuckistan. I don’t sent money into that country, so they’re dead to me.

sincere question – was Lieberman referring to specific hospitals as having the right to say to emergency contraceptives? Like Catholic ones? I am just curious if he was clear on who he meant…

sorry, I have missed this whole discussion on the site as i have not had too much extra time to read here…

If I may make a suggestion: the trick is to get any protests of NARAL and Planned Parenthood onto Connecticut TV, and into Connecticut newspapers.

Reason: they can’t report the story, without retelling the tale of “rape gurney Joe”. It’s my contention that Joe’s infamous quote and position on the emergency contraception issue are still not widespread and well-known (except within the friendly Left Blogosphere).

And that if they are, this will eat all the oxygen in Lieberman’s campaign until at least the August primary (likely, beyond), and fatally damage him with women voters.

Currently, CT women, by and large, are okay with Joe… because, by and large, they don’t even know about his outrageous dismissal of their well-being.

So… MAKE THEM KNOW.

Also: am I wrong, but is the Lamont campaign not making hay out of the CONFLICT OF INTEREST in Hadassah Lieberman’s lobbying for Big Pharma? Is the Lamont campaign passing THIS out all over CT, and if not, WHY NOT?:

http://www.observer.com/200607…..onason.asp

Justin R is bizzy himself today:

“… I hear Spencer Ackerman at the New Republic has a piece forthcoming on Hoekstra, with some interesting details. While we’ve been dissecting the May letter, I’m told that Ackerman has assembled that and many other pieces into a portrait of a powerful intelligence overseer who may or may not have all his pieces together himself.”

Chrissie, he filed the necessary papers to start collecting signatures.

Hmmmm,Raw story say’s Pelosi hasa made all Democratic caucus meetings mandatory for members.
‘Cracking the whip and takin’ names.’

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2….._0712.html

Doug Ireland has more on this grotesque situation.

Good for Pelosi.

Maybe some kind folks might wanna send some internets thru the toobz for this move. Kinda like, “Let’s hash out a postition on THIS issue ‘X’, and present a UNITED front” strategy…I hope?

lotus #158 – time for Harry to shut down the Senate again?

lotus

Those statements can be found at the link in Jane’s post above (they are both on the same link).

Jeebus — the Senate ain’t all that needs shutting down! Did you see Glenn’s post yesterday?

Prominent right-wing blogger today calls for the murder of Supreme Court Justices – the Right fails to condemn it

Thanks, neuro.

Lotus-h/t wrt Lieberman’s filing to collect signatures and not actual filing of signatures. Sometimes I think my poor head will explode trying to keep up.

New Christy Minstrels thread

The New Constitution:

Article 1: Anything the President does is legal.

Article 2: Whenever something appears to be illegal, refer to article 1.

Its simple, succinct, what’s not to like? Who can really be bothered with all that long-winded legal stuff anyway?

Yo tambien, Chrissie!

Put your seatbelts on.
Christy’s post is powerful.

NARAL Pro-Choice America
1156 15th Street, NW Suite 700
Washington, DC 20005

Main Number: 202.973.3000
Main Fax: 202.973.3096

This would be a very good time to contact them if you’re disappointed in their decision. Here’s my message, left on an answering machine at the number above:

I’m outraged that NARAL would endorse Joe Lieberman. He enabled the Alito confirmation and he supports the right of hospitals to provide inadequate care for rape victims. His expressed attitude toward rape victims is unacceptably cavalier. I was at university before abortion was illegal, and I know what’s at risk. I presume NARAL no longer has a clue, and thus ends my support for the organization.

okay – I looked again and all I see is the one quote. If I heard him say that I would assume he meant Catholic hospitals.

Voting for cloture and then against Alito is like letting the horse out of the barn and then voting to go catch it.

kitty,

Here’s a link to CTBob—he explains it all pretty clearly. Scroll down to May 4th.
http://ctbob.blogspot.com/2006…..chive.html

I have been a donor to Planned Parenthood/NARAL, and receive mailings on a consistent basis from your organization.

Unfortunately, I do not wish to provide financial support to your organizaton any longer, due to your support for Joe Lieberman for Senate.

Please take me off your list.

Signed, Your Name

P.S. (always send in that first $1 – get the mailings, then let them have it)

Sent this Jane and Christy:

_______________________________

RE: Your position endorsing Joe Lieberman for Senate in the state of Connecticut.

There is a more strongly pro-choice candidate in this race and it is Ned Lamont. Your organization is behaving irresponsably and damaging its own cause by endorsing Joe Lieberman.

I will not forward any of your emails to my friends or promote this organization and website while you endorse Joe Liberman and his stated position of asking Connecticut rape victims to walk to another hospital if the hospital they were brought to does not administer Plan B.

Regards,

Anna *****
Truly Pro-Choice
New Orleans, LA

re: Conason article. Anyone amazed by the hypocrisy or is it only me who’s always in perpetual amazement? What gets me is that Haddassah and Joe can put on a really congenial mask and show upbeat enthusiasm for “public health” when really it’s about receiving a nice, fat check, as far as I’m concerned. Jobs? sheesh. I suspect that does not make up for the layoffs &so on. Lieberman is pure theater.

meta@41, McGee and Stuckey’s “The Bountiful Container.” If you have window boxes and/or flower pots, you can grow some veggies :)

The women who authored this book run a nursery somewhere in the Great Northwet.

It seems apparent that their real goal is “freedom and personal responsibility,” so the Lieberman thing can be thought to fit into that. Nothing too specific, mind you!

I just received this from an e-mail I sent less than 5 minutes ago:

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.

Best,
Elizabeth J. Shipp, Political Director
202-973-4210

37 years ago today I was kidnapped at gunpoint from the bus stop where I was waiting for my ride home from work, gang raped by three men, beaten, and kicked out of car in nothing but the shreds of my slip 14 hours later. On a street in NW Washington DC.

I ended up in a hospital for a week, almost dying from my injuries.

I was 17 years old.

This was before rape crisis centers, before there were procedures in place to help rape survivors, hell, there wasn’t even a woman officer on the DC police, the FBI or the national Park police units, all who had to interview me after the rape. (I was driven into Maryland and Virginia, raped in a national park).

If I had found out three weeks later that I was pregnant, I would have killed myself.

I still lock every door, shut every window when I am alone in my home. 37 years later.

And some people think I should have carried a rapist’s child to term?

I tell you this not for sympathy, only to stand up and say that no woman should be forced to search for help after a rape, not even if it pricks the conscience of a ‘anti-birth control activist’ to allow a woman emrgency contraception.

Just received this:

Sue,
I am also a member of CT Choice Voice (in my individual capacity) and understand your frustration. We as the CT state affiliate of NARAL Pro-Choice America do not play a role in endorsements in federal races. NARAL Pro-Choice America makes those decisions. They have an incumbency policy and have chosen to continue their support of an incumbent who they consider to be pro-choice. Beyond that, you should direct any questions to them at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org or 202-973-3000.
Regards,
Carolyn Treiss

I think you’re taking this too far, and here’s why:

1. Stopping your support of NARAL (or any other org that disappointed you on one
single issue) doesn’t send the right message. NARAL endorses 109 candidates other
than Lieberman. So you’re punishing up to 109 campaigns that you probably support
in order to chastise a single-issue PAC.

NARAL, because it is a single-issue org, does not factor in Lieberman’s record on
anything other than Choice, which aside from the ’short ride’ controversey, is
solid. Nor do they care about his rapport among democrats, since NARAL is
bipartisan and endorses pro-choice GOP candidates, too.

2. Conservative bloggers have made a great point recently: While the right spends
time blogging about follies of the left, the left is spending time blogging half
about the follies of the right, and half about the left.

Criticism is definitely healthy, but how awful is Joe Lieberman, anyway? Surely
he’s preferable to the eventual republican opponent. I’m just saying, keep your
eyes on the prize – progressive control of the House and Senate.

Don’t waste time in-fighting when there’s a greater battle to be won, that’s all I’m
saying. NARAL is there to help, so don’t turn your back on their whole effort just
because they supported a couple guys you didn’t. Ceasing your support of them
ultimately serves the GOP.

I used to work for a NARAL affiliate. The national organization has no idea what is going on in grassroots America.

NARAL has a numerical weighting system for rating candidates for endorsement. The system is set up so that if you are an incumbent, and you are marginally pro-choice, there is no way you will not get the NARAL endorsement.

NARAL is part of the worst branch of the incumbent protection racket in D.C..

NARAL’s loyalty is to incumbents, not to what’s best for women.

You know Jane, I was kind of on the fence about Lieberman. I didn’t really like him, but I wasn’t bashing him like most of the blogosphere. Heck, I was even ostracized on my OWN site for taking a more moderate approach, but this one did it for me.

Lieberman needs to go. Maybe he can start a taxi service for those poor women that need to find another hospital!

Executive Director and others at NARAL ProChoice Connecticut support Ned Lamont. Endorsement was a national decision that considered, but did not weigh CT opposition more than Senate longterm voting record.

While not a fan of too much “what have you done for me lately” sentiment, these endorsements based on longterm record are a distortion.

Similarly, US Rep. John Lewis supports Lieberman because his work with freedom riders in the early 1960’s “should be worth something”. It was, it got him to the State Senate, Attorney General, and US Senate 18 years ago. But hasn’t that chit been spent? Or invalidated by cozying up to Bush’s harmful social policies?

Support change. Crash the gate. Support Ned Lamont. http://www.nedlamont.com/contribute