Why Women's Orgs Must Become Non-Partisan

Why Women's Orgs Must Become Non-Partisan

Amy Siskind
President and Co-Founder of The New Agenda
Posted: November 8, 2009 02:29 PM

After yet another evening of being thrown under the bus, it is high time that women's organizations drastically change their approach!

Women in the Democratic Party have been taken for granted and have lost their bargaining power as a result. Ladies, this is business, plain and simple, and what it comes down to this: We can no longer work with only one political party: that is "speaking." Women's organizations must learn to "negotiate" and establish dialogues with all political parties. Party exclusivity is why women's organizations are failing in their missions to protect their members and their members' interests. Women's organizations must become non-partisan immediately.

Last night, our Congress, under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi primarily and President Obama secondarily, approved a health care bill that does not include funding for abortion. What did they gain for this concession? Nothing. Still, 39 blue dog Democrats voted against the bill. There is no better indication of how little bargaining power organizations such as NARAL and Planned Parenthood currently have thanks to their efforts with one party.

The organizations and religious groups that are against abortion have amply made their case with the Democratic leaders. The DNC Chair is anti-choice. Half our country does not know whether President Obama is pro-choice.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amy-siskind/why-womens-orgs-must-beco_b_349970.html&cp

recognizes women's automony? :shrug:

and we already know what we got from the Democrats. Just look under the bus and see the women and the LGBTs under it.

As long as we are taken for granted, we will get the betrayals on DOMA, DADT, and anti-abortion rights legislation like this much ballyhooed health care "reform."

I agree that Democrats have too much of an incentive to triangulate on these issues when it's convenient for them to do so. But part of the reason they do that is because women and LGBTs will continue to support them over the Republicans who are worse. Certainly there has to be some solution to change that situation. Trying to get support from Republicans is not a solution, however.

support only those candidates with a proven track record in defending one's rights.

Please explain how Palin defends anyone's rights.

So now you're a PUMA. Good luck with your plans to vote Republican in 2012. We'll see how far that gets you.

NARAL and Planned Parenthood: Ineffectiveness Anti-Choice Democrats Can Rely On

Jane Hamsher.Founder, FireDogLake.com
Posted: November 7, 2009 03:10 PM

Democrats in Congress have just proudly signed a deal with the Catholic bishops which allows a bunch of old men who have spent the better part of the last century avoiding their own sexual issues to dictate access to abortion services in the House health care bill.

No tax dollars were going to go to pay for abortions, mind you, but now insurance companies that participate in the exchange can't even cover them, thanks to Democrat Bart Stupak. FDL's Jon Walker explains how it works:

If the insurance companies offering plans on the exchange are not allowed to turn down any costumers, it means no basic insurance plan on the exchange could cover abortion. There would be no way to prevent that at least one of the plan’s costumer would be be using affordability tax credits to help purchase the plan. So the effect is no plan sold on the exchange could offer abortion coverage as part of its basic package.

But this isn't news. On July 1, Stupak wrote a letter signed by 19 Democrats saying they would do just what they're doing right now -- holding the bill hostage. And what did NARAL and Planned Parenthood do? Well, they released a lot of statements echoing the President's contention that the bill contained no abortion funding. But that was never Stupak's objection.

The floor of the House is now filled with ostensibly pro-choice Democrats like Rosa DeLauro and Anna Eshoo who don't seem to have noticed there's a problem here (Eshoo was probabaly too busy selling breast cancer survivors out to PhRMA). Honorary veal pen President Jan Schakowsky says, and I kid you not, "this is a great day for women."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/naral-and-planned-parenth_b_349596.html&cp

That Obama was not pro-choice enough and therefor not worth voting for, yet Sarah Palin was worth voting for because women's groups should endorse female politicians even if they are anti-choice.

Her bullshit site is just a front for PUMAs.

the conservatives are nutcases. There was 60 Dems who voted for that amendment with Repubs. The majority of Dems in Congress are not like that.

At least Sarah's site is linking to her work.

http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/10/amy-siskind-palin-inspires-girls-to.html

"When Sarah Palin entered the national political scene as John McCain's V.P. candidate, my daughter read that the Alaskan had played point guard on her state-champion high school team. My daughter, who plays point guard on her seventh-grade travel team, excitedly and proudly cut out a picture of Palin and put it on her locker with the comment, "Palin, You Rock My World!"

The importance of role models. Ugh, yes, role models. The message my daughter got from point-guard Palin was: My possibilities include the chance of running the world. And here's the message all our daughters are getting from watching Obama play hoops with the guys: It's still a man's world."

I am looking up some more of those who are part of the New Agenda.

http://thenewagenda.net/about-us/board-of-directors/

When I see the words bipartisanship my ears perk up and I say uh oh.

I think there is some worth in the argument that NARAL should be more independent from the DNC, etc, but Suskind seems more pissed that NARAL endorsed Obama over Clinton, not that NARAL endorsed somebody and therefor gets too close to a potential administration.

Edit: Just answered my own question. And the answer is an unequivocal YES.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=8705446

they should primary all 60 or so Dems who voted for Stupid-Pak. Breaking away from the Dem party, thereby ensuring teabagger control of the government, will do much more harm than good.

Get this shit out of here.

So now some DU'ers hate Obama so much they're signing up to be Palin Pod People.

Geniuses.

:rofl:


missed that one!

One woman to another, "Go fuck yourself, Siskind."

If she thinks Palin is going to magically see the light on feminism she has real problems. I wish people wouldn't post New Agenda stuff here, it's crank literature that just makes actual feminism look bad. :(