NARAL attack on Sanders unnecessary

[angrychair]

NARAL makes a deeply vicious and nasty attack on Sanders after the Town Hall meeting last night in Iowa.

Stating in a release:
"He’s made it clear that, in his mind, the economic critique at the center of his campaign trumps the importance of any identity politics, including gender.

But as Hanson points out, access to health care—and especially to birth control and abortion, which allow women to time their families around their economic situations and their careers—“is an economic issue, and one that's fundamental to a woman's ability to succeed.” Sanders had a great opportunity to make that point last night, and thereby to signal that he really deserved Planned Parenthood’s endorsement. Once again, he passed."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/01/26/bernie_sanders_just_can_t_get_it_right_with_women_s_groups.html

I don't get the point being made here by NARAL. What long term advantage is gained by casting Sanders as someone that doesn't care (enough) about women's issues?
He has advocated for women's health and pay for decades.

Sanders talked about women in the context of health care, equal pay for equal work and income inequality in general during the Democratic Town Hall on CNN last night.

In fact, Sanders said the word "women" more than any other candidate last night:

Sanders: 12

Clinton: 4

O'Malley: 1 (on edit...missed it)

Transcript from town hall: http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2016/01/26/cnn-iowa-democratic-presidential-town-hall-rush-transcript/

The attack is very disingenuous and a deeply unfair characterization of Sanders based on his words, his actions, his existing policy statements and his historical record.

[HerbChestnut]

1. I can't believe it's come to this.

Progressive organizations attacking arguably the most progressive candidate in Congress because...reasons.

[Fawke Em]

2. Because "establishment."

Can't be loosing our influence and turns, now!

[enough]

3. +1 (nt)

[roguevalley]

53. yet these corrupt slaggers expect us to donate to them, No.

[arcane1]

54. Whatever It Takes(tm)

[Plucketeer]

66. Disappointing

to say the very least.

[NCTraveler]

4. Facts

1) Sanders is running against the "establishment."
2) Sanders supporters are anti-establishment and attacking everything they can define as "establishment."
3) Sanders called PP a part of the "establishment" giving his supporters the green light for a full offensive against PP.

Sanders knew exactly what he was doing. That is why you won't see me get pissed at the attacks on him. Damn straight. Sanders went after the progressive establishment that is PP. This is necessary to fight back at the verbiage Sanders knowingly used against great progressive organizations.

Whoever you got your numbers("women&quot from is wrong as well.

[Empowerer]

26. Not to mention that this wasn't an "attack"

It was a criticism, not an attack.

[navarth]

40. disingenuous

Bernie was referring to the leadership of PP because the rank-and-file had no say in the endorsement. But you knew that.

[FSogol]

5. The transcript you posted proves you are wrong. O'Malley did mention women:

How about this, the long deferred promise of equal pay for equal work for men and women?

The attack is very disingenuous and a deeply unfair characterization, blah, blah, blah

[angrychair]

7. My mistake

On my phone, I missed one...sorry. Not sure why your reply is so vitriol.

[FSogol]

21. Yeah, sorry about that. Crappy day & seeing a lot of total lies about O'M being spread on DU n/t

[Omaha Steve]

33. AFter what O'Malley did last, I will do all I can to help him raise $ if he doesn't get 15% in Iowa!

I have already kicked in $70 for him. I did a $50 match the Hillary people treated like leprosy and could have had for Hillary. I gave $10 when the NRA went after him. And $10 when I opened the DU Act Blue account.

OS

Donate to O'Malley here: https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/duforomalley

[FSogol]

36. Awesome, OS. Keep up the good work. n/t

[angrychair]

34. No problem

I get it and understand. We are good. There are things a I like about O'Malley and see him as my second choice of the three we have this cycle.

[FSogol]

35. Thanks for that. n/t

[emsimon33]

6. NARAL has done a lot of damage to its image with this

I would have expected more honesty and professionalism from Ilyse Hogue, who was formerly with MoveOn.org.

[synergie]

38. There was nothing dishonest or unprofessional here, why attack her personally? Because

she's not on board with your chosen candidate?

[MineralMan]

8. If Sanders did not address reproductive choice for women,

he missed a chance to demonstrate something. I didn't watch, so I don't know firsthand whether he mentioned it or not, but according to this, he did not.

Few issues are as crucial to many women as reproductive choice. It's a fundamental issue that is only really faced by those who will carry and bear children. To ignore that is to ignore one extremely important thing.

[JonLeibowitz]

9. Just as you ignore his 100% pro-choice record.

[MineralMan]

10. Yes, that is his record.

I'm aware of it, and do not ignore it. However, if you're seeking support from women, it's worth mentioning when you have an opportunity. It's one thing to vote for reproductive choice. It's another to champion that issue.

I ignore nothing. I'm as aware of Bernie Sanders' record in the Senate as anyone here. Please do not assume anything about me. My choice of a candidate support is not based on ignorance. It never is.

[gyroscope]

13. I thought championing something meant you actually vote for it

not just pay lip service. What else do you expect him to do exactly?

[tammywammy]

14. Voting for something is supporting it

A champion would be an advocate for an issue. Someone that draws up a bill, goes on a talk circuit drumming up support for the cause, etc.

There's supporters and then there's champions/advocates for a cause.

[gyroscope]

16. Abortion is legal in the country

why would you need to draw up a bill for it.

[gyroscope]

18. btw, what bills has Hillary drawn up

in regard to abortion rights?

[Empowerer]

28. There's more to supporting something than simply voting for it.

[MineralMan]

19. Acknowledge reproductive choice when discussing

issues important to women. Championing something means speaking out in favor of it or otherwise making your support publicly known. Many women expect the politicians they will vote for to be vocal about reproductive choice and their support for it. Hillary Clinton is outspoken on the issue. It's no wonder, then, that she has the support of women for whom that is a crucial issue.

Does Bernie Sanders support reproductive choice? Yes, he does. He consistently votes for measures that protect it. Did he speak about it at that opportunity? No, he did not. So, people who care deeply about the topic noticed that.

I'm a man. I can't get pregnant, and I've never caused a pregnancy. However, my support for reproductive choice is supported by my actions and words over the years. I don't get to vote on such measures often, but I can show up to support PP when a protest against it is going on and serve as an escort. That I have done many times over the years.

Sanders' lapse in not mentioning that issue at that town hall may well have cost him the support of some people. I can't say, but apparently someone did say that. Someone with a strong voice that is heard by many women.

It was a mistake for him not to speak out on that topic. People make mistakes. Maybe he'll correct it soon.

[gyroscope]

22. Sanders mentioned his 100% Naral voting record

when the lady in the audience asked him about his support of women's rights. how can you say he didn't mention it?

[sulphurdunn]

47. I'm pretty sure he did mention it.

[synergie]

41. Taking passive votes is pretty much paying lip service women want to see

leaders who will take an active stance in promoting women's basic rights, not just passively playing defense. He has a 100% pro-choice record, so did Hillary, she just took it further by actively introducing bills that dealt with issues women face.

I'm sorry you don't like the outcome, but they're were pretty open and honest about WHY they chose to support the candidate that they did, attacking them for doing so kinda shows the tone-deafness on this issue by the Bernie supporters. Even those who are 100% pro-Bernie are annoyed by these attacks.

[JonLeibowitz]

15. Apologies, I did not mean to imply that.

What i mean to say is that one shouldn't look at a tactical campaigning error (failing to mention reproductive choice in a speech) as any evidence that he is not a fierce ally on women's health issues.

There is campaigning errors and then there are policy errors. This one goes into the first category and it would be a mistake to read into the second based on it.

[MineralMan]

23. It's not for me to say how people will react to

"tactical campaigning errors." Every individual has agency to react as they react. This thread is about NARAL's statement. Apparently, some members and leaders of that organization noted the error and have reacted by speaking about it and praising Clinton.

I have nothing to do with what anyone at NARAL says. There is a campaign going on right now. Errors in campaigns may have consequences, as has been demonstrated on many occasions.

I did not read anything into this. I'm simply discussing the OP.

[PotatoChip]

73. He mentions it in nearly every stump speech, and at every rally I've ever seen.

The quotes below are just a few of them.

1) “At rallies in Vermont and across the country this weekend, our message was clear. We are not going back. Not only are we not going to retreat on women's rights, we are going to expand them. We are going forward, not backward.”

2) “I have a lifetime 100% pro-choice voting record. I understand that people disagree on this issue, but I believe that it is a woman's decision, it's a difficult decision, but it's a decision between her and her physician. I will do everything that I can in 50 states of this country to make sure that women have a choice.”

3) "Not only are we going to expand policies that advance gender equality, we are going to fight to pass the long-overdue Equal Rights Amendment and vigorously defend the critical laws and programs which protect all working people in our country.

4) “The current attempt to discredit Planned Parenthood is part of a long-term smear campaign by people who want to deny women in this country the right to control their own bodies.”

5) “The right wing in this country is waging a war against women, and let me be very clear, it is not a war that we are going to allow them to win.”

6) “Today's House vote to defund Planned Parenthood is nothing more than a right-wing attack against women. Part of a war we won't let them win.”

7) “We are going to fight to pass the long over-due Equal Rights Amendment.”

8) “We aren't going back. Not only are we not going to retreat on women's rights, we're going to expand them. We are going forward, not backward.”

9) “We are not going back. We are not returning to the days of back-room abortions, when countless women died or were maimed. The decision about abortion must remain a decision for the woman, her family and a physician to make, not the government.”

http://www.betterworld.net/quotes/bernie/bernie41.htm

[cali]

20. He has addressed it and he's been a strong ally.

Mostly they're being stupid and shortsighted. If their hope is to diminish his support among young women, which is much stronger than Hillary's, they'll fail. And though Bernie probably won't win the nomination, he'll return to the Senate with greatly increased power and influence- on the level of Warren.

This is a guy who has a 100% rating from NARAL.


And I think you, a man, lecturing women about the vital importance of reproductive rights, is mansplaining at its ugliest.

You know jack about having an abortion. No man can.

[MineralMan]

24. The leadership of NARAL is "being stupid and shortsighted?"

Really. That seems like an odd thing to say. I certainly admit that I can know nothing about having an abortion. Nor have I ever impregnated any woman. I am, however, 100% for full reproductive rights of all women. I always have been.

[cali]

29. Yes, it's fine to endorse her. It's stupid to alienate millennials

Surely you can figure out why that is.

And great that you support abortion rights, but don't lecture women on how important those rights are to us. You seem clueless about why that's offensive.

[Autumn]

72. Yes they are "being stupid and shortsighted"

To attack a man who has stood with them 100% as Kaylie Hanson did goes well beyond stupid and shortsighted. I have no problem with NARAL endorsing hillary but she crossed the line when she lied about Bernie.

[angrychair]

32. Again

He mentioned women 12 times, more than anyone else. He talked about the importance of PP and the amazing work they do. He talked about his own lifetime rating with those organizations supporting women's rights and health. He talked about equal pay and social security benefits for women. As well as the difference his healthcare plan will make for everyone, including women.

Lastly, if that is so important, why not level the same criticism on Clinton? I went back through her entire part of the Town Hall transcript and found no mention of women's reproductive health rights. Again, she only said the word "women" 4 times during the Town Hall, none of they about reproductive health care.

[moondust]

11. On a side note,

Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood is in Iowa campaigning for Hillary (as of last night on Chris Hayes). I think it's one thing to endorse somebody but something else to travel quite a distance to actively campaign for somebody when many of your clients no doubt endorse another candidate. And when you're so close to an establishment candidate that you're traveling quite a distance to actively campaign for them, you might as well go ahead and consider yourself part of the establishment.

[synergie]

42. That's kind of what endorsing a candidate actually means.

[moondust]

48. Not really.

Many newspapers and other organizations endorse candidates all the time but do you see their employees out actively campaigning for their endorsees?

I suspect Cecile Richards may be using the opportunity to advance her own career, possibly in politics like her mother. That may be the case for some other endorsers as well.

[synergie]

52. I see, you seem to think that Planned Parenthood is a newspaper and must thus

behave like one of them? The unions who endorse and many other organizations only have valuable endorsements because their members and leaders do the actual work of canvassing etc.

That's why you see all the other people and organizations and their leaders on the stump, it works that way for Bernie too.

I suspect that you don't understand much about Cecille Richards nor do you understand much about how endorsements work or who is out there doing the active campaigning in general on any side.

Cecile Richards is already high profile, she doesn't need this to advance her career or to go into politics like her mom, and stating such uneducated things, selectively about the people who endorsed a candidate you don't like really doesn't make for a very good argument, and it's rather lame for a conspiracy theory as well.

Why don't you turn your attention to those who have not endorsed, but are still pretending to be unbiased journalists who are using the opportunity to advance their own career by blatantly supporting your favorite candidate?

Endorsers are doing their job, the journalists are not.

[moondust]

61. IGNORED.

[synergie]

65. Ignoring incovenient facts and clinging to your ignorance about how things work

in reality is not a rational way to live life. I'm sorry that you choose to dig into false beliefs and conspiracy theories that suit your emotions better than simple facts do. This does not change how endorsements work, nor does it excuse attacking NARAL, PP, and Cecile Richards based upon that lack of understanding.

[Maedhros]

12. NARAL cut a deal with the Clinton Campaign.

In exchange for access and support, they agreed to attack Sanders. A standard Inside-the-Beltway business practice. In this particular case, NARAL is placing identity politics ahead of the best interests of women.

[MineralMan]

25. Really? You have evidence for that?

I'd love to see it. I'll wait here.

[LanternWaste]

39. I'd allege as much too if my bias depended on it.

I'd allege as much too if my bias depended on it. Granted, we'd both dramatically fail to provide objective evidence to support our creative and imaginative allegations; but if asked to, all we need to do is scream "third way!" and then quickly change the subject.

Buffoonery can only be met with more buffoonery.

[synergie]

49. It seems that you're putting identity politics ahead of telling the truth.

[Maedhros]

70. What about my post is not true?

Does quid pro quo not apply to the endorsements of national political organizations?

[BainsBane]

59. Yeah, the deal is they share a commitment to women's reproductive rights

You can't reason with people like that.

[frazzled]

17. Here's the issue

And it goes back to arguments we were having at the very beginning of this race.

Sure, Bernie Sanders (usually) raises his hand to vote. That's a necessary but not sufficient condition. It's what we expect of any Democrat (or Democrat-for-the-purposes-of-running candidate). And he pays the expected, nominal lip-service to issues of race or gender when they arise. He says the right things when they become issues in the campaign (or when there is a vote in Congress). But he does not go far enough. Sanders's singular focus on banks and the "billionaire class" as the answer to any issue misses huge swaths of reality for the majority of Americans. Getting rid of banks and billionaires will not help African American job seekers get interviews (or god forbid, actual job offers). It won't end being stopped by police (even if they are world famous tennis stars or politicians). It won't address inequality in primary education. It won't reverse states' incursions into women's ability to make their own reproductive decisions--decisions that are HUGELY significant to their ability to secure their economic futures.

Hillary Clinton has seen inequality in broader terms, and she even addressed that well last night, defining inequality to include issues beyond those narrowly focused on the financial sector. And she details a few of her actions that have gone beyond votes or speeches into actual action

I think it's fair to say that I have a 40-year record of going after inequality. And not only economic inequality: racial inequality, sexist inequality, homophobic inequality. The kinds of things that go after people to put them down and push them back.

So since I was a young lawyer my first job in the Children's Defense Fund, I took on the problem of juveniles in adult jails. What kind of inequality can you imagine that's worse than that, taking a child and putting them in with adult prisoners? And we went right after that to change that.

I went after schools that were being turned into private schools that were really there because they wanted to escape integration in the south. I went by myself down to Alabama to do investigations because again, inequality stalks our education system.

I was on the Legal Services Corporation. I chaired the board. Inequality's also about not being able to get a lawyer. You can't afford them. You can't stand up and have your voice heard and have your case adjudicated.

So I have a really long history of taking on all kinds of inequality. And when I went to Beijing in 1995 and said human rights were women's rights and women's rights were human rights that was a statement about inequality: economic inequality, education inequality, cultural inequality ... every kind of inequality you can imagine.

Now, when you focus just narrowly on economic inequality, I've also been in that fight. I was in that fight during my husband's administration. And let's remember what happened there.

At the end of eight years, we not only had 23 million new jobs, what was most important is incomes grew for everybody, not just those at the top, more people were lifted out of poverty, incomes rose, in the middle and working people.


http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2016/01/26/cnn-iowa-democratic-presidential-town-hall-rush-transcript/

[jeff47]

31. Do you have any examples that don't just involve Clinton speaking?

Perhaps actually doing something? Say, introducing legislation to push back against TRAP laws? Trying to get more reproductive care into Medicaid?

Statements are easy. Easier than votes. What hard work has she done?

[angrychair]

46. Really?

Haven't people like you beat a hole in that drumhead yet? This"Bernie is stuck on a single issue" falsehood is so last month.

Bernie has spoken, often and with great passion, on LGBTQ rights, women's rights and the rights of people of color. Not just his words but in his deeds. PP, NARAL, Human Rights Campaign, NAACP all give him a 100% rating, he was the co-founder of the Progressive Cacus in Congress.

He mentioned the word "women" 12 times during his portion of the Town hall. Sanders programs, enacted as written, will do more to advance women, especially disenfranchised women, access to healthcare than any other in modern history. It matters and it is a big deal.

[Z_California]

55. Your premise that Sanders is a one-issue candidate

is false. He has an extensive record on all of the issues in word and deed and to suggest otherwise is intellectually dishonest (also known as dishonest).

[SidDithers]

81. +1...nt

Sid

[Larkspur]

30. National NARAL execs are the same bozos who endorsed Joe Lieberman

over Ned Lamont in 2006; whereas, the CT NARAL and CT Planned Parenthood presidents endorse Lamont that year. National PP also endorsed Lieberman in 2006, so yeah PP and NARAL are part of the corrupt Democratic establishment.

[m-lekktor]

57. thanks for that info. Human Rights Campaign did the same thing, endorsed Lieberman over Lamont! nt

[Lordquinton]

37. Your last line

"The attack is very disingenuous and a deeply unfair characterization of Sanders based on his words, his actions, his existing policy statements and his historical record."

Sums up the campaign against Sanders from all angles.

[m-lekktor]

43. NARAL is hearing about it on facebook!

I just looked at their page! the women aren't pleased!

https://www.facebook.com/naralprochoiceamerica/photos/a.10150700055509321.417714.80562389320/10153832279404321/?type=3&theater

[azurnoir]

45. I took a look and no they do not like NARAL's choice one bit

[senz]

56. Love the blowback from NARAL supporters against this.

Not all prochoice women are as unthinking as the current NARAL leaders, and now NARAL knows it.

[BainsBane]

60. "The women"

You mean all "the women" who agree Bernie's career matters more than their basic reproductive rights?

I'm sure NARAL is well familiar with the tactic, given the PP, the Human Rights Council, one progressive legislator after another and the mothers of Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice, and James Garner, and many dozens of unions have all experienced it.

The Bernie supporters enemies list is extensive, and includes virtually every individual and organization who champions social justice, equal rights, and working-class organizations have all experienced it. Woe be to those who imagine their democratic rights matter in this current climate where a group of internet thugs are certain that none of the lives, concerns, or interests of anyone who fails to endorse Bernie could possibly matter compared to their own impenetrable sense of self-entitlement. That they share that enemies list with the GOP is itself illuminating.

When supporters make clear organizations like PP and NARAL are their enemies, they provide absolute evidence that those organizations were right to endorse another candidate.

I will now prepare myself for another series of posting linking to pro-life organizations celebrating attacks on organizations that champion women's equal rights. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=992133

[MeNMyVolt]

68. Thank you for this. Needed to be said.

[R B Garr]

71. Thank you. This is awesome!

And so true.

[Number23]

74. Oh, how you nailed it.

I laugh every time I see someone crowing about how someone's Facebook/Twitter has been shat on because they dared to not support Sanders.

But reading your post and your accurate characterization of the people who engage in this kind of crap as "internet thugs," I realize it's alot more pitiful than funny. And it's incredibly counter productive as well.

That they share that enemies list with the GOP is itself illuminating.

Ain't it though?

[NastyRiffraff]

85. Bingo!

Absolutely righteous posting! Thank you.

[mountain grammy]

44. NARAL will support Bernie Sanders when he's our Democratic nominee..

they all will. I've always supported NARAL and always will. I disagree with this choice, but they'll be with me soon enough.

[Proserpina]

64. And at that point, who will care?

Their support will not stand out and be counted. That kind of Me-too-ism is cowardly.

[passiveporcupine]

50. But it will be picked up and repeated.

[jfern]

51. 100% NARAL rating? Not good enough, Bernie!

[BainsBane]

58. What do you expect when a candidate calls PP "establishment"

and some of his supporters link to and support pro-lifers in working to defend the only organization that provides reproductive healthcare in great swaths of the country? I heard the dog whistles loud and clear, and so did NARAL. Attacks on PP, the Human Rights Council, and the mothers of Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and James Garner, in conjunction with the attacks on Black Lives Matter last summer--all convince me that I cannot count on Sanders or many of his supporters to defend my rights.

Sanders is politically astute at tapping into white rage, especially white male rage. He's made clear he is working to attract those voters. http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/27/politics/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-middle-class-voters/ That is his right, but you can't expect the rest of us not to take that as a clear message.

NARAL is absolutely right. He does not stand with me, and I do not stand with him.

[angrychair]

69. Interesting

You've created as divisive and disingenuous reply as you can and managed indignant fortitude in your stance to never support Sanders.

I use words like "divisive" and "disingenuous" since you reference a link as your source and have either never read it or deliberately misrepresented it.

From your own source link:
"What I'm suggesting is that what Trump has done with some success has taken that anger, taken those fears -- which are legitimate -- and converted them into anger against Mexicans, anger against Muslims," Sanders said.

But while he made the case that both candidates had tapped into a similar frustration, Sanders was careful to underline the different approach he offered -- a sharp contrast to Trump's often controversial or demeaning rhetorical spasms.

"For his working class and middle class support," Sanders said, "we can make the case that if we really want to address the issues that people are concerned about...we need policies that bring us together, that take on the greed of Wall Street the greed of corporate America and create a middle class that works for all of us rather than an economy that works just for a few."

Not sure where you got "white male rage" but terminology like that is unbefitting someone that has worked their entire life for the healthcare and rights for women, LGBTQ and people of color and has a 100% rating from PP, NARAL, Human Rights Campaign and the NAACP and was a co-founder of the progressive caucus. He has fought for these things for decades, not just words but action.

[Arazi]

77. NARAL spokeswoman who spoke against Bernie is also a DNC Regional Press Secretary

doesnt get anymore a part of the "establishment" than that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511072779

[BainsBane]

89. What's more establishment than that?

Serving in the House and Senate for 25 years.

[Arazi]

90. It's Establishment politics

A NARAL spokeswoman is also a DNC spokeswoman.

Establishment politics writ large.

There's a difference. Sorry it's too subtle for you

[SidDithers]

82. +1...nt

Sid

[Hekate]

83. AMEN, BainesBane. Bullseye.

[Bobbie Jo]

87. Amen, sister.

Well said.

[NYC Liberal]

88. SPOT ON. Sanders and his fans continue to attack progressive orgs that do not fall into lockstep

with their very narrow worldview.

It is absolutely disgusting to witness.

I just wonder what the next Progressive organization will be thrown under the Sanders bus.

[jillan]

62. All I can think about is when Susan Komen got political & went after PP Women were outraged.

Komen is still trying to recover. They ended up losing support & donations from the very women they were there to help.

This is so similar.
I'm 60 - I have been an advocate for women's rights ever since my college days. I always donate to PP because they were there for me when I needed them. When my daughter was a teenager I told her that I didn't want to know when she became sexually active but I made her promise me she would go to Planned Parenthood first & I told her where they were located. I told her they would take care of her.... That's how much I believe in them.

Now they did this. To attack a democratic candidate that has a 100% rating from their organization? This is not right. It's infuriating when the GOP uses women's healthcare as a political talking point. This is not much different! I would hope that Hillary supporters would agree.

Our breasts and vaginas are NOT political.
Shame on NARAL & PP!!

[Proserpina]

63. NARAL went off the rails quite some time ago

around Reagan, I think. They had a collective stroke or something. Have been speaking gibberish since.

[AzDar]

67. Short-sighted and STUPID.

Bernie!!

[George II]

75. How was that "vicious and nasty"?

So now when anyone or any organization comments on Sanders' statements it's "vicious and nasty"?

How is that compared to the stuff that has been thrown at Hillary Clinton over the last three decades? Or what's been said about her on this very site the last year or so?

By the way, one's level of support support fir women isn't measured by the number of times a person uses the word "women".

[angrychair]

79. First

We are talking specifically about the NARAL spokeperson response to Bernie Sanders part of last night's town hall in Iowa. It has nothing to do with what some teapublican operative said about HRC 10 years ago. You will get no arguement from me that HRC has faced far more criticism than most and most undeserved.

The spokesperson's comments were vicious and nasty because the insinuation is either he doesn't care or doesn't care 'enough' about women's health to talk about it 'enough' during the Town Hall.
As I have stated several times in my OP and responses, Sanders talked about the importance of PP and the amazing work they do. He talked about his own lifetime rating with those organizations supporting women's rights and health. He talked about equal pay and social security benefits for women. As well as the difference his healthcare plan will make for everyone, including women and most importantly disenfranchised women who face significant healthcare challenges.

Sanders has spoken, often and with great passion, on LGBTQ rights, women's rights and the rights of people of color. He has for years. It is reflected not just in his words but in his deeds. PP, NARAL, Human Rights Campaign and the NAACP all give him a 100% rating, he was the co-founder of the Progressive Cacus in Congress.

His credibility and dedication to the causes of women's healthcare and pay equity are above reproach.

Lastly, I never stated his use of the word "women" was a measure of his commitment to women's healthcare, only to point out that, in the specific case of this town hall, his comments were heavily focused on answering questions related to conerns that focused on women.

Sanders actions, policy statements and voting record speak to that.

[merrily]

76. Unnecessary is the nicest possible word for it.

According to another post here, the person who attacked was a DNC official.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1072779

They are supposed to be neutral.

Her question made it about endorsements.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1072075

Sanders has had a 100% rating from NARAL throughout his career and has been to Hillary's left on choice, at least at times. (Sorry. I am only human. I have only so much time and energy. Therefore, I don't keep up with the details and timing of all the evolutions on one issue after another.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511072034#post5

This reeks.

[Zorra]

78. Seems wealthy private interests are controlling a lot of non-profit

organizations these days.

The HRC is another example.

[angrychair]

84. I get that postatomic

I understand her comments and very aware of Sanders' statements as well.

In the case of this NARAL spokesperson statement, it goes further than minor criticism on a specific policy issue or this particular event. It attacks his commitment to women's healthcare, which is a ridiculous attack that is unwarranted and crude.

Bernie has spoken, often and with great passion, on LGBTQ rights, women's rights and the rights of people of color. Not just his words but in his deeds. PP, NARAL, Human Rights Campaign, NAACP all give him a 100% rating, he was the co-founder of the Progressive Cacus in Congress. He has fought the fight of women's reproductive rights and access to healthcare and pay equity for decades.
Sanders programs, enacted as written, will do more to advance women, especially disenfranchised women, access to healthcare than any other in modern history.

To your last comment, I get it but not what I'm doing or what I have ever done.

[Cary]

86. You don't see why, because you don't want to see

And that is unfortunate.