NOW

A lot of folks get on the National Organization for Women for not doing enough about global women because (probably) Bush is in office and they wouldn’t want to support him in any way. I let it slide because I think organizations need to keep a focus and if their focus is local and on silly issues, so be it.

So Scott at Environmental Republican notes a horrendous breach of civility out of NOW of NY concerning Ted Kennedy’s endorsement of Barack Obama yesterday.

The title just the title of their press release is enough to make me ill.

Psychological Gang Bang of Hillary is Proof We Need a Woman President

This press release seriously, seriously puts the “taunting” of Hillary Clinton by the “scared of females” male candidates in the same class as gang rape.

I will not bother with the ridiculous charges of taunting as if Hillary were the only candidate ever made fun of for whatever. (see Edward’s hair, or Kerry’s CIA hat, or Romney’s “giant erect penis”, or Dean’s scream or Bush’s booze or the list is endless) It is too whiney and not respectable and certainly not something a strong woman candidate would give a rip about.

But to put that taunting and string it to gang rape is unconscionable. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Dave at Uncorrelated notes another press release from the same NY organization where they call Kennedy’s endorsement of Obama the “ultimate betrayal”.

What?? A man and a woman are running and people are not allowed to choose the candidate they think is best, unless they choose the woman?? Is that what NOW is working for? Always choose the woman? Get me a gag bucket.

The reasonable news is that national NOW has put out a milder statement respecting Senator Kennedy’s endorsement.

This campaign got ugly with Bill’s involvement but NY NOW just made it uglier.

5 thoughts on “NOW

  1. Well, Sen. Clinton got one on them…and a good one after all that constant “button pushing” that the other men seemed so adept at doing. Sen. Obama, retorted or reacted in some way after the constant bouts of sheer eloquence that makes everybody twittle…he was quoted as saying “[…somebody…] is doing alot of Tea reading hear.” For a young zealotly motivated true believing man like Obama…this would be a terrible spectacle should he get into office…the diplomacy issue of how he would run the country on his “eloquence” and sheer demeanor to coincidently (fall right into the republicans hands) at running into (or seeming to by threatening) clean house. It takes along time to get the Democrats back into office…the bipartinship on the Hill back in the nineties could only get Nafta drafted working sheerly with the republicans. Eloquence is nice but we have too much damage control to do…and policy must be addressed…Obama, I fear understands his conservative constituency which I have been traditionally …suffice it to say “passed by a grey car”…Hillary has real agenda’s for immediate relief and hallmark policy’s of which I want to be instilled with in the country regardless of how we look.

  2. So you are saying it was good and solid reference that makes complete sense to equate rape and taunting, because in the long run it may allow your candidate to be in the White House?

    You’ve lost your mind.

  3. I’m not…your taking the materialism of my words and while trying to transcend and understand between the lines, you are not getting my message…what I’m is simply, with the amount of fracturing within the voting blocs going on rite now, we’re going to end up with alot people going the polls who rationalize to themselves, “ya, know I really want to vote for whoever the party gets nominated, but ya’ know I really have to vote for the best intentions of the country.” Thus, making many swing voters.

  4. You’re not really saying anything then. And certainly nothing that pertains to this blog.

    Why are you here?
    Voting for the best intentions of the country is what most people do who have any actual interest.

Comments are closed.