Daily Kos

View Story | 24 comments

  •  Actions vs. Words (4.00 / 2)

    If Chaffee says he's pro-choice but votes lockstep with the party to confirm anti-choice judges then which is it?

    For me the question is whether NARAL really has to take a position on every single election.  I don't think so.  When NARAL is given a choice between a sitting Republican who says he's pro choice but in fact votes with the party to approve extreme right wing judges and a Democrat who might actually win, and do some good on privacy issues generally, but happens to personally be pro life, then it's perfectly OK for NARAL so sit that election out.  Say you don't really like anybody and move on to some other election where there really is somebody  to feel strongly about.

    As far as this goes, NARAL got played for a chump.  They did Chaffee a big favor by shooting down his competion and got nothing in return.

    Editor of the Harvard Law Review and top 7% of his class vs. Mr. 894 out of 899. How has having a stupid President worked out the last eight years?

    by Tod on Wed Jun 08, 2005 at 05:14:57 PM PDT

    •  "Which is it?" (none / 1)

      Chafee is a Republican.  First and foremost.  He votes for Bill Frist for leader and Janice Rogers Brown for the most important circuit court in the nation.  That's all you need to know.  He's the enemy.  NARAL are morons.

      Shill, Shill, Shill.

      by Paleo on Wed Jun 08, 2005 at 05:23:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'd like Dems to explain too (none / 1)

      Especially the allegedly pro-abortion-rights ones who get into office then vie with Republicans over who can prove abortion is wronger.

      As someone who believes in keeping abortion safe, legal and none of anyone else's fucking business, for several elections my "choice" has been between R's using it for a cynical election ploy and D's using it for a cynical election ploy.

      I'll continue to support NARAL and hope they continue nonpartisan endorsement of pro-abortion-rights candidates. If any candidate is exposed as having an opposite agenda, may that support be yanked hard, publicly and with great formula.

      NARAL can't predict the future clearly enough for those on the site? To anyone here who uses NARAL as a convenient scapegoat and/or whipping girl for Dem problems -- demand the same level of predicting the future from all pols, please, including and ESPECIALLY Dems, who have not fought hard enough for choice and not fought hard enough to keep abortion legal.

      I agree about withdrawing support from Chafee.

      by Peanut on Wed Jun 08, 2005 at 06:45:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm embarassed to say I had no idea (none / 0)

        what NARAL was before about two weeks ago. I joined immediately to support an organization who fights for an issue that I believe in deeply. I don't agree with all this single-issue voter rhetoric on Kos. If the Dems won't come out swinging hard, I'm not sure I should come out swinging hard for them. I do see that NARAL is becoming, as you say, a convenient scapegoat - but would also agree that I'd now like to see them dump Chafee.

        But I don't support dumping the people who made the decision; or the tone of some of the gleeful pile-ons of NARAL today.

        by oysterface on Wed Jun 08, 2005 at 07:14:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

View Story | 24 comments