I got a call from the Warren Olney show because they are devoting Monday to the latest SCOTUS decision which kicks a huge hole through Roe v. Wade by allowing states to end-run it, something NARAL's Nancy Keenan seems blissfully unaware of. They had read my post on NARAL's failure to fight Alito in spite of the fact that they raised obscene gobs of cash for just that purpose, and wondered if I'd be interested in being on their show with Keenan. I answered, of course, "you bet, any time, any place you want, let's go."
NARAL declined to participate.
I look to the NRA, possibly the most successful single-issue group of all time, who have not only wiped the floor with any politician of either party who opposes their agenda but who have also managed to build an incredible base of rabid loyalists they can mobilize to promote the entire conservative agenda. And they will debate anyone, anytime, anywhere. Anybody catch them with bared teeth accusing liberals of bathing in the blood of the Virginia Tech shooting victims? It was an argument that was taken much more seriously and given much more airtime than calls for stricter gun control, which preemptively had a lot of Democrats like Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid saying "well, let's not get too hasty here."
Why won't NARAL do the same?
This affects more than just choice. A lot of people give money to NARAL believing they will take the lead in these fights for a lot of reasons. Then NARAL goes and endorses people like Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Arlen Specter and Joe Lieberman — all of whom voted for cloture on Alito. They give them the social progressive bona fides they need to get elected in more socially progressive New England states, only to watch them turn around and put reactionary judges on the bench who are destroying reproductive rights quite furiously. We were worried about something happening to John Paul Stevens such that George Bush would appoint a fifth reactionary judge to the court, but with this decision it looks like Robets has his hand so far up Kennedy's ass that the point is moot — Kennedy is now adopting the arguments put forth by architects of the father/daughter purity balls in writing his decisions:
But never until Wednesday had the court held that an abortion procedure could be prohibited because the procedure itself, not the pregnancy, threatened a woman’s health — mental health, in this case, and moral health as well. In his majority opinion, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy suggested that a pregnant woman who chooses abortion falls away from true womanhood.
“Respect for human life finds an ultimate expression in the bond of love the mother has for her child,” he said.
Justice Kennedy conceded that “we find no reliable data” on whether abortion in general, or the procedure prohibited by the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, causes women emotional harm. But he said it was nonetheless “self-evident” and “unexceptional to conclude” that “some women” who choose to terminate their pregnancies suffer “regret,” “severe depression,” “loss of esteem” and other ills.
Let's face it, with regard to the Supreme Court, we're really screwed for some time to come. And Nancy Keenan — who was entrusted with millions by pro-choice Americans to protect Roe v. Wade and failed miserably by not showing up to fight — has a lot to answer for.
I've been on the Warren Olney show before talking about the Blue Dogs and their attempt to neuter Henry Waxman shortly after the election. I calmly recounted the facts, I was not foaming at the mouth and I didn't drop any f-bombs. If NARAL can't stomach sending someone to counter me in an extremely wonky, heavily moderated setting, if they won't engage in any public discussion of their policies and practices, how exactly are they going to fight a bunch of rabid wingnuts who are living to jam another true believer onto the Supreme Court?
I was on BlogTalk radio yesterday and I said Nancy Keenan must go. As a woman who is very worried that my basic human rights are under attack, and that key female Democrats either don't want to talk about it or are using right wing frames to do so while the largest and most powerful pro-choice lobbying group is asleep at the wheel, I believe that to be true.
Related posts:





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Jane!
…hope this meets you well.
olney rocks and so do you.
I keep telling the NARAL folks who call — for months now about short-ride Liebo and Alito. The callers express wonder.
gotta get this meme out.
I give to Planned Parenthood on this issue.
Go get ‘er, (((Jane)))!!
Get up, stand up!
Jane, even before I read the post, I would like to answer the question in the title:
Because you’re right and she’s wrong and she knows it.
Another example of simple answers for simple questions. :})
dakine01 @ 6:
Yep. Occam’s Razor, pure and simple.
This issue and more, finds several from my party, the Democratic Party, “asleep at the wheel”. It’s way beyond frustrating.
Amen, Jane!
Is that Nancy I hear? Oh wait, *crickets*
I can’t imagine why!
“Scared shitless” is probably the more accurate term.
From the NYTimes story on the case–this, after noting Kennedy’s claim of the law legitimately protecting women from the depression that results from having an abortion.
Justice Ginsburg objected vehemently that “this way of thinking reflects ancient notions of women’s place in the family and under the Constitution — ideas that have long since been discredited.”
She cited century-old Supreme Court cases that upheld a paternalistic view of women’s place in society and contrasted those with more recent cases, including one she successfully argued to the court in 1977 and one in which she wrote the majority opinion in 1996, that rejected “archaic and overbroad generalizations” and assumptions about women’s inherent dependency.
One law professor, Martin S. Lederman of Georgetown University, commented after reading Justice Ginsburg’s response on this point that Justice Kennedy’s opinion “was an attack on her entire life’s work.”
NARAL has already sent out two email solicitations for money in the wake of the new decision. This is a cash cow for them.
It surely would be good to get a definitive list of those on the NARAL national exec board. Do the local organizations have this information?
Now that I’ve read the post, a little more info. When I ived in upstate NY, my congressman there was Sherwood Boehlert. He was supposed to be a liberal Republic. I voted for him one time then discovered that he was good buds with da Newt. I believe NARAL continued to endorse until he retired last year. NARAL lost my money years ago and hasn’t done much to get any of it back.
NARAL clearly is emulating the ostrich.
Plus: fingers-in-ears, LA-LA-LA, I-can’t-hear-you.
Betcha Nancy Keenan’s buddy Barbara Boxer steered her away from you, Jane. If Nancy Keenan won’t debate the people who AGREE with her goals (and challenge her tactics) how will she ever win against those whose goals she opposes?
Answer: she won’t. Never expect someone to act in a way that might endanger her paycheck. Or something like that.
I don’t get it. Does Reid and Pelosi want to go back to minority status? Is that more fun for them? Or are they tacitly admitting that they are beholden to corporate interests now?
You go girl.
NARAL is the anti-NRA. Except maybe when it comes to fundraising.
I don’t know if I’m alone here, but I’ve been upset for some time that O’Connor retired. She knew what would happen. And she didn’t just leave to spend time with her family. She was on the Iraq Study Group. That’s no small investment of time and energy.
Somebody tell me I’m wrong.
peterboy @ 12
I presume Justice Kennedy would agree that because of post-partum depression, a law requiring mandatory sterilization would be appropriate and constitutional, right?
peterboy @
12
The NYT article is really good. A must-read.
Jane Hamsher @ 13
Is the list of their board of directors public? If so, it would be interesting to see what, if any, politicians are on it.
dakine01 @ 6
Yep. too
History of Names:
National Abortion Rights Action League –> National Abortion & Reproductive Rights Action League–>NARAL Pro-Choice America
Misnomers all.
Dover Bitch @ 20
Don’t forget, she helped the junta take power. I am sure she wanted to get out before the reckoning came.
Dover Bitch @ 20
You are not alone. Compare her to John Paul Stevens, who I suspect is *more* than ready to retire, but can’t bear to let a Republican choose his replacement. Sandy couldn’t care less.
Biodun @ 25
Why are they misnomers?
Defund NARAL until they dump Keenan. She obviously is running scared if she refuses to appear with FDL. The age of “politics as usual” is dead. Time for the usual suspects of the past that have been so ineffective in thwarting the rise of the radical right is over. Rising up angry!
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 25
She sure did. I tried to forget that.
Dover Bitch @ 20
She is also the Chancellor of the College of William&Mary as well as a trustee of the Foundation for The Future, the State-funded sinecure of Wolfowitz’s ladyfriend. Her excuse for leaving the Court was to spend time assisting her Alzheimering husband, but many reporters who seek a comment from her write, “former Justice O’Connor was traveling and could not be reached for comment.”
Jane Hamsher @ 12
For the moment, maybe. But I put them in the same boat as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC). They’re selling their soul to make nice with Republicans (and Connecticut for Liebermans). And last week’s decision is what they have to show for it. Eventually, their donors are going to realize that if NARAL (and HRC, for that matter) isn’t going to fight for what it supposedly believes in, that money will better used by other groups.
Eli @ 27
Both appointed by Republics. Stevens grew in office and in application of the law. O’Connor, not so much.
TeddySanFran @
16
Barbara Boxer is a worthless piece of shit and I sure hope someone anyone with the clean closet (no skeletons) and financial wherewithal will step up and put an end to Boxer’s lying bullshit. I’ll volunteer my band to play fundraisers in the Bay Area for any progressive candidate who’ll take Boxer on in the primary.
Dover Bitch @ 20
Her husband was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s and it was important for her to be with him since he’d been beside her all the way. – to the Supreme Court!
Guitar_Playing_Bastard @ 34
Why? What is wrong with her?
Frank Probst @ 32
I have high hopes for NARAL, actually. I don’t think there is time to do what needs to be done to develop an alternative who have the brand name and fundraising ability that they do. Keenan has to go, and someone who has better political instincts, who can build a better infrastructure and be more responsive both to state groups and to membership, needs to replace her.
How does that happen? Dunno yet. Gimme some time.
Dover Bitch @ 19
Well, you probably should have been upset with O’Connor ever since December 2000, but otherwise, you’re not wrong.
Yeah, Imagine if you had a father like Justice Kennedy who essentially said you were denying your womanhood and humanity by rejecting the pregnancy…or “killing your baby” when you obtained a MEDICALLY NECESSARY abortion procedure.
I wonder if the death of a woman who has acute preclampsia or some other complication who cannot obtain the procedures necessary for them because of these idiots will even make them see the light.
Will Judge Stevens “feel regret”, “a loss of self esteem”, “severe depression”??? I doubt it! He’ll likely find some way to deny that he was responsible or blame it on her getting pregnant.
Elliott @ 34
I wasn’t aware of her husband’s illness. I would never presume to tell anybody how they should react to a family crisis like that. I hereby retract my earlier comment.
Jane Hamsher @ 37
Would an open revolt by the state affiliates have any effect at all, d’you think?
My suspicion is that the only “scorecard” that matters is fundraising, though. If Keenan stops bringing in the cash, she’s gone. But actual results seem to be irrelevant.
Remember how Spectre punked Keenan during the Roberts fight?
Keenan pulled the ad.
SnarKassandra @ 28:
From Jane’s post above:
No chance she’s a political imposter poised to create a focus of support that she has no intention of supporting. That sounds so paranoid, I know, but with what has been happening, I wouldn’t be surprised.
Dover Bitch @ 40
I did not know about it either. But there’s still no shortage of reasons to dislike Sandy.
SnarKassandra @ 36
Jane Hamsher @ 37
What I don’t understand about the repubs is that they want to make abortion illegal, but they also don’t want real sex ed or access to birth control. Do they just want people to have tons and tons of babies? Because I don’t think there’s too many who wait till they are married. And you need to be protected from diseases before that.
Just found a page with Board members: here
Ian Welsh, who has blogged at FDL, had an interesting comment: here.
~~I did find out, actually, it’s a closed circle: board members appoint other board members and the president. So Nancy’s job is safe as long as the board loves her, which they do. Which means the only way to deal with their refusal to do their job is to launch a campaign to starve them of funds, and see if we can get the money to go to a group that does its job.
Ian Welsh April 20, 2007 – 1:11am~~
Eli @ 45
Had she retired from public life, I would understand. As my previous comment (and others’) makes clear, she may lead a more active life now than while on the Court.
zig alert!
I checked NARAL.com on http://WWW.robtex.com, and one of the people who shares the server or domain or whatever it is, is Conrad Burns. It seems, however, that NARAL officially uses NARAL.org.
LS @
44
Nancy Keenan is a Catholic who believes abortion is wrong. What she is doing heading up an organization that protects the right to do something she believes is a sin — well, I just don’t know.
I’m not happy with the Supreme Court decision, but it’s not the most devastating decision for those who do not want the religious right making our health decisions for us. The laws making some abortion illegal can be repealed with a strong pro-choice Congress.
LS @ 44
Well, there is this:
Jane are you still going to be on that show on Monday? Or will they cancel it since the other person does not want to debate you?
Joe Klein’s conscience @
46
Siding with Nancy Keenan and Joe Lieberman isn’t enough? Please pay attention.
Jane,
I’ve never gotten myself involved in the abortion debate past supporting my mom, sister, wife and daughter 100% if they asked for help. But your essay here inspired me! So I went to NARAL’s home page to find out how to get in touch with their Alaska chapter, hoping to set a radio debate in motion locally. It appears they don’t have an Alaska chapter. I only count 26 chapters nationwide at their website. They don’t keep their board of directors information very public, they represent only half the states – are these people real? How much of the pro-choice financial support nationwide do they actually account for compared to other groups?
I challenge firedogs in every state that has a NARAL chapter to find somebody to go on progressive talk radio and debate your state’s NARAL rep on why they support candidates who wilt when reproductive strategies at the national level become highly critical.
I always thought the “we don’t watch cloture votes” excuse to be a total cop-out on NARAL’s part. If the object is to maintain rights to privacy and equality, then every step of the friggin’ legal process ought to be under scrutiny, because those rights can be subverted by procedural actions, too.
Valley Girl @
49
That is very helpful, VG. Been looking for that for a while.
Joe Klein’s conscience — please take care when quoting others’ comments to ensure your cursor is at the bottom of the Comment box. Otherwise, your comment appears embedded in the comments of others, changing their original comment, sometimes considerably.
For the record, while I have serious questions about Boxer’s support of Lieberman and have (personally) challenged her hiding behind NARAL’s skirts in supporting RGJoe, I support her as my Senator and for re-election. The inserted comments above are not mine.
Dover Bitch @ 40
I, too, was disappointed O’Conner left the bench. It was so frustrating knowing it gave George a seat to fill.
It still bugs me that George won in 2004 with the potential of Supreme Court vacancies. That should have shifted the election to the Democratic candidate easy. And not just for Choice, either.
Biodun – I left a belated reply to your question about the French election in the previous thread.
SnarKassandra @
56
Nope, since NARAL won’t go on, they don’t want to hear me talking to myself.
montag @ 59
I keep coming back to this: Imagine if it were an anti-gun bill. Do you think the NRA would give *anyone* a free pass for voting for cloture?
I may very well be full of sh*t (OK, I AM full of sh*t). But I believe that Kennedy is super sensitive to how he is portrayed in the news. Therefore, it is my NSHO that Kennedy will swing a lot of votes to the left during the next few months just to get back some positive pub.
He is the primary swing vote. And aside from reproduction/womens rights, which is a big aside, I think he is a believer in the basic constitution and rule. Which is why when the subpoena and Executive Privilege issues reach them, he will come down with Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter, and Stevens. And if I’m wrong, we all f*ck’d.
Jane Hamsher @ 64
Well that stinks! They can’t find someone else for you to talk with? Or just get your reaction?
SnarKassandra @ 48
They want women who have sex to be “punished” if they’re “irresponsible” about it like men are. (Well, the theocratic Republicans do. The rich ones just know that they’ll be able to afford to get their daughters abortions if they need them no matter what the law is.)
SnarKassandra @ 48
Cassie, they believe in life and everything up until the child is born, then we’re on our own. It’s called Social Darwinism.
Hell, Jane. You share the shit out of ME and I’m on YOUR SIDE!
Just FYI. That’s probably why she is afraid of you.
Has Keenan ever written a book?
If so, maybe she’d like to stop by some Sunday to “discuss”.
Jane Hamsher @ 63
They could just play the sound of a cash register in between your comments.
Jane Hamsher @ 53
Oh! using the BushCo way!
DB -hahaha!
dakine01 69,
Unless you live in Iraq or Darfur, of course.
So true and so sad. The Supreme Court and Iraq, two terrible legacies left us by BushCo which will haunt us for decades. SCOTUS was bad before W and is much worse now. Frankly I gave up on SCOTUS when it appointed W in 2000. SCOTUS is our most reactionary, undemocratic institution. It gives the right wing a constant veto over anything progressive.
punaise @ 63:
Thanks. I’ll go read it.
Jane Hamsher @ 64 says:
Talkin’ to yourself is fine. Just be careful not to start answering yourself. :})
How significant is the mole factor? Since Lieberman, I have come to beleive, believe mind you, that there are games being played. Like planting sympathisers in your opponents camp. I think Lieberman is a mole, Nancy may well be one too. Or do I just have a fanciful imagination?
This guy Seldin, who quit NARAL after the Roberts ad dustup, might be someone to approach.
VG, from your Ian Welsh link — wow. NARAL is rated at one star, “Fails to meet industry standards and performs well below most charities in its Cause.”
noen @
79
rich wingnuts have attempted to do that to the Sierra Club more than once over the years.
OT, sorry to interrupt. just saw this gambit:
LS @ 75
Oh of course, because they can pound their chests and brag about how Xtianist they are and loving of all dog’s little chilluns’. /snark off
Sleeping at the wheel is never a good idea, especially when the vehicle is headed for a cliff.
Keep after ‘em, Jane.
And VG — thanks for that list of directors. Been looking for it for quite some time now. The only one that rings a bell is Anna Quindlen, but I’ll be giving them all a look.
Jane Hamsher @ 81
Wow indeed- you ARE quick- I didn’t get that far in my reading. I will go look!!!
legaleze @ 76
A veto that can’t be overridden. The Republican takeover of the judiciary has been very much under the public’s radar, but it’s hugely important. The judiciary has the final word, and they cannot be removed.
TeddySanFran @
61
Sorry about that. I didn’t realize what happened till after I posted, and there is no way to go back and delete them. :-(
Eli @ 87
stealth crawlers
Also from VG’s link:
Name Nancy Keenan
Title President
Compensation$58,770
% of Expenses 0.95%
Compensation from Affiliates $121,230
Two-thirds of Keenan’s compensation comes from affiliates (state NARALs).
Eli @ 87
It doesn’t happen often but they can be impeached. Alcee Hastings was the last I believe. I think after he had been acquited in court. He is a congress critter now from FLA.
I am also old enough to remember the annual introduction of teh “Impeach Earl Warren” resolutions by the nutters upset for his court having the audacity to allow things like integration, civil rights, the pill, etc. Those never went very far as it was only teh far right’s wet dream
noen @ 79
just a terminology quibble:
Lieberthug has been so blatant a sellout for so long that “mole” seems a misleading.
“Flaming pile” seems more apt…
jane, rock star.
oh yeah.
i’ve hated naral for yrs… before i was for ‘em.
they have been playing a stoopid game. dug a hole and now filled it up over theirselves.
punaise:
I read your response to the Sego question last thread. I’ve been following all this closely–mostly in Le Monde. On verra indeed!
And oh yes. I also read Jane Kramer in New Yorker. My favorite part? Ham and cheese n’est pas croque monsieur.
So Barbara Boxer isn’t pure enough either? We’re runnin out of people we like- cept fer Fiengold.
OT
now it’s Boston 7 Yankees 5
bottom of the 7th, 2 out
Biodun – a suivre…
Jane Hamsher @
64
that explains alot. but refusing to participate – they are depriving you of the soap box.
if you were going to be on for the whole time just “talking with yourself” (without challenge)…. they might have the motivation to participate (if they thought their position was defensible – of course it’s not)….
this way, the radio listeners don’t get to hear from you…. that is a “win” for them – there won’t be someone (smart, articulate and knowledgable) to be expaining why they shouldn’t give any more money to NARAL.
I gotta say, as a childfree man, isRedshift @
68
I gotta say, as a childfree man, irresponsible and STUPID men are a big part of this problem to begin with.
I was lucky, that my first wife came to me and said “I want to have a kid” rather than just “oopsing” me, as she easily could have (we had had the talk and I had said no kids, ever).
One thing everyone can do to reduce the number of abortions needed is to encourage sp[ecialists (orologists and OBGYNS) to LET PEOPLE GET THEMSELVES STERILIZED IF THEY ASK FOR IT WITHOUT ANY BULLSHIT QUESTIONS.
It took me another 10 years (and one aborted pregnancy) before I could find a urologist who’d give me a vasectomy even though I had no children.
“You’ll change your mond, son” was a common reaction for physicians when I asked abotu getting a vasectomy. Finally, at age 32, I’d had enough and told the doctor “No, I won’t FUCKING change my mind and if you want me to pay for a visit, you’re going to give me a referral to a urologist who won’t give me any bullshit.”
He gave me the name of a guy who said “don’t want any kids, eh? Good.”
It’s more than anti-abortion that’s happening – and the “punishment” isn’t just happening to women. If you are childfree in this country, you can expect to be treated poorly from all ends of the political spectrum, in the workplace, and in the general public. you can expect to get grief, ostracization and scorn form everyone, even though being childfree is the greenest thing anyone can do. I’m not leaving anyting behind that will use ANY resources.
rwcole @ 95
Who is the MOST liberal person in the whole Congress?
dakine01 @ 91
I know, but it’s rare enough that it’s really not a practical option for cleaning up the judiciary. The only way to do that is, say, 20-30 years of Democratic presidents and/or supermajority Democratic Senates.
Not that it matters, since the Supremes are, well, Supreme, but didn’t three Federal District Courts and three Federal Appeals Courts find against the ban? I read this somewhere, but it has not been part of the TradMed narrative.
Perhaps it should be, since it isolates the Supremes’ opinion from a Federal judiciary known to have been infiltrated by conservatives. Makes their decision more extreme-sounding; this may irk Kennedy.
Oops – I hacked the NARAL site and found their FY 2008 Budget:
Income – $25 million
Expenses -
haircuts – $1 million
cocktail weenies – $2 million
champagne – $5million
Lieberman T-shirts – $5 million
Paying landfill to take Lieberman T-shirts – $1 million
Salaries – $10 million
Postage and mailing supplies – $2 million
Good gad! From your link Jane,
Overall Rating 1 star of 4 poss.(34.43)
Organizational Efficiency
Program Expenses 74.6%
Administrative Expenses 9.4%
Fundraising Expenses 16.1%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.19 (!!!!!!)
Efficiency Rating 1 star of 4 poss. (26.93)
Eli @ 87
Scalia has participated in cases ruling on controversial matters about which he has strong public opinions.
He declined recusal, and went on to rule in favor of his expressed views.
His lack of ethics (as distinct from his views) and judicial decorum seem more than enough reason to bring about Articles of Impeachment.
Test? Are we back?
I don’t understand cloture.
tap, tap, tap. “hello”
And I thought Kirk was going to get in the last word…)
Valley Girl @ 103
and keenan gets $180,000 a year for THAT??!!??
Elliott @ 72
Not unlike Lieberman, who stated on the floor of the Senate that “all abortions are unacceptable.”
dakine01 @ 105
Yes, and you made me buy pork chops.
Whew! Comments must have been hititng the server hot and heavy to cause it to crash li’e dat.
OT Boston 7-NY 5, W-Becket, Save-Pabelbon
Ed*ard Teller @
102
Super Fund toxic waste clean-up cost of said HoJo landfill: open-ended no-bid time-and-materials contract.
I keep wondering how big money figures into this–as if maybe Lieberman steered money to NARAL through his political connections.
The biggest contributions, by far, come from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and both David W. Packard’s father (co-founder of H-P) and Lieberman have ties to the more recent incarnations of the Committee for the Present Danger. The late Packard was also a deputy defense secretary during the Reagan years (and, in a sneaky and backhanded way, wanted to basically turn over all defense r&d decision-making to private industry).
Might be a connection there, between Lieberman and the Packards.
Wasn’t Nancy in education before she was against it?
Eureka Springs @
109
I thought it was something I said….
We’re back. Something with the servers, C&L was down too.
Jane–
Reposted from earlier thread, where it was OT, but very much ON-T here. Elizabeth Hager was listed as a NARAL Board member on another post. After some thought, I decided to send her the following email, which is self-explanatory:
I lost the *best* comment EVAH!!!! I would like a refund please.
stop jumping on my toobz!!
I feel so much better now.
Hillary Rodham Clinton said Saturday that if she is elected president, she would make her husband a roaming ambassador to the world, using his skills to repair the nation’s tattered image abroad.
dakine01, I am skeptical about J. Kennedy; he voted to appoint Bush in 2000. As a lawyer I can tell you there was virtually no basis in precedent or otherwise for that decision. From that day forward, I lost all respect and hope for Kennedy. At least with Scalia, there is no pretense; we know what we are getting.
TeddySanFran @ 120
LOL
thanks jane, from my heart, for speaking for me……….my life would be much different if not for roe vs. wade…..bad, ugly situation that turned out ok for me, because abortion is legal, would have been way more traumatic otherwise….something people need to stop being so chicken about saying………thanks for your perserverance……go get ‘em…….there’s plenty of ‘me’s’ out there, just not speaking up……….
FDL, C&L, DailyKos, TPM, WesPAC
obviously all use the same server facility as all have been having problems.
It is now overdue for some existing or new group to capture the flag from NARAL and do two things:
- fight as hard and as persistently as the NRA against any voice that speaks out against all women being the sole voice (with their MD) in determining how their pregnancy or sexual relations are to be managed. make it clear that they are not a fixture in the Dem. party’s bathroom, hidden from view and taken for granted. but never support any politician (like Liebershit, Snow, et al) that seems to claim a so-called moderate position – instead beat their ass into submission or defeat.
- reduce the ability of NARAL to speak on this issue by cutting their financial support by donors. no prisoners taken. make it an embarrassment to contribute to NARAL – very publicly. Marginalize by attacks any Dem. voices that give credence to anything NARAL says on policy or endorsements.
Loo Hoo @
112
Nuh-uh, Did not. You wanted them. All I did was make some discussion yesterday about fixin’ various types of food.
I like my comment that managed to make it through.
Teddy SF – Please reconsider your support for Boxer. She has not earned it.
Oklahoma kiddo @
122
Oh, hasn’t he always been “roaming”?
sort of OT, but not really since we are speaking of sellout, viperous women, I had the misfortune of reading Maureen Dowd’s column today, playing up that stupid sh*t about Edwards’ $800 haircut.
Yo Maureen! I bet you don’t spend ANY money on the coiff over that smug-ass multi-lifted face of yours, eh?
valley girl
Gleef had this yesterday.
Guidestar , an online non-profit information database, has NARAL Pro-Choice America’s 990 Form for FY2005 online (sorry, no direct link, free registration required). Attachment V of that form lists their Board of Directors at that time:
Rosalyn Levy Jonas — Chair
Lisa Lindelef — Vice Chair
Janet L. Denlinger — Secretary
Marcie Love — Treasurer
Angela Walker Reimer
Barbara Silby
Jill Swid
Rev. Dr. Katerine H. Ragsdale
Helen Rosenthal
Tim Stanley
Coni Batlle
Suone Cotner — Chair, NARAL Pro-Choice Washington
Betsy Cohn
Diane Dillingham
Liz Hager
Richard A. Gross — Chair, NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation
Edward Howard
Ruth J. Katz, JD, MPH
Amy Madigan
Amy B. Harris
Susan M. Hyatt
Richard Licht
Sally J. Patterson
I know Rosalyn Jonas was still the chair as of their most recent annual report, but have no idea if other board members have left or joined since FY2005.
Hope this helps.
this is from December…
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
not sure if current…
Richard A. Gross Board Chair
Dagmar Dolby Second Vice Chair
G. Angela Henry Secretary/Treasurer
JoAnn Eisenberg
Nonie Hawkes Greene
Rosalyn Levy Jonas
Judy Kovler
Wendy Mackenzie
Sally J. Patterson
Anna Quindlen
Barbara Silby
Nancy Silverman
Rev. Dr. Paul Smith
Felicia Stewart
James Trussell
Colburn Wilbur
Judith Zarin
(This list was from guidestar dot org, but the link I had is broken.)
don’t remember who posted it, sorry.
jinny @ 130
You mean like Newtie?
Joe Lieberman obviously hacked the servers!! Call the FBI!
ON BushCo
I found this, it charts their whole stinkin’ mess:
(scroll down)
BushCo charted
jinny @ 126
Wow – what seems to me like good company may seem to a winger like a cyber target rich environment.
Perhaps there is no work-around, but such a concentration of major progressive blogs on one platform seems like a potential vulnerablity.
(no disrespect intended to the fine folk who created and made the blogs and their platform)
I left a note at Warren Olney….saying this is no way to act, letting Keenan control whether you tell what a sad case NARAL has become.
link to email:
http://www.kcrw.com/about/gene…..ney_warren
Loo Hoo @
107
Cloture is the term used in the Senate for cutting off a “filibuster.” At one time, a filibuster required 2/3 vote to close. This was back when a senator had to physically be on the floor talking about any subject he wanted to talk about. The record was Strom Thurmond whoheld the floor for over 24 hours one time, blocking a civil rights bill iirc.
Nowadays, the Senate does not require the senator to be holding the floor but it also only requires 60 votes to break a “filibuster.” That’s why the 60 vote mark is the magic number for the senate. That’s why the Dems used the filibuster to block some judge nominees and the Repubs talked about a “nuclear option” that would eventually only require a simple majority.
The 60 votes is also why the Repubs can get away today with blocking measures that have a clear majority in support but not the 60 votes. And that’s why we need to elect 60 plus dems in ‘08 to the senate.
What precisely is the mission of NARAL?
kirk murphy @ 136
That concerns me too as there are quite a lot of people who would like to shut us all up.
legaleze @
123
Well, I did say I was full of sh*t! :})
NARAL… is an awful name, imo.
I’m local to KCRW, I go back being a supporter as far as 1978, and really enjoyed the work Warren Olney did, first on Which Way LA? (Post-riots) and currently on To The Point.
That said, I rarely listen now due to schedule but caught Matt Stoller of MyDD on a Roundtable regarding the current Iraq funding stalemate a week or two ago. When Matt stated that Bush is acting like a child, Olney jumped on him, it seemed to me. Matt stated carefully 4 reasons the Bush behavior was clinically descriptive of child–like behavior, but he wasn’t brought back into the discussion after that – I took it to indicate that Olney, a very creditable interviewer/moderator, does not suffer casual leftist slams against the President. Fortunately I think Stoller gave a well reasoned and astute response to Olney’s challange.
As you pointed out in your opening, Jane, I think Progressives have to be prepared to push back with credible discourse every time we are dismissed as a fringe group.
Eureka Springs @ 142
It’s like a cross between NAMBLA and NORML
peterboy @ 137
Thank you.. so will I.
SnarKassandra @ 100 asks:
to try to answer this once again after getting blown away by the crash:
My money is on Barney Frank, D-MA from the House and Bernie Sanders, I-VT from the Senate. Sanders is nominally an Independent but actually an avowed Socialist.
TeddySanFran @
120
Well then let’s hear it.
cassie at 49
your mind blows me away…..keep on it girl, you got it right…….
Elliott @ 96
Long time sox fan final 9-2 Jane, you are a star for raising this topic. Tom Toles had a toon with the new decision and a coat hanger. Very sad times for females.
Jane –
Thanks for staying on this! Bless you. It would be really, really nice to see Nancy booted.
[I arrived on the scene in time to read the main postings, but clicking on comments landed me in the twilight zone. Went to Gabbly, but surprised no one was home until finally jeffreyw arrived. It was fun chatting with him, but I’m certainly relieved FDL is back up. Anybody know what the hiccup was?]
peterboy @
137
Me too!
dmac @ 125
{{{{{dmac}}}}} for your troubles. OT and EPU’d from discussion onprevious thread, I grew up in Harrison County which is south of Kenton Co.
Jane- someone who has donated a lot of $ to kcrw in the past now gives a lot to BA and is an FDL supporter. 6 degrees and all that? Howie will know what I am talking about. or send me an email.
Eureka Springs @ 142
Punaise, could they change it to NASAL?
Pretty funny TPMCafe chat about MoDo’s Edwards haircut column. Sample comment (from lindiana):
dmac @ 125
(((dmac)))
Jane,
has anyone heard from Kate Michelman since Alito, Election, SCOTUS decision ??
just wondering if she would be helpful in drawing attention to Keenan’s failings
Thank you, Dakine. So if somebody votes FOR cloture, are they voting AGAINST the filibuster?
cbl @ 156
I got an email from her the day after the decision, related to her support of John Edwards. Excerpt:
TeddySanFran @ 154
Oh. My. God.
And of course she won’t deign to “enlighten” poor little ignorant you.
Barf.
“you” meaning the writer. I know you’re just quoting, Teddy.
Boy does that make me see red.
Loo Hoo @ 157
Yes. A vote FOR cloture means to “close” debate. (That’s how I remember it) It’s a vote to close debate and vote on the issue at hand. Closing debate requires 60 votes FOR cloture, while passage of a bill (or nomination) requires a simple majority.
Mrs. K8 @ 160
Hi Mrs K8! I sure hope MoDo writes back to me too. We have a BOND, you know, from YKos….
TeddySanFran @ 163
can we say “Queen Bee”?
(edit- meant MoDo of course!)
TeddySanFran @
151
I don’t think that was it. They didn’t disinvite me, they were just trying to put together a comprehensive show on the decision and without someone to talk about he other side they didn’t have a segment for now. I like them a lot, the producer gets it and I have no doubt something will eventually come of it, it’s just the process.
TeddySanFran @ 162
Bwahahahaha!
If I recall, you bought her a drink and she walked away. What a rude boor. You go get ‘er. She’s got one hell of a lot of nerve.
(((TeddySF)))
was that via an Edwards release ?? would love to send her Jane and Brendan’s posts. Often folks in her position are loathe to say anything “uncivil” but I am convinced she, unlike Keenan is still authentically committed to choice
I’m off!
bye y’all
Jane has a new thread
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/21/cornered-2/
Jane has a few wingers cornered upstairs
what happened? i couldn;t post.
SnarKassandra @ 170
hiccup in the tubes from about 3:47 to 4:23
dakine
thanks, good family got me through it, and money, you gotta have money when you’re in a fix, noone talks about that either…poor people are screwed when it comes to roe vs. wade………..yes, harrison county, saw that, but haven’t looked it up on the atlas yet….but travelled rt 127 many times to cumberland territory, so probably have been in your town many times…
i went out and got two corn dogs…and i don’t eat that shit…you all talkin’ about hot dogs yesterday got me cravin them…….that’s why i’m behind on comments again……..corn dog run, and beer, tonight is beer night…….felt like it.
and OT
on npr mountain stage tonight is three stellar human beings and talented musicians……….
jorma kaukonen, from around here, fur peace ranch guitar camp, from jefferson airplane…….
john hammonds band
arlo guthrie family band
jorma is done playing on my station, but worth tuning in to hear the rest or going to their website to hear the whole concert……………..
ooops, hope I didn’t mess up.
Anyway, you and Nancy aren’t really on opposite sides on the Supremes’ decision, are you? Was the show about NARAL or was the show about SCOTUS?
[Oh good, it wasn’t just my computer. Reposting the one that didn’t go
through]
Cinnamonape # 39
In a case like that, I’d want to send the bill for the funeral to the court, and tell them that since she died because their decision denied her proper medical care, they can d*mn well pay for it. But I’m inclined to be rude or at least snarky about things like that.
—–
I’m hoping that what happens to Keenan and NARAL is something like what happened to the boat trailer I saw on the freeway shoulder this afternoon. The entire wheel assembly (including the mounting bracket!) had come off and was lying a couple-three hundred feet before the trailer. The boat was still on the trailer, but the outboard motor was more than a bit dinged from hitting pavement.
Jane Hamsher @ 53
I didn’t know that. Are you serious? That’s incredible.
Somehow I doubt that the head of the NRA is a Quaker who believes that guns are wrong.
epu’d
jane i sent you an email titled keenan
Loo Hoo @
158
Yes.
Jane,
No one seems to be able to find a list of current directors of NARAL. It looks like Naral Pro-Choice America, Inc., is a California corporation. California Secretary of State. The agent for service of process is Amy Everitt, who is the director of California NARAL. Here is her bio.
Impeach the lot of ‘em before we loose the entire court.
Maybe all of the important and dangerous progressive blogging sites should not be on the same server. Can’t you be your own server if you have a big fat puter somewhere? Or is that old hat?
Sad decision, sad state of our nation, this christian fundie extremism, isn’t it? Always always about Control.
And entrenched by criminals.
I would venture the easiest route back to normalcy (I am ignorant of the procedure for removal of USSC sitting Justices) would be to wait until 2009, when hopefully the vote will not be rigged, and the Fascist Party (the overt one) loses control of White House. Then the new president and Congress could call for “a return To Traditional USSC Values”, which would actually be just returning the court to the original 12 sitting justices. Make it a law.
Meaning the new president gets to appoint three new justices…..
Far-Fetched? Seems easy cheese for legislators, that is their damn job isn’t it? NARAL funds could be spent to “encourage” them to speed it along. And hell, wave “Return to Traditional Values” in the faces of these creepy christian control freaks. And their msm talking head allies.
John Roberts is Chief Justice. A “What me worry” look on his silly ass face permanently engraved.
Could it get much worse than that?
massachio
see my post at 132 and there were other posts with board of directors info
Ouish @
177
That is an excellent analogy, I’m gonna borrow it if you don’t mind.
farang at 182, I like it.
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 17
Joe, your third question nails it.
Hope you are doing well, Jane.
-t.t.
Purity Balls!
If you want to be scared S**tless, watch this:
http://video.google.com/videop…..p;q=Purity ball&hl=en
And no one is talking about this in the MSM. But it has been around quite a while …. Talk about SICK!
[Mod Note; updated embedded link ]
Jane Hamsher @ 184
Please do! *Blush*
But he said it was nonetheless “self-evident” and “unexceptional to conclude” that “some women” who choose to terminate their pregnancies suffer “regret,” “severe depression,” “loss of esteem” and other ills.
—-
Well, it’s self-evident to conclude that some women who go ahead with their pregnancies suffer regret and wonder if they did the right thing. Heck, women with children have been known to suffer severe depression too. And those whose health has been ruined by a pregnancy are probably even more prone to “other ills”.
Of course, these guys don’t believe that your health can be ruined or damaged by pregnancy and childbirth. They don’t believe anyone even dies. It’s signal to note that the one person on that court who actually went through pregnancy and childbirth was passionate in her dissent– because she knows, 1) it would be very unusual to have a late-term abortion unless something was wrong with the fetus or childbirth endangered your health, 2) there are lots of reasons why late pregnancy and childbirth can hurt you– diabetes, placenta previa, blood clots (that was mine), high blood pressure, stroke, hemmorhage– but of course, Mr. Justice Kennedy refers to OB/GYNs as “abortion doctors”, like their role isn’t to protect the health of their patient.