Surely this was a tough decision for NOW...I mean, they 'very, very rarely endorse a presidential candidate', right? Hmmm. Then why do they have a POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE? In fact, take a look at THIS. It's NOW's endorsement of Hillary Rodham Clinton for President. No surprise, right? Take a look at the date on the press release. March 28, 2007. Yes. That says 2007. That's pretty much immediately after Billary announced her presidential bid. Didn't take long for them to turn their back on their stated political neutrality.
And why did they support her? Well, look at their own words:
Gathered here today at the historic home of Alice Paul and the National Woman's Party, surrounded by great women of the past, we are celebrating this Women's History Month by both honoring the past and looking to the future. We truly are living in historic times, days our foremothers knew would come, as long as new generations of women's rights activists — and voters — carried on their work. And carry it on we have, with U.S. women enjoying freedoms and opportunities that our great grandmothers only dreamed of. Today, the first woman speaker presides over the U.S. House of Representatives, and Harvard University has its first woman president. Firsts are important, because they open doors for those who follow — but our real goal is to have every first followed by seconds and thirds and fourths, until having women in leadership is so common that it isn't even remarkable any longer...I love this. This is the fallout from the Palin VP selection that I was waiting for. I've been waiting for the time when all of the feminist groups extolling the virtues of absolute equality, nay, sameness of gender, will have to decide whether they are promoting women or liberalism.
NOW PAC's "Make History With Hillary," campaign will organize and energize women's rights supporters across the country — urging women and men across this nation to stand up and say "I'm Ready" for a woman president.
In its support of the Obamanation, NOW has firmly squared itself in the liberalism over women camp. Why? Because NOW is not about 'now'. It's about 'then'. Which 'then'? JANUARY 23, 1973, that's when. Palin is pro-woman. NOW is pro-abortion. If they were really about 'choice', then they'd have to respect Palin's intellectual 'choice' that abortion is murder. The only 'choice' NOW is really interested in is retaining the 'choice' for women (and more correctly, men) to live as promiscuously as they want, because they're always the 'choice' to eliminate the proof of those 'choices'. The reason they don't get that explicit is because if they did, they'd sound like A FREAKY CAMILLE PAGLIA, outwardly recognizing abortion as murder, and recognizing others have the right to opinions, but just flat out ignoring all reason publically.
All NOW is really interested in is promoting the pro-abort, anti-real woman agenda. And now they've been put into a position where this is painfully obvious. Well, to those of us listening.