Comments on: NARAL’S BAD CHOICE

By: Roxie

Roxie — Sun, 25 May 2008 21:29:46 +0000

Let’s get back to the topic here.

Great cartoon Pat, and intelligent comments from most.

Let’s use some of this energy for keeping Hillary in the race!

By: DancingOpossum

DancingOpossum — Sun, 25 May 2008 16:06:44 +0000

“smart women these days ought not need abortions”

Smart men ought to refrain from making bullshit sexist statements. There, fixed your typo.

By: DancingOpossum

DancingOpossum — Sun, 25 May 2008 16:05:04 +0000

NARAL has been making a lot of screwy endorsements — they endorsed Lieberman over Lamont even after hearing Lieberman’s boneheaded support of pharmacists who refuse to supply the morning-after pill, and despite Lamont’s strong pro-choice statements. They’ve made other, equally weird, endorsements. I stopped giving to them years ago.

Interestingly, when they endorsed Lieberman and another suspect candidate, the Orange Site and other Bloggers went APE SHIT, screaming from the rooftops about their stupidity and boneheadedness. I wonder if they did the same this time around…I won’t go to those sites anymore so I don’t know but somehow…I doubt it…

Just another reason the rings of “BUT ROE!” ring hollow to me. I am basically a two-issue voter, reproductive rights and the environment are my two immovables, yet I see nothing that indicates BO would be better on either issue than McCain. I am so pro-choice I think abortion should be free and on demand and handed out like lollipops, so Obamabots, you can stuff it with trying to scare me on that issue.

By: cindy

cindy — Sun, 25 May 2008 06:54:05 +0000

Yup.

By: jyotinc

jyotinc — Sun, 25 May 2008 04:26:06 +0000

If NARALS position of supporting Obama is because of his pigment is blatantly racist to me. And for them to be used by Obama is inexcusable. They all need to be FIRED!

By: Alien

Alien — Sun, 25 May 2008 03:01:25 +0000

Abortion is handy for ridding society of future crims. I am all for it but smart women these days ought not need abortions- well at least after ONe they should be wiser.

By: kat in your hat

kat in your hat — Sun, 25 May 2008 00:47:25 +0000

I emailed all of NARAL’s affiliates and let them have it.

Now I will RE-write them, and send along a link to this article in the email.

Wow, they really suffered a serious backlash.

GOOD. I hope that president of NARAL loses her throne. Obviously they were promised something from Obama’s camp, because there is no other reason to endorse HIM only a few weeks before everyone has voted, and Hillary OBVIOUSLY has the better record for women’s rights and reproductive rights, and she VOTES as such. Obama does not.

Obama is a fraud.

By: Fish

Fish — Sun, 25 May 2008 00:29:01 +0000

Way too clever!! I think the kool-aid drinkers have gone too far and did not realize the fatal flaw in their plan — women. I say to the “barry” lovers – call me what you want, I have endured your childish behavior for months and have a long memory.

I do believe Hillary will be the nominee because the democratic party is going to wake up and realize 2 things. 1) the electoral map doesn’t pan out for barry 2) there are no caucus states in a general election

By: ginamc

ginamc — Sat, 24 May 2008 22:55:18 +0000

AnninCA– You speak for SO MANY of us. Ditto.

By: pankhearst

pankhearst — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:56:15 +0000

Anecdotal racism will be treated with the contempt it deserves.

By: Lynn

Lynn — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:49:30 +0000

Although, there are still many eloquent and articulate posts on the Naral Blog in response to the betrayal of Hillary Clinton, there are also countless pro Obama postings written by trolls. On May 14th starting at about 5pm the blog became adulterated and many pro Clinton posts were shortened or deleted altogether. Many of the trolls use the same name, and are men making blatantly sexists comments about “hysteria” and ” ladies, ladies, let’s settle down and get behind the annointed etc.” I have much of the original commentary and am saving it in an archive. If there are any pro-Hilary blogs that would like to host some of this text, do let me know.

I am asking myself at what point does overzealous and ruthless campaigning become conspiracy and intend to circumvent a democratic process?

By: class warrior

class warrior — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:42:24 +0000

Okay, so let’s talk about abortion.

By: karen for Clinton

karen for Clinton — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:36:20 +0000

Guess what? You underestimate women. We vote with our heads not our uterus’. Or is it our uteri?

Can’t hold Roe as blackmail, it isn’t as if whomever McCain selects as a potential nominee for SCOTUS just marches into a seat.

You can bet there will be plenty of women to stop it as there always has been… or if not, so what.

It is up to the new generation to support somebody like Hillary who will fight for them. If they are stupid enough to want a faux rock halting stupid teleprompter reading sexist like that sham ob, then the hell with them, let them fight for their rights.

By: aqious

aqious — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:36:03 +0000

What do you mean?

By: karen for Clinton

karen for Clinton — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:29:41 +0000

yep dave that fox video was a main subject here the day it was aired. And the delegates are well aware of the math of caucus vs primary. supposedly they do understand the basics of a electorl college as well if they are old enough to have voted in 2000 when it was driven into our skulls by the sledge hammer of bush vs gore.

The elected delegates should know the math and the map quite well. They shoud know democratic party history quite well also.

So what gives? Why are they supporting ob?

There’s lots of speculation and rumor as to why.

Time will tell…