Emily's List Backing Anti-Semitic, Homophobic Campaign???

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 20:01


What would you say of a politician running for Congress who failed denounce something like this attacking her opponent:

Typical Republican, right?  Well, almost.  Typical Harold Ford protege, actually. A corporate lawyer after his own heart.

The minister who put it out--who lives well outside the district--works with a group that's in league with the Traditional Values Coalition.  And Emily's List is supporting her, more on the basis of her ovaries than her anything else--given her non-existent pro-choice credentials.

In 2006, local blogger David Holt reported: "When asked about abortion, she said the she doesn't support abortion but that the government should stay out of it."

That's an Emily's List candidate nowadays???

In sharp contrast, her incumbent opponent, Rep. Steven Cohen ranks in the TOP 25 according to Progressive Punch.

The attacks are motivated by Cohen's race, his religion, and the fact that he supports hate crime protections for lesbians and gays.  His enemies clearly have no place in the Democratic Party.  But Emily's List is in bed with them!  And Black Agenda Report--in the person of no-nonsense Executive Editor Glen Ford--is all over this, as you'll see on the flip.

Paul Rosenberg :: Emily's List Backing Anti-Semitic, Homophobic Campaign???
As the Memphis Commercial-Appeal explained earlier this year:

Race-baiting in the 9th
No comment from Tinker: The worst kind of rhetoric didn't get a reaction from the candidate who could benefit.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

What does Nikki Tinker think about anti-Semitic literature being circulated that might help her unseat 9th District Congressman Steve Cohen in the Democratic primary next August?

A fair question, which Tinker declined to answer this week after a flier stating that "Steve Cohen and the Jews Hate Jesus" began circulating in Memphis.

The question goes to the character of the woman who wants to represent the 9th District, and 9th District voters deserve an answer. But Tinker declined to return a phone call about the flier.

A spokesperson did deny any involvement.  But Cohen has long suspected her behind-the-scenes involvement in fomenting attacks on him by conservative black clergy (he defeated her in the Democratic primary in 2006.)

For example consider this story from WMC-TV, last September:

"We are people of God who ought to be compassionate," says Rev. Dwight Montgomery.

But critical is how he describes the behavior of some fellow ministers during a meeting Tuesday night between Congressman Steve Cohen and the Memphis Baptist Ministerial Association.

"I felt rather uncomfortable at the time, in relation to what was happening," says Montgomery. "And I must admit, I felt for him," he adds.

Instead of discussing a federal hate crimes bill, the sanctuary filled with accusations that a white man cannot adequately represent a primarily black district.

"I left the meeting felling rather down," Cohen says by phone from New Orleans. "That I was not in a place that the Lord was in," he adds.

Cohen suspects the ambush may have been orchestrated by the Nikki Tinker campaign. She came in second to Cohen in '06 and is running against him again in '08.

"She has been to the minister's association several times soliciting their support," says Coehn. "And through her airlines (Pinnacle Airlines), she's given them and members of their church free airplane rides around the city," he claims.

We went to Pinnacle to try and track down Tinker on the job. Reporter Jason Miles also stopped by her Harbor Town home. Phone calls to a Washington DC based spokesman were not returned.

Black Agenda Report--in the person of no-nonsense Executive Editor Glen Ford--is all over this, going way beyond the orchestrated attacks:

The unfinished African American journey out of Jim Crow and its narrow political mindset has reached a critical juncture in Memphis, Tennessee. There, in the city's 60 percent Black Ninth Congressional District, a first-term white incumbent whose voting record would place him solidly in the political bosom of the Congressional Black Caucus, is challenged by a young Black female corporate operative - an acolyte of Harold Ford, Jr., the worst Black congressman in modern history.

Nikki Tinker is backed by the full flatulence and awesome gluttony of the MemphisMemphisTinkerExplains Baptist Ministerial Association, greasy-fingered clergymen who have descended into homophobia so foul and raw it must embarrass the White Christian Right whose behavior they mimic. These politician-pastors oppose federal Hate Crime legislation because it includes protections based on sexual orientation, while claiming moral and racial authority over the secular lives of Memphis Blacks.

It is a perfect storm of corruption: Nikki Tinker, a physically attractive but intellectually vapid lawyer for regional boss-man Northwest Airlink/Pinnacle Airlines - whose principal duty is to keep unions in check - backed by a gang of gay-baiting preachers who never saw a Republican Faith-Based Initiative check they wouldn't cash. If elected, Tinker can be expected to act as a surrogate for her sponsor, Harold Ford, Jr., the Bush-loving former representative of the district, unsuccessful candidate for U.S. Senate, and now nominal chairman of the corporatist Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).

Glen Ford is on fire, as per usual.  Go ahead, read the whole thing.  You'll be better for it.

And then there's this, from egalia at the Tennessee Guerilla Women blog, back in 2006:

Emily's List vs. Pro-Choice White Males II


What follows is a clarification of the central point of my earlier, admittedly hastily written, rant about the attack on pro-choice State Senator Steve Cohen by Emily's List.

The central point being: Emily's List should spend its considerable resources supporting pro-choice women who are actually running against anti-choice candidates. Believe it or not, it is not hard to find anti-choice candidates in this state!

Instead, Emily's List is alienating this state's progressives by throwing its support behind newcomer Nikki Tinker and against a pro- choice man with a 24 year record as a progressive state senator.

Meanwhile I still cannot find a word about Nikki Tinker's pro-choice stance on her website. Compare that with Steve Cohen's plainly stated, and documented, pro-choice position.

If Steve Cohen were a woman, Emily's List would be behind him 100%. Instead, Emily is attacking this state's best and most viable progressive candidate for Congress.

If Emily claims a victory in next week's primary, progressives in this state will call it a loss. And we will be seriously thanking Emily for that loss.

I have tossed this together rather quickly, after seeing this diary frontpaged at Dkos.  So pardon me that it's a little disjointed.  One things' for certain. But I will be following up, I promise you.

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Emily's List Backing Anti-Semitic, Homophobic Campaign??? | 40 comments
Why make this about EMILY's List (4.00 / 1)
On a day that was all about unity isn't it a little over the top to make EMILY's List the issue in this race?  And the headline just a little inflammatory?  Since no, EMILY's List is not backing an anti-semitic campaign since that flyer did not come  from the Tinker campaign.

I will not try and sell Tinker as a progressive as I know her politics are far more moderate then mine.  But as an EMILY's LIst member, I take exception with your headline and find it offensive.  

I'm a member because of our support for women like Donna Edwards and Hilda Solis.  Because we send in-kind campaign staff to women like Jenny Oropeza in a State Senate run against George Nakano in 2006 - how many organizations do that, let alone a national one.  Because we supported Karen Bass in a four way primary and sent her a staff person during GOTV in 2004.  And because EMILY's List was the first organization (I think, maybe second) to endorse Debra Bowen for Secretary of State when no one, NO ONE else gave her a chance.  I could go on and on, and name the countless other progressive women that EMILY's List has supported.  Like any organization, sometimes, the candidates EMILY's List supports aren't the most progressive.  But I think your post, especially the headline is a gross mischaracterization of EMILY's List and their support for Tinker.

I'm proud of the work EMILY's List does and support their efforts to leverage the power of women as candidates, activists and voters.

Because it is coming from people .. (4.00 / 4)
in league with her .. and she refuses to denounce it .. that's why .. do you know anything about the Ford political machine in Memphis? .. and how pissed they are at Cohen .. because he won a fair election for a seat that they felt entitled to
[ Parent ]
Why not? (4.00 / 2)
It's no different than asking why various environmental groups go around legitimizing token Republicans.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both
[ Parent ]
What Are They Doing There In The First Place??? (4.00 / 7)
Why headline Emily's List?  Three reasons. One, it was featured on the DKos diary that first caught my attention.  Two, nothing I read in the process of putting this together disuaded me from thinking that this was the big story. Three, there was no good reason for Emily's List to be there in the first place.

The bottom line is, I used to think that Emily's List was great, but lately, the more I hear, the less I like.  They don't seem to do a whole lot when it comes to fighting on the front lines.  Instead they do a lot of infighting against other progressive forces--and in this case they are way over the line fighting on the side of a corrupt political machine that's more allied with the GOP than it is with grassroots Dems.

The examples you give are, quite frankly, less than overhwelming for those who know something about them.  I like Jenny Oropeza. She was my coucilwoman before moving up to the state legislature.  But George Nakano is not the enemy of progressive pro-choice women, and I fail to see why folks giving money to organization under that brand should trying to defeat him.

Karen Bass has decades of experience as a community organizer.  She is legendary.  And Nate Holden, her principle opponent, was a superannuated fool.  Did Emily's List help?  I'm sure it did.  And I'm equally sure she would have won handily without them.

Debra Bowen--ditto.  She was known to be planning a run for Secretary of State for a very long time before she announced.  She has been authoring legislation dealing with issues feeding into the problems with electronic voting since her first term in the Assembly.  Her involvement as a State Senator was second to none.  To pretend that she was dependent on Emily's List, a waif with no one to help her, is incredibly insulting.  Oh, and the only primary opponent she faced was also a woman.  Debra was far superior--but not on the basis that Emily's List supposedly exists for.  She was far superior as a classic progressive in the Russ Feingold mold.

The point is, Emily's List was right to back Donna Edwards.  That was precisely the sort of primary fight they ought to be involved in.  But the Tinker endorsement entirely negates both the rationale and the goodwill of the Edwards fight.  "Stupid" does not even begin to cover it. "Criminal" is more like it.

The homophobia and anti-Semitism is way too late to be the last straw in this case.  The last straw was the moment Emily's List decided to endorse.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Hm, sometimes people read what they want to (0.00 / 0)
I suspected that your headline was more about a deeper problem that you have with EMILY's List and therefor made sense that it did not matter that you were inflammatory.

And clearly you're free to dislike EMILY's List. That's your choice.  But nowhere in my post did I say that EMILY's List is the reason all those women won, or that they were dependent on EMILY's List -- did I miss that in my own post?  Although, I would say that I'm willing to bet that all those women would say that EMILY's List played a unique role - as a matter of fact since I've heard them all say something to that extent - I'm positive they would.

And also, I don't see anywhere in the EMILY's List mission statement that they should only target the "enemies of progressive pro-choice women", so actually supporting and helping Jenny Oropeza is exactly what they should be doing -- supporting a pro-choice Democratic woman in an open safe Democratic State Senate seat in a state with a dwindling number of women serving in the State Senate - um yeah, that's exactly what I hope they would be doing.

My point was, that despite what "you hear", I know firsthand that EMILY's List does alot on the front lines.  "Alot of infighting with other progressives", again - a bit exaggerated no?

Anyhoo, as I stated in my previous post and as you reaffirmed - you have a bigger bone to pick with EMILY's LIst.  I get it. I just take issue with the fact that you're willing to exploit an anti-semitic attack not connected to EMILY's List in anyway to further your own agenda.

That's actually something I expect from Republicans.

[ Parent ]
I'm Just Responding To What You Said (4.00 / 2)
My point was, that despite what "you hear", I know firsthand that EMILY's List does alot on the front lines.  "Alot of infighting with other progressives", again - a bit exaggerated no?

You were the one who gave us the examples, none of which involved running against a Dana Rohrabacher, for example.  Now, I fully expect that Emily's List is supporting Debbie Cook, and it's good that they do so.  What's bad is that this is really the exception in everything they do, and yet they misleadingly push the impression that it's the rule.

But it's not so much that I have a bone to pick with Emily's List.  It's with the whole corrupt system that they once seemed to be opposed to, but are now so obviously a part of.

And for folks who haven't focused on it before, this incident should serve as a wakeup call.  You play fast and loose long enough and this is the inevitable result.

The claim that the "anti-semitic attack [is] not connected to EMILY's List in anyway" simply overlooks the long-festering homophobic politics involved.  It's hardly a surrprise that homophobic black ministers should turn out to be anti-Semitic as well.  That's the way bigotry works.  Buy one, get one free.  We all know it's true of homophobic white ministers.  Why should these bigots be any different?

These are the sorts of questions that political professionals are supposed to ask.  It's called "vetting," or "due diligence" or "having the sense you were born with."  And if they don't do it, then yes, they are responsible.

"Shucks, it just happened!" is actually something I expect from Republicans.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
What are YOU doing about it? (4.00 / 1)
I think you've been skillful in generalizing the argument about Emily's List. But the point here is that Emily's List is supporting a candidate who condones anti-Semitic campaign materials. Emily's List should stop it. If you contribute to Emily's List, what are you doing to persuade the organization to withdraw its support? If the answer is nothing, what does that make you?
[ Parent ]
They certainly shouldn't have endorsed this woman... however (4.00 / 1)
I'm not sure if its fair to attribute this horrible display of anti-Semitism to Emily's List. I do think its fair to take them to task for endorsing this person.

After reading this diary I did a little bit of digging around. Funny that you named Herald Ford as an example of this kind of tactic. According to 2008 Race Tracker, Herald Ford Jr.'s brother is actually running in this exact same race against Cohen as well! He's running as an independent. Like I said I don't know much about this race or if he is still running or what the hell he is up to but I wonder if maybe he is the one who is really behind this anti-Semite Rev. George Brooks letter. That letter is absolutely disgusting by the way. He manages to be grossly anti-Semitic and subtly anti-Black in the same pamphlet, implying something along the lines of "we are going to have to suck this up and vote for the black woman because at least shes not a Jew."

Absolutely disgusting.  

End this war. Stop John McCain. Cindy McCain is filthy rich.

[ Parent ]
OK so I realize Rev. George Brooks is actually black but... (0.00 / 0)
that pamphlet/letter/whatever certainly seems like he is implying that they are going to have to hold their nose while they vote for her. Maybe its because she is female and he is only sexist and I was misreading it.

End this war. Stop John McCain. Cindy McCain is filthy rich.
[ Parent ]
What You're Missing Is (4.00 / 3)
that Tinker has a history with the conservative black ministers involved.  So there's good reason to suspect her.  And if she wasn't involved, then why not come right out and say it?

The best face I can put on it is that she's counting on the bigot vote and doesn't want to alienate it.  The worst face is that she's in it up to her eyeballs.

Either way, what's Emily's List doing within a 100 miles of this?  Don't they have anti-choice candidates to defeat anywhere in the US? Or is it just my imagination that such creatures still exist?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I agree with you about Emily's List. Thats why I gave you +4. They deserve to be badmouthed. (4.00 / 3)
This endorsement doesn't make any sense if both candidates are pro-choice, it is just anti-Semitic, anti-encombant (not always bad), and anti-Male. I wish Emily's List would pay more attention to who they endorse in the primaries and make sure they only endorse against anti-choice candidates.

Maybe Tinker has this history. But seeing that Herold Ford Jr.'s brother was running in this contest as an independent, I can't help but wonder if maybe this church originally endorsed him but then moved to Tinker after it was obvious he wasn't a contender and had no chance to win this race. It wouldn't surprise me one bit, judging from the "tone" of that letter. I suppose I could look this up and know for sure, but I'd rather speculate wildly. ;)

Anyways good diary and I agree 100% that Emily's List is in the wrong here, I just don't want to go so far as to call them anti-Semites, since that isn't a label I like to use loosely.  

End this war. Stop John McCain. Cindy McCain is filthy rich.

[ Parent ]
What's not fair? (4.00 / 2)
I agree with most of your post. But if Emily's List is endorsing a candidate who accepts supporting arguments that are "absolutely disgusting," as you say, shouldn't the organization change course? Shouldn't it try to persuade the candidate to behave more respectably? If it fails in that, shouldn't it disendorse?

I'm now calling on Emily's List to do one or the other. I'm asking everyone not to give another penny to this organization until it sets itself right.

[ Parent ]
Emily's List (0.00 / 0)
I just stopped all my support to the DNC etc.  I will only give to Emily's list.  I am tired of you guys using my ovaries or my daughter's to force me to vote for another mediocre male.  

If you blackmail me with my ovaries I will only vote for ovaries.  You have to deal with that.  


[ Parent ]
Who's Blackmailing You??? (0.00 / 0)
I'm utterly mystified.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
I think what she means is... (0.00 / 0)
...an "inadequate blackmail."

'Mystifying' is an understatement.

Yeah I blog.

[ Parent ]
Too bad (4.00 / 1)
I guess you can empathize with only one human category. You have to deal with that.
[ Parent ]
This IS Insidious (0.00 / 0)
I have a feeling it is a microcosm of what lies ahead in this year's GE:  race, religion and sexism in all their varied permutations.  All that is needed to make this even more volatile is the injection of an Hispanic candidate to hammer home the growing perception that Blacks and Latinos are rival constituencies, doomed to be at odds. This story is valuable because there is so much here for reactionaries to exploit.

 

Some perspective (4.00 / 1)
In 2006, local blogger David Holt reported: "When asked about abortion, she said the she doesn't support abortion but that the government should stay out of it."

Let me start my saying I am a longtime member of the board of a prochoice orgainzation.  I always prefer prochoice candidates to be forthrightly prochoice....but the phrasing here of her position is typical of lots of prochoice candidates from John Kerry to Mario Cuomo to Geraldine Ferrarro ...who have taken the position that they personally are not pro abortion...but they are nevertheless prochoice...because they don't think it's the role of the government to make that decision for women.

Now the anti semitic flyers should be called out by the Cohen's opponent, Tinker...who I will assume, unless there is evidience,  has nothing to do with it...however if there is involvement that of course is reprehensible....and she should lose on that basis.

However the front page post at Daily Kos in terms of  how it framed the issue is a further sign to me of that blog's descent into closing its eyes to sexism.

The answer has to be sexism; he's a man. No other explanation can possibly make sense.

EMILY's List's mission statement is to elect prochoice women to federal office.  So supporting her falls within their mission.  And to call it sexism is to deny the validity of their mission.  It would be in the same category as if the front page of Daily Kos had decided that affirmative action was racist because it was too pro-black.

The post at Daily Kos was vile. Do I think Emily's List  had good reason to support her over him...I don't have enough evidence.  They have supported women against incumbents before.

I did not follow the race in 2006 until Steve won and then it was exciting becasue he when he went Vanderbilt he was friends with a good friend of mne.  He was a progressive....but maybe Emily just couldn't get over Steve Cohen likening Hillary Clinton to one of the most sexistly conceived  movie roles of all time...the murderous Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction.  I personally found that pretty unforgivable..Just how much of a male feminist can one be in your heart if that is your first unconscious reaction...but does that justify their support...
I don't know..What other evidence is there..  

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

Go Read The Black Agenda Report (4.00 / 3)
If you really need to be schooled about Harold Ford at this late date, then you not only need to read the Black Agenda Report story I linked to, you need to go through their entire archive on Harold Ford.  (BTW, Pam herself at Pam's House Blend is with me on this, too.) Here's some more of the story I linked to:

The white boy in the race, Rep. Steve Cohen, previously a long-time state legislator who lost to young Harold "The Prince" Ford in 1996 but triumphed against a crowded field ten years later while Ford was courting statewide redneck voters, should by all principled political rights keep the seat. Since his swearing-in in January of this year, Cohen has voted his Black district's interests as diligently as 23 of the 40 voting members of the Congressional Black Caucus, earning an 80 percent grade (a "B") on the CBC Monitor's latest Report Card. Six Black congresspersons scored lower than Cohen, eleven higher. In contrast, the CBC Monitor named Harold Ford, Jr. "Lawn Jockey Emeritus" for consistently ranking at the bottom of every Black congressional class he attended since the watchdog group began tracking votes in September, 2005. In fact, Ford veered sharply to the right in his second term, in 1998, which means Cohen is the best - and "Blackest" - congressman the Ninth District has had in nearly a decade, and as progressive a representative as most Blacks on Capitol Hill.

However, literally nobody but the CBC Monitor keeps methodical track of such things, so Cohen must resort to behavior that some might consider, pandering. He has issued a document called "Steve Cohen's Position on the Covenant with Black America"; applied to join the Congressional Black Caucus but withdrew after noting the resulting discomfort among CBC members; and takes every opportunity to ceremonially show allegiance to the majority of his constituents. But most importantly, he votes correctly most of the time, and is careful to display a range of issues-positions on his web site, to prove it.

Challenger Nikki Tinker is encouraged to believe she can be elected simply by displaying her melanin. Tinker's campaign web site doesn't even bother to put forward a single substantive position, but is instead laden with meaningless "Nikki's Promise" items such as:

"I will place my satellite office in a community where people rely heavily upon public transportation (for example either the Hickory Hill community...

"I want to perform economic development in these areas.  I have met with business leaders and expressed my dedication to helping to improve opportunity in these areas...

"Our children...need to know that we support them and that we have become successful not through professional sports, through rap music, nor through illegal activity."

The emptiness of Tinker's campaign literature is not due to a lack of proficiency with words. She is, after all, a lawyer - a corporate vice-president for "labor relations" for a right-to-work-state routed airline - the in-house executive in charge of suppressing excessive union activity. Tinker is well-trained in that regard. Previously, she worked at the union-hostile firm Ford & Harrison, which was honored this year by Chambers USA, "America's Leading Lawyers for Business." Such are Tinker's credentials for representing the people of the 8th poorest city in the nation.

Does that help make the picture any clearer?

I am well aware that many people hold a formally similar position to the one that Tinker expressed.  And it would certainly be acceptable to support her against a rabidly anti-choice candidate of either party.  But (a) that does not describe Cohen, who has strong support from pro-choice women in his district, and (b) one can formally hold those views, and still be a fierce advocate, but this is clearly not the case with Tinker, as she is not a fierce advoacate of anything except her own election.

Finally, even given their mandate, where is it written that they should prioritize getting rid of a man who has a strong record on their issue, and also on the issues of many of their progressive allies?  Where is the collegiality and movement-building percentage in that?  Do they have a mandate to be as narrowly self-serving as possible, on the theory that who needs allies, anyway?

Finally:

He was a progressive....but maybe Emily just couldn't get over Steve Cohen likening Hillary Clinton to one of the most sexistly conceived  movie roles of all time...the murderous Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction.  I personally found that pretty unforgivable..Just how much of a male feminist can one be in your heart if that is your first unconscious reaction...

Yeah, who ever uses hyperbole in political discourse?

I guess if you're going to put more weight on stupid things people say, rather than evil things they do, you really should be supporting the Harold Ford Machine.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Electing Pro choice Democratic women is Emily's List mission (0.00 / 0)
I think electing women to office is an inherent good in and of itself.

And one of the dilemnas of the women's movement has long been whether it is sufficient to support seemingly progressive and seemingly feminist men...so much so that women never get a chance to be elected.

In NY State, where I live, it has long been noted by women's organizations here that there are lots of progressive men in office.  But believe it or not, until Hillary Clinton there had been no statewide female public offical. And that in the liberal bastion of NY!

So to say that women should suck it up for a progressive man and not challenge him...is like saying never go after power for yourself..only for others.

Also remember that when you look at the membership of the Congressional Progressive Caucus...it is mostly minorities, women and Jewish men.  So when a women is running in a progressive district there will often be a man there with their claim in already.

I have to say I trust people's unconscious responses to be revealing re Steve cohen's outburst...But if you are asking me from what I have gleaned about Tinker...I do think the race seems more about her than the issues. However what I object to is the idea that female candidates must once more defer for the greater good...which oddly enough too often means leaving the boys in charge.  

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

[ Parent ]
The point is ... (4.00 / 3)
why are they wasting the money ... isn't it more important to take out Republicans first? .. wouldn't their money better be spent helping women like Debbie Cook(who would be taking a seat from a rabid wing nut)?
[ Parent ]
Defer for the greater good? Sucking up? (4.00 / 4)
How about sticking up for choice, you, know the so-called mission of EMILY's list?

Tinker says "the government should stay out of it." Just think about that for a minute. What does it mean when the government "stays out" of issues of civil rights? It means you don't get any. The government is our only guarantee of civil rights.

Tinker is not pro-choice, why is EMILY's List supporting her in her attempt to unseat a candidate who is?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Thanks, Sadie! (4.00 / 1)
This is 100% correct.  And it's what I realized as soon as I read her comment, but somehow I sort of lost my handle on it when challenged.  So thanks a million for getting me back on track!

How, exactly, does the government "stay out of it" when the issue is the reproductive rights of a minor?

And how does a purportedly "pro-choice" group not pick up on this "little" problem with their candidate?

The closer you look at this, the worse it gets.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I'm not sure of that one (0.00 / 0)
I don't know what Tinker's philosophy here, but if your underlying ideal is that the government should stay out of doctor-patient decisions, and abortive care is a quintessential doctor-patient decision, then I think her statement is consistent with a pro-choice philosophy.

Further, while we think of the government as the guarantor of rights, as Sadie put it, we should also remember that in a system of checks and balances, the government is designed to guarantee our rights especially from excesses of the government itself.  Putting it another way, there's a reason why so many of our Constitutional rights are derived from passages beginning with the phrase "Congress shall make no law...".  While we rely on the courts to preserve that protection, we're really relying on them to protect us from the rest of the government.

I'm not sold that this phrase is as damning as you think, though please tell me if I've got a glaring hole showing somewhere (the perils of blogging at 3:20 AM).

Yeah I blog.

[ Parent ]
It's Simpler Than You Think (0.00 / 0)
Yes, we all know (a) that government can trample on rights, (b) that restricting abortion rights is an example of that, and (c) that saying government should stay out of it is consistent with (a) and (b).

But the point is simply that that does not exhaust the subject, and parental notification laws are a prime example.  If government stays out of it, then all sorts of people will act in all sorts of ways and there will be no rights--just some teenagers who are luckier than others.  None of them will have rights.

That's what's wrong with Tinker's statement--aside from the fact that, reportedly, it had to be virtually dragged out of her.

She clearly hasn't thought much about it, and doesn't really care--or else she's simply mouthing the words to get the endorsement and the money, which appears to have been far and away the biggest chunk of money supporting her candidacy.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Still not sold (0.00 / 0)
Parental notification laws are, to me, a textbook example of the government inserting itself into the doctor-patient relationship.  It's a prime example of a legal barrier between the doctor and the patient needing care, and a great example of why the government shouldn't be trying to direct medical ethics instead of the AMA, which generally does a fine job on reproductive rights (and, with the possible exception of prescription drug marketing, on most other medical ethics issues).  

Putting it another way: without the government telling doctors that they have to notify parents about reproductive care, this barrier to treatment wouldn't exist at all.

So, again, I don't see that supporting governmental non-involvement is inherently a sign of weakness on choice.  And since I've gone fairly in-depth on the issue thus far (if anything, I think you'll agree, judging by your comment title, that I've over-thought it as opposed to under-thought it), I don't think you can claim a person arguing that position necessarily "hasn't thought much about it."  I think there's a legitimate argument to be made for non-involvement as a mechanism for protecting reproductive rights.

Yeah I blog.

[ Parent ]
Black Agenda Report (0.00 / 0)
If we are going to quotre BAR, it may be a good idea to know that they don't like Obama. They think he is not a good candidate for Blacks. They also this he is a Wall St Candidate
http://www.blackagendareport.c...

http://www.blackagendareport.c...

Well, They Have A Point (4.00 / 2)
And I've quoted them about it before, too.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
Single-issue advocacy groups are obsolete (4.00 / 4)
I had a friend, with whom I've since lost touch, who resigned a full-time, salaried position with the Arizona branch of Emily's list in disgust for their strong preference for primary candidates who were only progressive on the abortion issue -- pro-choice, but also pro-business, pro-war, anti-gay rights, anti-union, anti-environmentalist, etc. -- over actual progressive women in primary elections for the state legislature.  Apparently the thinking was "Arizona is a conservative state, therefore we must support pro-choice conservative women over pro-choice progressive women in primaries because the progressives will just lose," ignoring the character of the particular legislative districts involved, some of which were strongly progressive.  This was in Tucson, the western half of which falls into the congressional district of Raul Grijalva, rated by Progressive Punch in 2006 as the single most progressive member of the House of Representatives.  To hell with single-issue groups, they'll backstab the progressive movement in a red-hot minute and sell out any issue that isn't their own hobby-horse.  (And effectively sell out their own issues too, as with environmental groups that back moderate repugs who vote for a wing-nut repug leadership, or Emily's list backing a fundy business lawyer who may only be pretending to be pro-choice at all over a genuine pro-choice progressive.)

"A fantasy is not even a wish, much less an act.  There is no such thing as a culpable or shameful fantasy."  -----Lady Sally McGee
Again, just so we're consistent (0.00 / 0)
There is no "Arizona branch" of EMILY's List.  EMILY's List has no branches or state affiliates.  It is a national organization with one office in DC. There are however many groups modeled off of them who often but "List" in their name, I'm sure in some way to confuse people and add legitimacy to their fundraising efforts.  

But again, if the intent is to tarnish the name of EMILY's List I guess it doesn't matter if we're being accurate in our posts.

[ Parent ]
I just joined with Max (0.00 / 0)
 I will not vote for McCain, but only women will get my money.  By the way, Cohen is the Fatal Attraction guy?  Cool, I will send the woman some money beyond Emily's list.  


[ Parent ]
Yeah, Send Money To A Homophobic Anti-Union Corporate Tool (4.00 / 1)
That'll sure show them!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
Heh...if it teaches Cohen a lesson. (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Sure, Cut Off Your Head To Spite Your Face! (4.00 / 1)
Yeah! That's the ticket!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
I think the cacophenous outcry... (0.00 / 0)
...taught him a lesson.

I think contributing to Tinker will just encourage more bad behavior of a different (but at least equally pernicious) sort.

But hey, it's your money: give it to whomever you like.  (As a matter of fact, I have to start making tuition payments AND mortgage payments this fall...)

Yeah I blog.

[ Parent ]
Can You Clarify This, Please? (0.00 / 0)
CristinaU wrote:

There is no "Arizona branch" of EMILY's List.  EMILY's List has no branches or state affiliates.  It is a national organization with one office in DC.

Can you clarify?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Clarifying.. (0.00 / 0)
Hi Paul, not sure what you meant by clarify.  The post I was responding to posted a story about his friend that resigned from the Arizona branch of EMILY's List.  And while I am sure his friend resigned from an "EMILY's List"-like group it couldn't have been a branch of EL as they don't exist.  
[ Parent ]
Paul was responding to that same post... (4.00 / 1)
...not to you.

But from my understanding, as someone who's worked campaigns for EL-backed candidates, you are correct about there not being state affiliates (and if you are incorrect, someone owes our last campaign another PAC check!).

Yeah I blog.

[ Parent ]
JR's Right (0.00 / 0)
I was echoing you, asking for a clarification in light of what you wrote.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
Emily's List at the Crossroads (4.00 / 4)
The crucial point here is that Emily's List is supporting a candidate who will not disavow a flier claiming that "Jews hate Jesus." This flier is about more than an election; it reinforces an age-old way of misthinking that leads eventually to violence--against women as well as men. Emily's List needs to disendorse Tinker unless she changes course.
Emily's List Backing Anti-Semitic, Homophobic Campaign??? | 40 comments





Donate to Open Left




blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
USER MENU

QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox