NOW endoresment for Moseley Braun official

Today, on Women's Equality Day, the National Organization for Women's Political Action Committee (NOW) and the National Women's Political Caucus announced their endorsements of former Ambassador and Senator Carol Moseley Braun for President of the United States. According to NOW President Kim Gandy, "After considering the positions and past records of all the candidates lined up to challenge George W. Bush, one candidate stood above the rest for her lifetime commitment to feminist ideals and her 25-year record fighting for the rights of women at the local, state, national and international levels." She went on to say that Moseley Braun will serve "as an inspiration to women and girls of all ages who believe that a woman truly can become President of the United States."

more here

That's really pathetic.

"After considering the positions and past records of all the candidates" didn't you understand?

In fact there was a lot of debate, and several of the candidates made a good impression on NOW members, but after considersing the positions and past records of all the candidates, they chose to endorse Braun, because of her "lifetime commitment to feminist ideals and her 25-year record fighting for the rights of women at the local, state, national and international levels."

I'm on the emailling list and I got the announcement.

"Washington, DC - On August 17, 2003, the National Women's Political Caucus, for the first time in it's 32-year history, endorsed a presidential candidate, Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun. NWPC is very proud of Carol Moseley Braun's candidacy and campaign, and our decision to endorse her.

We believe Carol Moseley Braun through her experience as a state representative, Assistant U.S. Attorney, County Executive, U.S. Senator, and Ambassador is uniquely qualified to lead our nation by virtue of experience, work ethic and commitment to the principles of equality for all Americans.

Ambassador Braun's positions on the issues important to the National Women's Political Caucus are not only identical to NWPC's, but also Braun has a solid legislative record of fighting for the issues important to us. Including pay equity, reproductive choice, and access to childcare and elder care among many others. She has walked the walk as well as talked the talk.

Moreover, Carol Moseley Braun cared enough about NWPC's support to make her case directly to our convention delegates and Executive Board.

The mission of the National Women's Political Caucus is to win political equity for women at every level of government. We have worked for more than three decades to achieve that goal, and we look forward to President Carol Moseley Braun taking the "Men Only" sign off the doors to the White House."

:dem: :kick:

She went on to say that Moseley Braun will serve "as an inspiration to women and girls of all ages who believe that a woman truly can become President of the United States."

I say cheers to that!

:toast:

<>

I just made a directory called DrFunkenstein for all your pics.

Something tells me I'm not the first.

Endorsements are supposed to be political tools, a means of displaying and therefore wielding clout, and by endorsing a candidate with less chance of winning than *Al Sharpton* -- that is, by making an entirely useless endorsement -- NOW is indicating that it either has no clout or has no brain.

but that's one of the drawbacks of missing out on the early stages of the primary. Braun has worked hard for this endorsement. She deserves it. She will do a good job of advancing NOW's interests.

Would you care to talk issues? Or does your candidate even have enough a record and platform to merit a debate?

Since we're defining terms, btw, try looking up "bathetic."

but I was thin-skinned, perhaps overly defensive, and certainly caustic. For that, I'm sorry.

They are probably endorsing her to get Sharpton out of the race and also to raise the profile of women's issues. They probably know she isn't going to win the nomination. They are trying to advance women and improve her showing so that maybe future women with better chances run.

For those who were hoping she would drop out, it seems unlikely now.

It seems kind of wasted to me. Please don't hurt me. I know that is not the proper feminist thing to say and I know somebody is going to jump in here and tell me that Mosely Braun has as much chance of getting elected as the next guy....ooops. But the reality is that she is a novelty candidate. No matter how competent, nobody expects a black woman to be nominated, much less elected. That is a shame, blah blah blah, but it is the truth.

I'll remind you that only one of the are 9 (or 10 counting Clark) candidates can actually win the nomination. There are few logical reasons to believe that Moseley Braun's prospects aren't as good as any of the other candidates. And, as I'm sure you are aware, there are other political gains to be made besides winning the nomination. If you don't want to argue your point, and would rather just make your assertions and not answer for them, that's your prerogative, naturally. However, since you've posted your opinion, I hope you will understand my desire to challenge your assumptions and defend a contrary point of view.

As I see it you presented two lines of argument, the logically primary one being that as a Black woman Braun can't be elected. It is true that some polling suggests that about a tenth of the electorate say they won't vote for a woman for POTUS. And about the same number say they won't vote for a Black. I don't have any data handy to back me up, but if I had to guess, I'd reckon a lot of those bigots are the same bigots, that is, there's a high correlation between sexist bigots and racist bigots, so that the actual number of voters who claim to be prejudiced is not near 20%, but is closer to 10%. It is my sincerest hope, though I have no absolute proof of this, that most avowed bigots are already aligned with the Republican Party, so that even if we're talking about avowed bigots in an open primary, what we're talking about is more in the order of a minor obstacle rather than like Alpine peaks.

That doesn't account for the number of voters who vote out of bigotry, but wouldn't explicitly say so. That group I'd call swayable, because their inconsitency suggests either a discomfort with their prejudices or a lack of confidence in their vote. How much of an obstacle swaying that group will be depends on how Braun handles her message, and how the campaign develops. So far, I'd say--well, it's a little early still to definitively assess, but on the plus side she hasn't stuck her foot in her mouth (imo) and there's something to be said for that.

Now, the second line of argument assumes that Braun is unelectable and then discounts the political value of endorsing her anyway. That's essentially the argument Dean made before NOW when he said of himself that he was "from the electable wing of the Democratic Party." A lot of NOW delegates there were impressed with Dean, and they made that argument in supporting him. But when people examined the records and positions of the candidates, and took into account the poltical and social value of Carol's feminist message, that a woman is every bit as qualified to lead as a man, they went with Braun.

What if they had gone with Dean because of his argument about electability? Or any of the other contenders who sought their support? Consider for a moment the implications of that. For one thing, it's by no means certain that any of the guys will recieve the nomination. In the event that they passed over Braun and went with one of the men, and that man didn't win the nomination, or the process went into a brokered convention, and Braun was still in the running, where would they be then? They'd have egg on their faces for sure, because they'd be no better off than had they endorsed Braun, and they'd look like hypocrits to boot.

(There's an argument about affirmative action in there, I'll leave it for another time.)

Therefore, it seems illogical to criticize NOW for endorsing Braun, and not, for instance, the Teamsters for endorsing Gephardt, or the South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association for endorsing Kerry. or any of the many organizations, political leaders and concerned citizens who endorse candidates in the primary.

On edit: Typo

You are correct that NOW should back whoever they believe in most. It just seems to me that if they had put that support behind somebody like, say, Kucinich, who is teetering on the edge of being a factor, they might have thrown their weight a little more to the point. If Dean, the current front runner and the man who currently looks most likely to win the nomination, works ok for them, then they haven't lost a thing by backing Braun. But if he doesn't and another candidate who stands more of a chance of taking the nomination from Dean than Braun could have benefitted from their backing, then TO ME, it is a waste of their clout.

As for her having an equal chance with everybody else running; whatever. That's PC and all, but you have to know it just isn't so.

One of them stems from lesbian activists and pro-sex feminists who believed that the national leadership of the feminist movement was attempting to silence them, and that the strategy of narrowly focusing on electing pro-choice candidates was not sufficient to achieve the goals of liberation, gender equality and everything the movement was about.

The other uses comes from attacks of feminist and leftist academics on college campuses that started in the 1980's. In general the term was popularized by the same people who attacked any smart, assertive woman as a "feminazi." People like Camille Paglia bridge the two uses, and there's the strange case of Bill Mahar, who seems to sincerely believe that he's all about the freedom of expression. Generally speaking, however, the complaint against political correctness is not progressive and is ideologically to the right of liberalism.

Therefore, as for your claims about what is so, I'm afraid your hedging belies an ideological orientation that would tend to bias your view. I repsectfully suggest that you have an ideological perspective, that it biases your view of the way things are, and although I wouldn't dismiss or try to hush your view because it is ideologically informed, I would have it discussed openly as a viewpoint before agreeing on the way things really are.

As to your other concerns, I believe I answered those already, but, whatever.

"Today, Women's Equality Day, the National Organization for Women's Political Action Committee is proud to announce our endorsement of former Ambassador and Senator Carol Moseley Braun for president of the United States. Both the National Women's Political Caucus and the National Congress of Black Women join us in endorsing.

"With our endorsement comes access to NOW's hundreds of thousands of contributing members and over 500 chapters across the country -- and the support of thousands of volunteer activists who are dedicated to supporting feminist candidates with their contributions and volunteer time.

"To receive NOW/PAC's endorsement, a candidate must demonstrate an uncompromising commitment to the entire range of women's rights issues. After considering the positions and past records of all the candidates lined up to challenge George W. Bush, one candidate stood above the rest for her lifetime commitment to feminist ideals and her 25-year record fighting for the rights of women at the local, state, national and international levels. We are particularly excited when out of a field of strong progressive candidates, the strongest feminist candidate is also a woman.

"Carol Moseley Braun has never wavered nor bowed to political pressure in her commitment to social and economic justice for all. As the first African American woman in the U.S. Senate, and the only African American senator during her tenure, she stood up for civil rights and women's equity time and time again.

"NOW/PAC's top political priority is sending Bush back to Texas, and NOW's Drive for Equality -- a campaign to identify, inform, register and mobilize women to participate in the political process -- will help by increasing the women's vote. We look forward to working with Carol Moseley Braun to advance that goal, because she speaks to a large portion of the U.S. population, particularly women, who were not inspired to get out and vote in 2000.

"For over 25 years, NOW/PAC has worked tirelessly for women to gain equal representation in our government. Moseley Braun's candidacy is a prime example of what feminists strive for -- women moving up through all levels of political office. We are proud to have this strong and accomplished woman running for the highest office in the land -- and serving as an inspiration to women and girls of all ages who believe that a woman truly can become president of the United States."

I like her and want her back in power somewhere in Washington, but I'm not impressed with her campaign.

Gov. Howard Dean has my full support because he's earned it with his strong support of women's rights in the past and to this very day, listening to all the factions of the Democratic base and paying them respect by attending their conventions and personally commerating their important historical achievements, and engineering a campaign that excites people with HOPE that WE can change this country and return to our nation's ideals. I've met Howard Dean twice and he is every bit a gentleman and there is not a whiff of male chauvanism or machismo in his bones.

nt

nt

Braun is black. Sharpton is black. Sharpton has a very controverisal record.

Non sequiturs. I'm asking for a reason.

On edit: Spelling

It may give her a few more weeks, maybe allow her to stay in unti Iowa or New Hampshire. But she still is going nowhere.

I'm disappointed.

That's where that was taken, huh?

Anyway, it's early to speculate. How do you feel about Dean as Secretary of Health and Human Services?

She's a good woman.

Mosleyy-Braun is an excellent speaker and is really taking this race to a new level.
She may be polling low, but that is now reason to discredit her. She usually ends up in the same ranks as Kucinich, Graham, Sharpton, and most recently Edwards and for a black woman that is an incredibly achievement!

NOW knows what they are doing with this endorsement. They are standing behind the canidate they like the most, that is what they should do. Some people on this thread sound worse than DLCmisters who they bitch about saying Liberman has the only chance of winning for similair reasons. Remember Dean was at the bottom of the polls a few weeks ago geniuses.

NOW sent out a strong message supporting a woman canidate who can excite other women and african americans to think about running such ambitious campaigns. Those 2 groups are some of the Dems most active and reliable groups and are usually forgot about, Braun is reminding us.

Good Luck to her! I'm hoping she'll be on the VP ticket.

Of all the candidates, she's exactly the right one to have got those endorsements. I would like them to have gone to Dennis, but Carol deserves them more.

Well done Carol! Brava!