Login Here
I'm sure Nancy Keenan is licking her sweet chops over the latest SCOTUS decision. It is, after all, probably going to be the biggest fundraising opportunity she's had during her tenure at NARAL. Bigger even than Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement. Remember that one?
"NARAL Pro-Choice America surpassed its fundraising goals in the hours following Justice O'Connor's announcement," said President Nancy Keenan. Donors "are deeply concerned that President Bush will choose to further divide this nation by nominating a radical right-wing conservative."
Moderation is not the tone of fundraising appeals in the nomination contest. "This is big, people. Huge," NARAL wrote to supporters. "It's true, there is no freedom without choice. Without choice, we are not free."
And what did they do with all that cash? They sat on it and didn't do a damn thing, didn't lift a finger to fight Samuel Alito. Worse yet, when the Gang of 14 decided to vote in favor of cloture, they said that they did not consider cloture votes "significant" and would not be considering them in their scorecard. They then went on to add insult to injury by asking their membership to thank Lincoln Chafee and Joe Lieberman for the beatings they delivered with their "aye" cloture vote by pretending that their "nay" floor votes were significant. They then poured salt into the wound by endorsing both "short ride" Lieberman and Chafee over their opponents who made it clear that they would not have voted for cloture for Alito, which gave us the 5-4 decision we have today.
Don't reward failure. Tell your friends. Don't give money to NARAL when they come knocking on your door to tell you that choice is going down the crapper unless you give them a lot of money, because what you'll be giving money for is Nancy Keenan's ability to point her little pinky over tea at Washington cocktail parties and tut-tut over the state of choice in this country at the hands of the fundamentalists. She'll take no responsibility for the fact that NARAL will not fight, will not back those that fight, and worse yet, that NARAL sucks up all the pro-choice money so nobody else can mount a meaningful fight, either.
May I humbly suggest that if you're looking for a place to put your fighting dollars today, you consider the Blue America PAC. All the money goes to support candidates who are carefully scrutinized by Howie Klein for their pro-choice stance. We were really successful last November in backing a slate of progressive pro-choice, anti-war candidates and will continue to do so, because politicians are not going to back choice unless they think there is support for doing so, and danger if they don't.
Keenan has told many people she thinks she does not have to address these complaints because eventually we will just shut up and go away. Not going to happen, because we actually care about choice and we do know how to fight.
She can wear this one around her neck. Nancy Keenan had all the money, and she did nothing.
Share This 
Spotlight
Go Jane!
Not sure if NOW has been doing much good these days either…
Right on, Jane.
Jane!
Too late for the zed, but I think we need some better choices for an alternative to NARAL.
CodePink maybe? What other choices do we have?
Also OT but breaking:
CREW Chief on Fitzgerald and the Missing Emails
By Matt Renner and Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report, Wednesday 18 April 2007
Fitz has not (yet) responded.
Bob in HI
Oh I won’t be sending anything to NARAL. They betrayed me. And most importantly, lots of women.
DAY-um! zed without even trying. Even stopped to read first! (trying not to break arm while patting self on back…)
Two excellent post in a row. NARAL is a farce. 5-4 decision sucks wind. A bitter dissapointment. What a heart-wrenching story, that last one.
bingo.
Them be the consequences
Preach it Sister Jane! You are sooooo right!!!
egregious — after I asked my question of you a couple threads back, I wasn’t able to stick around for the discussion, but I did get to read through it later. Thanks for your thoughtful responses.
Jane:
As others have said long before, if men were the ones who got pregnant, abortion rights would be protected by a constitutional amendment.
Is partial birth abortion ruling to NARAL what 9/11 was to W?
Scorching!
National NARAL sucks, but didn’t the CT state NARAL have something to say about Sen. Liebermann?
Thank you, Jane! I cut them off a while back, and will continue to keep them cut off. Blue America it is for me!
Why & when did NARAL go bad?
Well, actually, she’s right, we have gone away, but just away from her organization, not away from the fight.
lisadawn82 @ 14
Might be time for them to split off from the main group.
OT Daily Kos: during the past 15 years, 23 states have passed concealed-carry laws, joining the 16 that already had them. In the same period, gun murders have plummeted by 31% in the United States.
More guns, less crime
lisadawn82 @
14
As a matter of fact, they did. Carolyn Treiss, head of CT-NARAL, supported Ned Lamont but had no say in what the national PAC did. Brenden did a great post about this, lemme find the link.
I recommend Planned Parenthood as an alternative. The money given actually goes to providing services. Screw lobbying groups, especially ones that fail in their primary mission.
Quick next-step question for the team:
Notwithstanding the number of Dems who voted FOR the “partial-birth” bill in 2003, can Congress now repeal the law unilaterally? Do they need Bush to sign any repeal if it passes 50 percent in both Houses?
Since my confrontation with NARAL in Austin 2005, they have been on my fecal scroll.
[screechy NARAL rep verbally attacked Markos, got right in his face over his stand on single issue groups]
Removed myself from their email list (not an easy trick either)
Called and demanded to be removed from their mailing list.
Written paper letters expressing my dismay in NARAL’s narrow minded and misguided plans for action and support for candidate X just because of an expressed view on issue Y but has a TOTALLY Wrong record in whole.
When I run into them at events, they get an ear full.
Call them and tell them.
NARAL Pro-Choice America
1156 15th Street, NW Suite 700
Washington, DC 20005
Main Number: 202.973.3000
Main Fax: 202.973.3096
Media Relations: 202.973.3032
Membership Information: membership@ProChoiceAmerica.org
Legacy Gifts: plannedgiving@ProChoiceAmerica.org
Information Line: 202.973.3018
i’ve got say again (especially for newbies) how much i admire jane and howie and everyone who worked on blue america (the candidate list and the pac).
unlike the idiots at NARAL - they have principles and stay true to them.
when brown voted for the MCA (torture, indefinate detention and kangaroo courts) he got taken right off of the blue america list, even though he had been very progressive in other areas.
thank you jane, thank you howie. it’s good to know i can give money to blue america and trust that it will be well used. i just wish i had more $$ to give.
Actually, I am surprised Keenan still has a job after Alito and Short ride.
Apparently there must be a sort of blindness wrt to important decisions that have been inflicting self damage to the cause.
Jane Hamsher @ 20
Jane, I got that right here.
my contempt for Joe Lieberman is partially fueled by national NARAL’s awful behavior.
SteveAudio @ 12
Actually, the way I heard it is:
If the Pope could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacriment.
OT..
“OT Daily Kos: during the past 15 years, 23 states have passed concealed-carry laws, joining the 16 that already had them. In the same period, gun murders have plummeted by 31% in the United States.
More guns, less crime
When Rudy was mayor of NY, violent crime in the state of Montana fell by 1/3. Obviously the crooks were afraid that Rudy would come to their town, so they left.
Is it possible to reform NARAL from the inside? To perform a friendly (or not) take over so to speak?
Here is the NARAL feedback page… just to let them know how you feel!
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/feedback.html
This decision was made possible by the DLC, NARAL, and the corporate msm folks who told all of us uppity democrats (especially the female ones) that, in order to be considered serious, democrats need to shut up and do what the republicans tell them to do. Compromise means keeping your head down and giving in, time and again.
No more. Never again. I’ll fight until I die before I accept this notion of compromise. And you better believe my congresscritters will be getting (yet another) earful from me on this one.
NARAL to SCROTUM: “Please, Sirs, can we have some more?”
eCAHNomics @ 16
Because CEO’s of donation supported oranizations are performance ranked by how well they raise funds, not on their policy wins.
Don’t just dump on her, dump on the Board that uses this criteria
Don’t reward failure.
I AGREE completely. Which is why I won’t be supporting NARAL or NPR or PBS with my hard-earned dollars.
These organizations are especially unworthy of our patronage because of their influence over the less-informed liberal population. They are MORE dangerous and disengenuous than far-right organizations because they have a certain *liberal* veneer and prestige.
They are an insidious forces, all of them.
Where is Keenan’s board on this?
Where can we go from here?
brendancalling @
27
That’s a great post, Brenden. Says it all.
This got EPU’d so I hope it’s ok to repost. It is relevant because it’s Ursula K. Le Guinn’s take on what a truly gender neutral society would be like.
The Left Hand of Darkness
Wikipedia entry
merciless @ 33
Whoopsie, this also is a bad day for Hillary “(DLC is my middle name)” Clinton, imho.
I swear I was going to donate to NARAL tomorrow but instead I’m giving to Blue America–anyone want to match me $50.00?
Thanks Jane!! That was so very close!!
PLovering @ 19
Try More Police, Less Crime.
One does not always cause the other.
PLovering @ 19
The proportion of the population most likely to commit crimes (teenagers, basically) has gone down. Rudy G. tried to claim credit for his this in NYC, however the same trend occurred at the same time in other cities. If you want to claim credit for concealed carry laws lowering the crime rate, you have to break things out quite carefully.
Anyways, more guns, less crime is not a good summary of the post by meteor blades.
Part Of Ginsberg descent, from Balkinization:
Link
America’s women just got patronized big-time in this decision.
AMEN, Sister!
Another great alt. idea is to send your dough to or volunteer for Planned Parenthood. Their services cover all aspects of Ob-Gyn care, & truly help those who can’t pay & have few other options…
Phule @ 43
Conceal carry laws don’t necessarily mean there are more guns out there. You would also have to consider the types of gun-related killings - in private or public spaces for example. And did the death rates go down in the just states that enacted the legislation or elsewhere as well - in which case something else is going on.
So far, what you got proves nothing.
SteveAudio @ 12
If men were the ones who got pregnant, women would be the ones in power.
Congress needs to create a bill that solely addresses the right of every woman and every man to be able to control their own reproductive system and all medical decisions in relation to their own bodies.
So, what does NARAL propose to do when even more women are restricted from exercising their right to reproductive freedom by NARAL’s blatant refusal to STEP UP and fight back?
Jane, maybe I should print off your excellent post and mail it to the headquarters, along with a letter asking them to take me off their mailing list. Permanently.
-S
PLovering @
19
No, the correlation is between guns and murder. Violent crime has soared.
The perception here is that most ‘Christian church’ denominations do not support choice. I could be wrong on this.
ccmask @
42
I’ll match your $50.
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 44
Also, more, many more, potential criminals locked up in jail.
And as someone else mentions, more cops.
No one has done a good study about the decrease in crime rates, considering the multiple factors involved. Or at least I haven’t seen one.
But don’t expect wingnuts to want a good study. Any damn correlation is good enough for them.
BTW, crimes rates have started to trend up under W, have they not? Especially in Midwest?
Reid - The President must search his soul…doesn’t appear to me that he has one..just sayin’
Nancy, Nancy you’re a tool
Flushing the cash is all you do
Pretend this ruling is something new
And stick it you-know-where you stupid fool
Jane Hamsher @ 54
I will match you too.
Jane Hamsher @ 54
Thanks Jane!
Fern @ 48
Phule @ 43
PLovering @ 19
at Daily Kos: during the past 15 years, 23 states have passed concealed-carry laws, joining the 16 that already had them. In the same period, gun murders have plummeted by 31% in the United States.
More guns, less crime
Try More Police, Less Crime.
One does not always cause the other.
Conceal carry laws don’t necessarily mean there are more guns out there. You would also have to consider the types of gun-related killings - in private or public spaces for example. And did the death rates go down in the just states that enacted the legislation or elsewhere as well - in which case something else is going on.
So far, what you got proves nothing.
Hint: There was a program to put more officers on the street in that timeframe.
Would you like to buy a clue for $100?
I got a fundraising call from NARAL over the weekend and told the phone person that I was not going to support them because of the Ho-Jo endorsement. She said that she had heard that quite a bit in her phoning, so perhaps we can get through.
Folks, do we have to feed PLovering? The term “concern troll” comes to mind. And obviously doing a decent job of throwing thread off topic. My $.02
PLovering @ 19
At the same time, Clinton funded over 100,000 community police.
You cannot measure this without measuring all the variables. Thom Hartman had a segment on yesterday debunking this study. That it was another NRA propaganda spin story.
What is different in Europe & Canada that USA
1. safety net (healthcare, pensions, BENEFITS)
2. Gun control (every weapon is known and registered)
3. Less violence on TeeVee
When people feel that they are cared for, that they do not need to fear for their safety, that the news is NOT “it bleeds, it leads” and ratchets up the fear factor.
Try a road trip through Canada away from the American media…. big eye opener, also the biggest way to decompress.
dakine01 @ 62
True, that. sorry.
Anyone who’s been giving money to NARAL for the last year must be living in a cave. I really don’t understand why people pay any attention to them at all. They’re the HRC of abortion rights.
The Republicans really, really need to get over their attitude that they know what’s best for us all. I so resent that arrogance. Especially from the likes of Bush.
AZ Matt @ 58
Done plus $25 for Charlie Brown.
Frank Probst @ 65
I repeat my Q from above, as I haven’t seen an answer. When & why did NARAL go bad, if anyone knows?
Thank You Jane!
Frank Probst @ 65
People work hard, they don’t pay a lot of attention to the news and they trust that when they write their check to NARAL that money is going to fight for choice. NARAL abuses that trust.
I really don’t get the concern from the right, often leveled against such legislation as anti-smoking laws, that they turn us into a “nanny state”. The right in it’s support of anti-abortion laws and others are the ones who are really giving up rights to the state. Just another Rovian spin I guess.
Jane,
Thank you for the article. Many of us need to be apprised of this kind of behavior in order to know where to put our money. Greed is not exclusively republican,after all, and, apparently, neither is hubris.
Nice going AZ!
noen @ 71
Anti-smoking laws are about externalities–what other people do that affects you. Anti-abortion laws are about what you do that affects only you. Does that clear it up?
I’m a white male in my 30’s, and since I was a little boy I have understood the importance of a woman’s right to choose what to do with her own body. I have seen a couple of posts that talk about giving money to planned parenthood, or about how they have personally tried to compromise on this issue in the past. There are few issues that I am absolute on, but this is one of them. In my opinion, there is nothing to compromise on in regard to a woman’s right to choose what she wants to do with her body. On more than one occasion I have heard people from planned parenthood talk about how there is room for compromise here. Both sides need to come together on this they will say. To which I once again will scream at the TV or radio THERE IS NO ROOM FOR COMPROMISE HERE! To me it is this simple, there is is a woman, she has a body, she can get pregnant, and she can choose to have the child or not. I don’t see any room in there for anyone, much less a man (who doesn’t own the same equipment and will never understand what it means to be a woman) to be making that decision for that woman. It’s much like the 4th amendment. There is nothing fuzzy there. A warrant is required for a search, and to get a warrant you need probable cause. Any room for compromise there? No, I didn’t think so.
Oh, also, you’ll get a lot of people that think restricting abortion rights to age is OK. Well, if your old enough to get pregnant, then you are old enough to choose what to do with your body. I would hope my kid would come to me if stuck in that situation, but I would never support a law that made her do it. That will just force kids into horrible situations to get the abortion anyway.
Not singling out anyone, just a positional opinion here.
ccmask @ 73
You are welcome!
How do we reconcile ourselves to those politicians who we admire for being pro-choice, yet, at the same time support, the Iraq war?
This is an excerpt of a letter I recently recieved from Planned Parenthood International:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo.....123951/995
WH & RNC working to vet emails?
eCAHNomics @ 74
So in other words… what you are saying is that in the eyes of the right… the law is all about me? Me, me, me. Everything in this world revolves around me. In the eyes of the right that is.
Well isn’t that just special.
Phule @ 43
Proven fact: More police, Less gun crime.
Who listens!
Jane, Christy, women of the lake.
Today I’m ashamed of our venal Senate, five Supremes (three of whom lied in their confirmation hearings in order to destroy abortion access), and our nation.
And my gender.
Thanks Jane and Christy for your tireless advocacy for reproductive freedom.
2008 candidates on the abortion ruling.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.....on-ruling/
noen @ 80
To put a finer point on it, Rs want to control your private life, especially if you’re a woman, or other disadvantaged group member. They couldn’t care less about the public sphere.
In fact, IMO that summarized the fundamental differences between Ds & Rs.
AngryAmerican @ 75
You must have had a wonderful mother. She raised you well. Thank you
Woodhall Hollow @ 78
As far as I can determine Mr. Wolfowicz has always had a penchant for being a liar. ;0)
OT but important
IN DECEMBER 2005, A VIRGINIA COURT FOUND VT KILLER SEUNG CHO ‘MENTALLY ILL’ AND ‘AN IMMINENT DANGER TO OTHERS’
Good for all of you. Great post Jane. WE WHO DO NOT FORGET!!
The culture-of-life folks won’t have anything to say about this devastation of life done under the auspices of their feckless leader.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04.....ad.html?hp
OT — USAs
If you’ve never seen the flip-floppery of MN Senator Normie Coleman, think progress has the latest goods wrt Rachel Paulose.
I think of it as a hooked walleye flipping and thrashing hopelessly in the bottom of the boat….
I stopped donating to NARAL awhile ago. But, I still get mail from them which gets thrown away unread. I’ll read the next one and if it’a a request for $, I’ll enclose, instead, a note letting them know how they’ve disappointed all of us.
looseheadprop @ 87
You’ve got to be kidding me.
Dear Nancy,
It’s a Short Ride from my mailbox to my recycling bin, as your requests for my support will discover.
looseheadprop @ 87
And then he went out and bought a gun. No questions asked.
Or maybe a hooked eelpout, since some say Normie has a lake place near Walker MN, home of the eelpout festival.
Some say it’s actually lobbyist Vin Webber’s garage.
looseheadprop @ 87
Ummm. Dung hitteth the fan.
looseheadprop @ 87
I’m counting the days until the first lawsuit gets filed against the school and/or cops.
Prairie Sunshine @ 90
I happen to be a Minnesotan. Sen. Coleman has become more and more strident of late. Sounding like just another clone. He used to be very moderate. I suppose that the Borg implants chaff.
But I think there were other reasons for his flip. Given the GOP penchant for black mail as a means to power.
AZ Matt @
58
I matched you both.
Thank You, That was very nice of you Jane!
Compare and contrast:
–the NRA’s scorched earth policy re gun control
–NARAL’s warm and fuzzies for moderation and compromise
Which group has been more effective over the last decade in achieving the goals desired by their donors and membership?
Gnome de Plume @ 52
Gnome de Plume @ 52
Jeebus, 4 million guns sold every year, and gun crime has gone down.
And you say — No Correlation!Fern @ 48
Save the spin. Let’s stick with the facts.
From Bench Conference by Andrew Cohen
LINK
Get your firedog matches and head on over to Blue America, for a progressive change…)
Boo yah!
PLovering @ 102
How about staying on topic.
This is really disturbing about the VT shootings
http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/s.....amp;page=2
“No record in government files”
Is it just Cho’s files?
Is it just psych drugs?
Is it ALL drugs prescribed?
WTF?
Just read the article. So a court found him to be an imminent threat to himself and others, and he was still able to walk in off the street and buy a handgun and ammo with no waiting period. And don’t forget, the assault weapons ban that outlawed high-capacity magazines expired in 2004. Let me know when it’s time to have a common-sense debate about gun control.
looseheadprop @
35
I have over 20 years experience in nonprofit management. Raising money IS very important, but more important is the agenda of an agency’s board of directors and how its manifested in their overall support for the director. Typically in large nonprofits, directors are responsible for the overall mission while development directors are judged more on the dollars they bring in.
Boards are weird. Most of them I’ve been involved with have a couple of members who are truly engaged while the rest serve as a way to fluff their resume. If they even come to meetings, they’re usually unprepared. They sit through meetings like bumps on logs and vote the way the active or loudest members vote. If a director has the support of the board’s active leaders (not necessarily elected leaders), the director’s job is safe. That is, until something happens that shakes up the inactive members.
Ultimately, NARAL’s blame lies with their board for allowing the organization to become ineffective.