Why NARAL HAD to support Chaffee

Why?

Because, the Democrats lost the presidency in a barroom brawl and promptly went home and beat up their women and kicked their gay kids out of the house and stuck a for sale sign on their house in the blue states and are setting up home in red States.

With this type of leadership in the Democratic party it is no wonder that the traditional groups are abandoning the party because the party is abandoning them.

NARAL is right because so far the DSCC has refused to back any new pro-choice candidates. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that if the Democrats do not back pro-choice certainly the GOP will not either.

This is a very shrewed move of NARAL and KOS is just an idiot as usual when is comes to womens issues and pray to god he never has a daughter.

If this was a white male politcal manuever KOS and his males buddies would be high fiving each other in regards to a perfectly executed “Sistah Soulja” moment.

The DLC has just issued a fatwa that Dems should kiss conservative and GOP butt… so why is what the NARAL doing anything different than the DLC?

The DLC constantly bashing Democrats in favor of it’s GOP soul mates. Look at Salazar which Kos ademently supported…he is a prick and is doing far greater harm to the Democratic party than NARAL’s bitch slap. I noticed that Kos has not said a peep about Salazar obvious betrayal of the Democratic party.

Am I happy that NARAL felt the need to support Chaffee: No

Do I understand why NARAL is supporting Chaffee: ABSOFUCKINGLUTLY

This last battering of womens issues by this abusive Democratic establishment was enough to “Burn the Bed”. We question women why they say in abusive relationships…this is no different. The support of Langevin was uncalled for and gratutitous violence against the trust of womens groups.

And as Kos further displayed he nor the DSCC have no intentions of supporting the pro-choice candidates running against Chaffee. Therefore, in the likelihood that Chaffee will win because the Democratic establishement will not support a Democratic pro-choice candidate…NARAL is right to support Chaffee.

This send a signal that if the DLC can cross the aisle than so can NARAL with is millions of dollars.

NARAL is about protecting womens rights not Democratic males egos.

NARAL is smart in protecting the last vestiges of pro-choice candidates in the GOP, because if they go Dems have shown that they will not support pro-choice Democrats.

Hopefully, this will wake the idiotic Dem leadership… but I am not holding my breath.

My prediction is that NARAL is the tip of the iceberg other groups will follow. The DLC will finally get its wish and the “single issue groups” will no longer have power in the Democratic party.

What Kos so blindly refuses to see when they go ie The Women, Black, Labour, Gays, etc….

DUH!!!!…. that will be the end of the Democratic party because it will in essence be a second Republican party concerned only with the issues of WHITE MALES….and Kos has the nerve to call others ideologically pure.

7 Comments

Parker on May 23, 2005 at 3:54 am

to any Democratic presidential candidate… to not even think about asking for NARAL support… just because they have a “d” behind their name.
I hope Hilliary is listening because at the rate Hilliary is dumping Democratic issues over board …come 2008 she will be a true DINO and of course Kerry will follow hence the Sanatorum/Newt bullshit from the both of these idiots.

CabinGirl on May 23, 2005 at 4:08 am

You know, I have had a hard time with the “blame it on the women’s groups” carrying on over there lately. The idea seems to be that by dismissing women’s reproductive rights/right to privacy as an issue, “we can win some elections, and hey, that is the best way to protect Roe v Wade”. I have actually had one individual point out to me “Yeah, well, where are these pro-choice women going to go? To the Republicans?” Duh…these women will just sleep in on election day.

I salute NARAL for standing up to the Dems “Let’s be more like the GOP”, and supporting someone who supports the issue they are focused on-and I can’t believe Kos’ whining about it. It’s a wake up call to the party, but I don’t think they’re going to hear it.

And what the hell is wrong with having an open primary, where the local voters select the candidate to run in November?

Parker on May 23, 2005 at 4:43 am

Guess who said this:

“The [Democratic] Party is no longer a link to most Americans,” he writes, predicting the onset of political rigor mortis. “Each advocacy group has become more important than the sum of the whole. It is a rational party no more. It is a national party no more. So, bang the drum slowly and play the fife lowly, for the sun is setting over a waiting grave.”

Guess who said this

What was Davis’ mistake? Early in his first term, he governed as a moderate but, later on, pretty much capitulated to the left-wing-dominated legislature on critical issues such as the budget, advocacy for gay rights, and illegal aliens’ drivers’ licenses. Becoming a willing prisoner of the legislative party was Davis’ cardinal error, one that Democrats should watch out for nationally, particularly in light of the success, so far, of the Howard Dean campaign. When faced with a recall, Davis’ advisers abandoned the center and instead took a “mobilize-the-base” strategy. In Dean’s borrowed phrase, they became “the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.” In California that meant energizing the poverty warlords, the ethnic pols, the labor union apparatchiks, the trial lawyers, and the activists — environmentalist, feminist, and gay.

Guess who said this

One of the key problems with the Democratic Party is that single issue groups have hijacked it for their pet causes. So suddenly, Democrats are the party of abortion, of gun control, of spottend owls, of labor, of trial lawyers, etc, etc., et-frickin’-cetera. We don’t stand for any ideals, we stand for specific causes.

What all of these fools have in common is that they all have conveniently forgotten is that the Democratis Party’s move away from these so-called special interest groups to some wishy washy muddled middle of the roadkill is exactly why the Democratic party has been losing. These jack ass would rather blame the women, labor and gays not their pathetic spineless no count Democrats they have been supporting ie Salazar, LIEberman, Bayh, Landrieu, Daschel, Herseth, Nelson….

Funny how these jack asses have for gotten to mention the damage these “non” ideological Dems have done to the party…but they manage to get themselves into a lather when women strike back in an abusive partnership.

jhngwa on May 23, 2005 at 8:57 pm

…Zell Miller is still allowed to be in the Democratic Party. You would THINK that, after giving the keynote address for the enemy camp, bashing the living crap out of the Dems presidential nominee, and continuing to walk, talk, and vote like a Republican, the Dems would just say, “Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out, Zell.” But noooooooo….

Parker on May 23, 2005 at 5:49 am

that Kos has his knickers in a twist over nothing.

Interest Groups

This seems to be the hot topic in the liberal blogosphere but I can’t really muster up strong feelings on the subject. But, I do think the power of single interest groups is overrated. If NARAL “drove” Langevin out of the RI race then that says more about Langevin than NARAL, I think. Yes, there are examples of single issue interest groups shooting their causes in the foot at times but to me NARAL’s endorsement of Chafee (post-Langevin dropping out) is really an example of a good use of an opportunity to prove their necessary non-partisan bona fides in a way which won’t have much of an impact on the election itself…

Nanette on May 23, 2005 at 12:32 pm

I don’t like the idea that NARAL has come out in support of Chaffee, unless they figure that it’ll help the nomination of his primary challenger from the right, thus leaving the pro-choice Democrat to be the main one to vote for. Anyway, I have no real clue about their strategy, or about the climate in whatever state this is pertaining to.

What I do agree on, though, is the need to not concentrate so much on the fractionalizing of the left, and all our causes, but the bringing in of all our sections under one umbrella. To me, this doesn’t mean giving up anything at all, or stepping back even an inch… it’s simply a matter of removing our most vulnerable from the line of fire, and all of us surrounding each other in order to fight more effectively and make bigger gains.

Divide and conquer is an age old strategy… we do most of the work for the opposition if we do all the dividing ourselves first. All that’s left for them to do is the conquering.

Parker on May 23, 2005 at 11:26 pm

Read Atrios comment above I think you would agree.

Parker on May 23, 2005 at 3:54 am

to any Democratic presidential candidate… to not even think about asking for NARAL support… just because they have a “d” behind their name.
I hope Hilliary is listening because at the rate Hilliary is dumping Democratic issues over board …come 2008 she will be a true DINO and of course Kerry will follow hence the Sanatorum/Newt bullshit from the both of these idiots.
CabinGirl on May 23, 2005 at 4:08 am

You know, I have had a hard time with the “blame it on the women’s groups” carrying on over there lately. The idea seems to be that by dismissing women’s reproductive rights/right to privacy as an issue, “we can win some elections, and hey, that is the best way to protect Roe v Wade”. I have actually had one individual point out to me “Yeah, well, where are these pro-choice women going to go? To the Republicans?” Duh…these women will just sleep in on election day.

I salute NARAL for standing up to the Dems “Let’s be more like the GOP”, and supporting someone who supports the issue they are focused on-and I can’t believe Kos’ whining about it. It’s a wake up call to the party, but I don’t think they’re going to hear it.

And what the hell is wrong with having an open primary, where the local voters select the candidate to run in November?
Parker on May 23, 2005 at 4:43 am

Guess who said this:

“The [Democratic] Party is no longer a link to most Americans,” he writes, predicting the onset of political rigor mortis. “Each advocacy group has become more important than the sum of the whole. It is a rational party no more. It is a national party no more. So, bang the drum slowly and play the fife lowly, for the sun is setting over a waiting grave.”

Guess who said this

What was Davis’ mistake? Early in his first term, he governed as a moderate but, later on, pretty much capitulated to the left-wing-dominated legislature on critical issues such as the budget, advocacy for gay rights, and illegal aliens’ drivers’ licenses. Becoming a willing prisoner of the legislative party was Davis’ cardinal error, one that Democrats should watch out for nationally, particularly in light of the success, so far, of the Howard Dean campaign. When faced with a recall, Davis’ advisers abandoned the center and instead took a “mobilize-the-base” strategy. In Dean’s borrowed phrase, they became “the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.” In California that meant energizing the poverty warlords, the ethnic pols, the labor union apparatchiks, the trial lawyers, and the activists — environmentalist, feminist, and gay.

Guess who said this

One of the key problems with the Democratic Party is that single issue groups have hijacked it for their pet causes. So suddenly, Democrats are the party of abortion, of gun control, of spottend owls, of labor, of trial lawyers, etc, etc., et-frickin’-cetera. We don’t stand for any ideals, we stand for specific causes.

What all of these fools have in common is that they all have conveniently forgotten is that the Democratis Party’s move away from these so-called special interest groups to some wishy washy muddled middle of the roadkill is exactly why the Democratic party has been losing. These jack ass would rather blame the women, labor and gays not their pathetic spineless no count Democrats they have been supporting ie Salazar, LIEberman, Bayh, Landrieu, Daschel, Herseth, Nelson….

Funny how these jack asses have for gotten to mention the damage these “non” ideological Dems have done to the party…but they manage to get themselves into a lather when women strike back in an abusive partnership.
- jhngwa on May 23, 2005 at 8:57 pm
  
  …Zell Miller is still allowed to be in the Democratic Party. You would THINK that, after giving the keynote address for the enemy camp, bashing the living crap out of the Dems presidential nominee, and continuing to walk, talk, and vote like a Republican, the Dems would just say, “Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out, Zell.” But noooooooo….
Parker on May 23, 2005 at 5:49 am

that Kos has his knickers in a twist over nothing.

Interest Groups

This seems to be the hot topic in the liberal blogosphere but I can’t really muster up strong feelings on the subject. But, I do think the power of single interest groups is overrated. If NARAL “drove” Langevin out of the RI race then that says more about Langevin than NARAL, I think. Yes, there are examples of single issue interest groups shooting their causes in the foot at times but to me NARAL’s endorsement of Chafee (post-Langevin dropping out) is really an example of a good use of an opportunity to prove their necessary non-partisan bona fides in a way which won’t have much of an impact on the election itself…
Nanette on May 23, 2005 at 12:32 pm

I don’t like the idea that NARAL has come out in support of Chaffee, unless they figure that it’ll help the nomination of his primary challenger from the right, thus leaving the pro-choice Democrat to be the main one to vote for. Anyway, I have no real clue about their strategy, or about the climate in whatever state this is pertaining to.

What I do agree on, though, is the need to not concentrate so much on the fractionalizing of the left, and all our causes, but the bringing in of all our sections under one umbrella. To me, this doesn’t mean giving up anything at all, or stepping back even an inch… it’s simply a matter of removing our most vulnerable from the line of fire, and all of us surrounding each other in order to fight more effectively and make bigger gains.

Divide and conquer is an age old strategy… we do most of the work for the opposition if we do all the dividing ourselves first. All that’s left for them to do is the conquering.
- Parker on May 23, 2005 at 11:26 pm
  
  Read Atrios comment above I think you would agree.

Why NARAL HAD to support Chaffee

About The Author

Parker

7 Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Comments