Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Seems that MOST Press Releases about Obama's Official Endorsements are PROUDLY touted here:

http://www.barackobama.com/newsroom/pres s/

or here:

http://www.barackobama.com/newsroom/inth enews/
(In the News)

But...
There is absolutely NO mention of NARAL's endorsement last Wednesday (5/14) on either of those pages. You have to go here:
http://women.barackobama.com/page/conten t/WFOhome

Why would this not be given the same weight/respect as other Endorsements (like Union Endorsements)? Why is the Obama Campaign choosing to relegate this important endorsement to the "People" (Blog) part of his website? Shame on NARAL for not demanding a prouder acceptance of their support! Shame on Women for not demanding it!

I've already been turned-off and alarmed that the entire Issue of Women's Reproductive Freedom is not deemed important enough to be listed as an "Issue" on Obama's website. Now this sends off even more alarm bells for me.

I know that Obama's supporters think this is being "extremely picky" and that it is purely a "design issue" in how his website is laid out. I disagree. Think about how would you feel if an issue YOU cared deeply about wasn't listed as one of Obama's issues? What about if his stance on Civil Rights was ONLY listed under the "People" section. Or if a MAJOR Civil Rights endorsement was only mentioned under "African Americans"?

Women are watching closely Obama. You say you want our votes? This is NOT the way you're going to get them. Badly played.

Tags: NARAL, obama (all tags)

Comments

58 Comments

Yea

    you're just borrowing trouble.
by southernman 2008-05-19 02:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Yea

Maybe because NARAL loves to endorse Rethugs?

NARAL: Pro-Choice Republican President "Would Help" Movement

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/10 /naral-prochoice-republi_n_67968.html

by KnowVox 2008-05-19 02:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Yea

  Perhaps, but Obama is no republican, despite what some folks on this site like to claim or imply.
by southernman 2008-05-21 10:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Maybe because NARAL got swamped with negative calls and e-mails, unlike any other endorser?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-19 02:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Exactly right.  NARAL doesn't need more threatening call and emails from dead-enders.

by fogiv 2008-05-19 02:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Kindly refrain from calling people who disagree with you in this campaign names.  It will work out much better for you and for your candidate in the end.  Thank you.

by Scotch 2008-05-19 04:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Hey thats what NARAL has become anyway .

Why bother over it ?

Look there are better organizations out there .

Why risk being labelled as pro abortion lol.

I am sure if he is questioned about it he would say he didn't seek the endorsement.

Its more like touting the endorsement of moveon.org , thats NARAL for you.

by lori 2008-05-19 02:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

if questioned about the endorsement, he might just say "present." Kinda like what he did with those 7 abortion rights bills in the Illinois Senate:

As a State Senator, Barack Obama voted `present' on seven abortion bills, including a ban on 'partial birth abortion,' two parental notification laws and three 'born alive' bills. He chose political cover over standing and fighting for his convictions. -- Illinois NOW

by KnowVox 2008-05-19 02:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

You mean the Planned Parenthood created strategy that Obama followed as requested?

You mean the present votes that HRC tried using in an NH flier -- which, after the primary, caused several of the NH state reps that were originally supporting her to write an open letter to the WaPo attacking her for the dishonest attack?

You mean the IL NOW, whose former President switched support from Clinton to Obama after NH for precisely the same reason?

But yeah... keeping pushing the false line of attack.

Makes you look real honest and above the board.

It's worked so far this cycle, right?

by zonk 2008-05-19 03:13PM | 0 recs
It's probably a respect thing.

There's a lot of internal strife within NARAL at the moment regarding the National Chapter's endorsement.

Obama probably doesn't want to announce it until they've sorted things out with their local chapters.  If they crowed about it, that would drive a wedge between the state/local NARAL people and his campaign even further.

Some Clinton supporters don't want to believe it, but Obama and his campaign have largely been very respectful of both the Clinton campaign and external groups that are pro-Clinton.  They realize that they need those supporters in the Fall.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-19 02:12PM | 0 recs
Re: It's probably a respect thing.

Some Clinton supporters don't want to believe it, but Obama and his campaign have largely been very respectful of both the Clinton campaign and external groups that are pro-Clinton.

- Since when ? , Just curious. I didn't really notice that , I just thought they were calling a bunch of them racists.

by lori 2008-05-19 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: It's probably a respect thing.

um no, I can't think of a time the Obama campaign has called the Clintons racist. Could you cite please?

by notedgeways 2008-05-19 02:17PM | 0 recs
Re: It's probably a respect thing.

How dare you challenge someone's fantastical perspective by asking for facts?!

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-19 02:30PM | 0 recs
Re: It's probably a respect thing.

NARAL shouldn't be making endorsements until the general.

by handsomegent 2008-05-19 02:23PM | 0 recs
Re: It's probably a respect thing.

They waited a long time. I guess they underestimated the force of wishful thinking.

by BlueinColorado 2008-05-19 03:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Yep, NARAL f**ked up with their endorsement, because the local chapters did not agree with their national endorsement.  

Many local chapters have a page up stating that they do not endorse either candidate.

good for them.  I emailed by local chapter and thanked them for not blindly following the ill-advised national endorsement of NARAL.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-19 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Women are separate, but equal!

He has been playing this game all campaign, he really doesn't want to be identified with culture war issues from the 60s and 70s like women's or GLBT rights. Hence the present votes.

by souvarine 2008-05-19 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

You're either being intentionally dishonest or you're misinformed.  The present votes were made at the behest of PP as a legislative strategy.  Obama has a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood and NARAL.  He's a staunch supporter of women's rights.  Make a substantive criticism or you risk being called a troll.

by semiquaver 2008-05-19 02:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

I assure you I am neither. The Planned Parenthood "legislative strategy" was a CYA for conservative Democrats. As Obama's colleagues in the state senate pointed out Obama was looking to future office and did not want to be tainted with pro-choice votes. We covered this extensively here at the time, but since you are new here you may have missed all of the documentation. Check the archives, here is a start.

You may call me whatever names you like, but if you want to defend Obama you will have to do better than recite half-baked talking points from Obama surrogates.

by souvarine 2008-05-19 02:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

To be clear, are you equating IL Planned Parenthood with Conservative Democrats? I live in Chicago; Obama was my senator, and I recall a minor dustup occurring over some of these votes, except the criticism came from the NRLC and other anti-choice groups.  I'll admit I don't fully understand the labyrinthine workings of our government, but I do understand that "Present" is considered equivalent to "No" and legislators use it all the time for various reasons; calling it a CYA move is disingenuous, because absolutely everyone understands that voting present will defeat a measure just as easily as a "no" vote.  It's often used as a marker, similar to how Hillaryis44 people tack on $.44 to their donations.

From your quoted post,

The state Senate voted 14 times on various abortion restrictions during his tenure. Half the time, Obama voted "present."

In other words, 100% of his votes were for choice.  He only voted "Present" on anti-choice bills.  If this isn't true, why was he roundly criticized by anti-choice groups and praised by groups like Planned parenthood, and why does he hold a 100% legislative rating from both PP and NARAL, arguably the two most prominent pro-choice organizations out there?  Do you honestly believe that they were deceived by his cunning ploy to avoid taking a stand?

NOW has endorsed Clinton and is playing a political game here, and it's sad.  The "present" vote argument is a joke made by people who don't understand IL politics and are trying to turn the votes of a supporter of women against him.  There are legitimate areas to attack Obama's record on, but this is not one of them.

by semiquaver 2008-05-19 03:22PM | 0 recs
"Badly played"

For too many on this site, every move by Obama is "badly played."  He could cure cancer and still get labeled "a show off."

The important thing here is the substance of the endorsement and Obama's 100% rating with organizations like NARAL and Planned Parenthood.

by Slim Tyranny 2008-05-19 02:16PM | 0 recs
Re: "Badly played"

Sexist that he is, he'd probably only cure testicular cancer.

by neeborMolgula 2008-05-19 02:31PM | 0 recs
Re: "Badly played"

Yes, I am sure he is not interested in the health of his wife and daughters.  As a matter of fact, I've heard that he actually has a secret room in the basement of his campaign headquarters where he plots his insults and disregard of all women.  He really hates women, you know.  He's just so subtle about it that only really really sophisticated people that spend all their free time on blogs can tell.  McCaskill, Napolitano, Sibelius, and the feminist politicians who know him are completely fooled.

by Strummerson 2008-05-19 03:26PM | 0 recs
Funniest thing I've read today

by semiquaver 2008-05-19 03:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Well, hell NARAL endorses him and they get a ton of vicious correspondences, putting it front and center would just rub salt in the wounds of those that so vehemently disagreed with their endorsement.

Did you support NARAL's endorsement, and if so did you let them know?

If not, could you see this as trying not to shov eit in people's faces?

by notedgeways 2008-05-19 02:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

If I were Obama I probably wouldn't want someone who votes based on the way that endorsements announced to vote for me.

If you think all women are so shallow and vapid as to decide if they want to vote for Obama based on the fact that he didn't galavant around showing off his endorsement from NARAL then you probably SHOULD vote for McCain.

by You are an idiot 2008-05-19 02:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

yep, woman rights are just so "gender" based and unimportant.

blech.  Your userid states it all about you.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-19 02:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Ha! You can't even make a valid argument. Your argument is that NARAL is a women's rights organization, NARAL has endorsed Obama, Obama does not pay due homage to an organization, therefore Obama does not support women's rights sufficiently.

That's not even valid you uneducated filth.

by You are an idiot 2008-05-19 02:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Actually it could be valid if you add the premise that in order to support women's rights sufficiently you must pay due homage to said women's rights organization. But then your argument just goes from invalid to mind-numbingly stupid.

by You are an idiot 2008-05-19 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL

I imagine he's not making a lot of noise so that NARAL can deal with the problem, bad as it is internally, without his campaign adding more attention to it and making the whole thing worse for them.

Who knows?  Maybe they even asked him to.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-19 02:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

What a bullshit diary.  Look at your two links, neither has the story of the Edwards endorsement.  The NARAL story first appeared in the main page of his website and when it was no longer current news it was moved to the woman's section.  

by Piuma 2008-05-19 02:33PM | 0 recs
The Edwards Endorsement

Was accepted by Obama in front of THOUSANDS of people, broadcast on TV and that video is front-and-center on the Obama website. Right now a picture of Obama hugging Edwards is the splash page of his website.

He is clearly PROUD of that endorsement, so I don't get your point?

Find me a press release or an official statement issued by the Obama campaign touting their proud acceptance of the NARAL endorsement?

by twinmom 2008-05-19 03:11PM | 0 recs
Re: The Edwards Endorsement

Here: http://women.barackobama.com/page/conten t/WFOhome

As I said, this article appeared on his main page until it was no longer current and then moved to the lead in the Woman's Issues section.  I don't know what your complaint is.  

by Piuma 2008-05-19 03:29PM | 0 recs
Not a Press Release

And not a link to the MANY News Items which were written on that endorsement.

He treated this endorsement differently than other endorsements which he felt proud to tout for the political benefit to him.

That's my point.

I get it that you don't think it maters. Good for you.

by twinmom 2008-05-19 03:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Not a Press Release

So you were proven quite wrong, and you're backtracking to make your complaint that...the release didn't link to other articles covering the endorsement.

Just to be clear, here.

Are you really that desperate for something to be offended over? That's pathetic.

by upstate girl 2008-05-19 03:58PM | 0 recs
I included that link in my diary

I know that someone blogged about the NARAL endorsement under his "People / Women" section. I linked to that exact example in my original diary.

My point is that every other endorsement seems to be treated quite differently... as a Press Release or as an "In The News" item/link.

So, how am I "backtracking" exactly? How was I proven "quite wrong" in this exchange?

by twinmom 2008-05-19 05:05PM | 0 recs
He needs to read up on civil rights movement

Where you learn that you cannot stand there while somebody tells a racist joke. Standing there means you are part of the problem. Walking out or denouncing the joke says you are part of the solution.

by catfish1 2008-05-19 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: He needs to read up on civil rights movement

by You are an idiot 2008-05-19 02:43PM | 0 recs
Re: He needs to read up on civil rights movement

You're right, the 2 main threats to civil rights in this country are racist jokes and posting your comment in the wrong diary. Clearly Obama just doesn't get civil rights.

by You are an idiot 2008-05-19 02:44PM | 0 recs
you got my head spinning

the diarist who shall not be named (who always gets rec'ed up the wazoo here) calls all women to arms to go to war with naral for their endorsement of obama......and you ask....why has the obama campaign not exploited this endorsement further??????????

sounds like the chewbacca defense to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUP5GzHIo jU

by citizendave 2008-05-19 02:39PM | 0 recs
Well it is ironic

It is exactly this kind of non-pride in putting this issue front-and-center which makes him undeserving of the NARAL endorsement.

by twinmom 2008-05-19 03:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Well it is ironic

women who think that naral has sold out by not endorsing the woman candidate will not be swayed....they are the ones that want to make an "issue" out of this endorsemnt.

good campaigning = not taking the bait.

sorry.

by citizendave 2008-05-19 03:17PM | 0 recs
Petty. Petty. Petty.

Get over it.

by LtWorf 2008-05-19 02:47PM | 0 recs
1/2 the population

Is supposed to "get over it" that Obama refuses to take a proud, firm stance on Women's Reproductive Freedom?

When Obama goes head-to-head against McCain, he won't be able to bury his stance on this issue. He will have to be unequivocal and answer the questions. Or maybe he'll simply give an answer like this massive equivocation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3iHr1IYW Uk&feature=related

Not good enough for me and no, I'm not going to "get over it". No woman should.

by twinmom 2008-05-19 03:06PM | 0 recs
Re: 1/2 the population

He voted against the partial-birth abortion ban.  If you want proof he's pro-choice, that's as clear a sign as you'll ever get out of any candidate.

The Republicans will hit him for that vote, just as they would Hillary.

There will be a real political cost for his vote on that one, and he voted the way I assume you would have wanted him to.

Stop looking for things to get mad about.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-19 03:09PM | 0 recs
So you think

If he is asked to re-affirm his vote against the partial birth abortion ban in a head-to-head debate with McCain that he will stand strongly behind that vote?

I'll believe it when I see it frankly.

If you are right and I am simply "looking for things to be mad about" and Obama turns out to be a strong, uncompromising champion for Women's Reproductive Rights in the GE, I'll come back and grovel then. I really don't think I'll have to, since he is clearly in GE mode of pandering, equivocating and trying to dodge giving this issue front-and-center attention. He's trying to please everyone... as you said, he's going to get slammed on this from the right... so why not take a strong, proud stance?

I don't want "proof" that he is pro-choice. I want proof that he's proud to be pro-choice. There's a difference.

I'll be watching closely.

by twinmom 2008-05-19 03:41PM | 0 recs
Re: So you think

Have you actually looked?  Why do you think NARAL and Planned Parenthood have endorsed him?  Here is the unequivocal statement on his website relating to reproductive choice:


REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE

Supports a Woman's Right to Choose:

Barack Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case.

Preventing Unwanted Pregnancy:

Barack Obama is an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand access to contraception, health information and preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies. Introduced in January 2007, the Prevention First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.

by Piuma 2008-05-19 03:58PM | 0 recs
Re: 1/2 the population

I don't think that the "Obama Hates Women" crowd who ascribe to this perspective represent anywhere near 1/2 the population.

by Strummerson 2008-05-19 03:29PM | 0 recs
Not again.

You seem obsessed with this idea that somehow you can divine evil intent and a lack of commitment to women's issues from the positioning of stuff on Obama's web site. Wasn't your last diary on this enough?

Where's the NARAL endorsement on Hillary's site?

by Travis Stark 2008-05-19 03:36PM | 0 recs
Her Pro-choice Endorsements

Are proudly listed right along with every other endorsement she has gotten. She doesn't hide them or treat them any differently than any endorsement.

by twinmom 2008-05-19 03:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Her Pro-choice Endorsements

How is being the lead article on the Woman's page hiding an endorsement?  Why was it on the main site for days?

by Piuma 2008-05-19 03:59PM | 0 recs
Why do Obama's supporters always make excuses?

You make excuses for him, others have posted jokey responses here. That's fine, people have the prerogative to disagree.

But I'm stating an opinion as someone who strongly supports Hillary Clinton, Obama is my distant 2nd choice. I will NOT vote for McCain but Obama needs to earn my vote.

In many ways I'm telling you what Obama should be doing to make Hillary Clinton supporters like me feel comfortable flipping my support to him. Instead of respectfully listening to and acknowledging my concerns, I get a lot of excuses, dismissal and even mocking. That sends a strong message about how his supporters feel about the importance of these issues frankly.

If you are truly committed to taking a firm, proud, welcoming stance to attract Clinton's female supporters, maybe my complaints shouldn't be dismissed? You all have a hundred examples of how he really is pro-choice... what's wrong with women demanding that he makes that a CLEAR centerpiece of his website platform?

by twinmom 2008-05-19 04:21PM | 0 recs
You've said it yourself.

People can disagree. I've already had the discussion with you about web site placement. You are not willing to consider that your design-based theory of Obama's level of caring about women's issues might be ill considered.

In addition, what do you want from us? Really? No one here has the ability to redesign the Obama website, so that can't be what you want. What you want is some sort of agreement from us that you're right about Obama and these issues, which you are not.

If there is some piece of information or any other doable thing I can do to put you at ease, then I'd be personally more than happy to do that, but if you're looking to just cast false aspersions on the candidate, then there's not much I can do about that.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-19 05:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Some more things for you to read:


Public Statements about Choice:

A selection of Sen. Obama's public statements on this issue is below.

"Thirty-five years after the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, it's never been more important to protect a woman's right to choose... Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America... I believe in and have supported common-sense solutions like increasing access to affordable birth control to help prevent unintended pregnancies... As President, I will improve access to affordable health care and work to ensure that our teens are getting the information and services they need to stay safe and healthy."
From a statement by Sen. Obama on the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, January 22, 2008. Full statement is available here:

"You know, I think that most Americans recognize that this is a profoundly difficult issue for the women and families who make these decisions.  They don't make them casually. And I trust women to make these decisions in conjunction with their doctors and their families and their clergy."
[Transcript from Democratic Presidential Debate in South Carolina, MSNBC, April 26, 2007.]

"I strongly disagree with today's Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman's medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient. I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman's right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women."
[Statement from Sen. Obama on Supreme Court Decision upholding Federal Abortion Ban, April 18, 2007, http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/a rchives/2007/04/obama_decision.html (accessed May 4, 2007).]

"I explained my belief that few women made the decision to terminate a pregnancy casually; that any pregnant woman felt the full force of the moral issues involved and wrestled with her conscience when making that decision; that I feared a ban on abortion would force women to seek unsafe abortions, as they had once done in this country."
[Barack Obama, excerpt from The Audacity of Hope published in Time Magazine, October 15, 2006, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/articl e/0,9171,1546298,00.html (accessed April 28, 2008).]

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/election s/statements/obama.html

by Piuma 2008-05-19 04:05PM | 0 recs
Actually

That excerpt from his book (in the TIME Magazine link you gave) is what originally sent off all sorts of alarm bells for me. I cringe at much of what he writes there frankly.

Read the whole thing. To me it is a MASSIVE equivocation. It shows his willingness to be overly accommodating on these issues. He changed his website to be less offensive according to this article. He blames his "staff" for the strong wording. For me, it is NOT that much of a leap to assume that his choice to not have these issues front-and-center as part of his Presidential campaign was quite calculated.

We know very few details about how Obama plans to walk this line and try to be all things to all people on these issues.

How EXACTLY does he plan to find "common ground" with pro-life groups? Why does he feel a "pang of shame" over his former websites strong stance on abortion rights?

Also, he focuses solely on abortion and reducing abortions, as if this is the only issue encompassed in Women's Reproductive Freedom. What about the impact which the attacks of the far right have had on stem cell research? Or the potential of granting equal rights to embryos will have on infertility treatment? His "vision" on this seems dangerously narrow in my opinion. He also seems far too willing to blur the line between faith and issues of privacy and personal freedom for my liking.

by twinmom 2008-05-19 04:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

Scraping the bottom of the outrage barrel, aren't we?

Many of the esteemed and oh-so-rational citizens on this particular site had a s@##-fit when NARAL endorsed him.  Maybe they don't want to subject NARAL to any additional blowback?

Nah, gotta go with the slime.

by rfahey22 2008-05-19 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama "Buries" NARAL Endorsement

We all know why he doesn't emphasize it.  Because he doesn't have a passion for it, he doesn't get it, and he doesn't care.  Besides, as we know, you can't catch those reagan republicans with that kind of talk, or the bush republicans, or the Daddy bush republicans, or a lot of Independents.

Well, I got news for you Obama, if you don't find it important enough to talk about, you are going to have a hard time catching a lot of democrats especially a lot of the ones who make up the majority of your party.

by Scotch 2008-05-19 04:30PM | 0 recs
The bottom line.

You know what. I think here's the bottom line. You obviously care deeply about the issue. The election in November will between Barack Obama and John McCain. If you like McCain's placement of his pro-choice group endorsements on his web site better than you like Obama's, then you should not vote for Obama.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-19 05:47PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads