NOW To Ted Kennedy On His Obama Endorsement: And After All We’ve Done For You

They just feel so used and…..dirty:

ALBANY, NY — January 28 — Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard. Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few. Women have buried their anger that his support for the compromises in No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bogus drug benefit brought us the passage of these flawed bills. We have thanked him for his ardent support of many civil rights bills, BUT women are always waiting in the wings.
And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment! He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman president, just not “this” one). “They” are Howard Dean and Jim Dean (Yup! That’s Howard’s brother) who run DFA (that’s the group and list from the Dean campaign that we women helped start and grow). They are Alternet, Progressive Democrats of America, democrats.com, Kucinich lovers and all the other groups that take women’s money, say they’ll do feminist and women’s rights issues one of these days, and conveniently forget to mention women and children when they talk about poverty or human needs or America’s future or whatever.
This latest move by Kennedy, is so telling about the status of and respect for women’s rights, women’s voices, women’s equality, women’s authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation – to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first woman after centuries of men who “know what’s best for us.”

The emphasis on the second paragraph is mine. I love that part. Don’t they sound like the jilted girlfriend?
I’m sorry, but I just can’t take an organization like NOW seriously until I see press releases like this one expressing their outrage about women being stoned to death, beaten, genital mutilation of women, and women generally being treated as property and beasts of burden by the Religion of Peace.
Until then they have NO credibility in my book.
Thanks to the Jawa Report for this one.
UPDATE:
And for some more NOW fun we can go to this press release by New York State NOW President Marcia Pappas. She calls the endorsement of Hillary by the likes of Ted Kennedy a “psychological gang bang.”
I’m not making that up. Here’s the final paragraph of the release:

Think about the legacy we’ll leave behind when we support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. Let’s put a stop to the psychological “gang banging” of women and girls. Let’s stand up and be counted by way of the hard-won votes we can now cast!

Read the whole thing. You just can’t make up stuff like this.

Tags:


«
»
  • http://Array robert108

    They would probably campaign against her, unless she supported all their pet issues, like abortion, etc. The so-called “feminists” are simply Marxists, and really don’t give a crap about women; that’s just their cover.

  • Rosemary Storaska

    As a non-member of NOW I do represent the mainstream American woman 45+ who will SHIFT in major numbers to McCain upon any nomination of Obama by the Democratic Party. Women no longer feel accepted in a party where one of its major players ignores all the “hard working” merits of a female peer in order to pursue his own agenda in using a BLACK man. WOMEN are not reacting as the “jilted girlfriend”; but rather, we react to what Senator Ted Kennedy stands for both in terms of his “old guard” and his ineffective history in the Senate with respect those things women hold dear–education, poverty and children/women’s issues. We have the hindsight to understand just what level of advisement this Obama/Kennedy package will mean? We have lived alongside this man and his attitude toward women exhibited by his own personal actions. At Bush’s final State of the Union Obama’s body language indicated more than his excuses for ignoring Hillary? It seems some things have already rubbed off on a younger, more inexperienced Kennedy would be?

  • laydownSally

    Pilgrim,

    Please don’t construe this to think I in anyway support this blather.

    But I actually feel sorry for her.

    Reading that press release, you realize that this is a (still little) tormented and traumatized girl.

    I know many feminists, most very moderate and intelligent women, who feel they are not given the same opportunities as their male counterparts.

    Some have legitimate issues.

    But Marcia needs help.

  • Mickey

    Now now ladies, just get in uncle Teddys car and lets take a ride.

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    I don’t see what everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over? Kennedy can vote for who he wants…

  • laydownSally

    Rosemary,

    You may be a non-paying member of NOW, but your views are most certainly in lock-step with the organization.

    Does the “45+” denote your age? Or is it representative of your intelligence quotient?

    You may be surprised at the lack of shock that we have that you would (aghast) switch your alligence from the Democratic nominee to the pro-democratic candidate McCain, in order to stifle the campaign of a black man.

    We have the hindsight to understand just what level of advisement this Obama/Kennedy package will mean?

    Is this rhetorical? If not, the answer is: NO.

    We have lived alongside this man and his attitude toward women exhibited by his own personal actions.

    This alone alludes to your dysfunctionality; you for years ally yourself to an abuser, then support a candidate whose husband is a serial abuser.

    All the while, pretending to care about the plight of women.

  • laydownSally

    G,

    You are right that there is precious little difference between the Democratic rivals.

    Or, for that matter, between them and John McCain.

    The point is however, that endorsements are not entitled; they are given as a way of accepting a candidates views on issues.

    NOWs’ rejection of the Kennedy endorsement is only, as Lik said, “identity politics”.

  • dirl126

    I second R108 on his comment about how the left works to divide men and women.

    In ‘specially’ selecting women and fighting for their rights it also serves a purpose similar to global warming. Their method: just make a big deal out of sophist topics to draw numbers. (Reminiscent of Satan)

    It appears… that in choosing women and talking about equality that they are combining the two sexes
    But in effect, they could not isolate women anymore.

    Any idea of love can not arise between the two sexes when women is constantly instilled with the ethos that she must

    fight for her rights

    .

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    Lastly if anything If I was part of the now gang I wouldn’t want ted kennedy’s endorsement anyways the man should be behind bars for killing that woman in a car accident down on the cape some years back.

  • Bat One

    The rift between the Kennedy gang and the Clintons has been a well-publicized fact of American political life for years and years. Mr. Bush slyly took full advantage of that fact by having Kennedy write most of the No Child Left Behind education bill.

    The NOW crowd apparently thinks that among Democrats principle trumps political expediency. They could not be more wrong… or more stupid.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    Geeze, Rosemary. Your comment is a lesson in identity politics.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    What do 200,000 abused women have in common?

    199,999 of them have not ridden in Senator Kennedy’s car?

  • http://manoffireandlight.blog.co.uk/ ManofFireandLight

    Would these feminists be up in arms if it were a woman running for the Republican candidacy?

  • Jack

    Seems that rather than a “psychological gang bang” the Kennedy men and women have performed a m`enage `a trois on Hillary

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    I would like to tell me why Hillary is entitle to all these endorsements while Barrack Hussein Obama is not?
    if anything the logic is flawed, one person one vote. Actually philospophically speaking there is no difference between Edwards, Obama or Hillary. So what difference does it make?

  • robert108

    This is a perfect illustration of the “divide and conquer” strategy of the far left. What could be more effective than dividing men from women?

  • http://manoffireandlight.blog.co.uk/ ManofFireandLight

    Who’d have thought it? Racist feminists.

    The advancement of civil rights has been intrinsically linked to the both the womens rights and race rights campaigns over the last sixty or so years. Oh the irony!

  • http://ewebsmith.com/ ews48

    Little do they know that Ted, by choosing between the lesser of two evils, is actually doing them a favor this time, not that either one of them cares about anyone but themselves.

  • laydownSally

    G,

    No one said differently.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/Anna/ Anna

    We won’t sit idly by and watch, while you gang bang one of us.”

    A gang bang is with a consenting party. :roll:

  • http://www.fileitunder.com/ Fiu’s Rob B.

    With NOW two X chromosomes matter more than anything else, unless they are aborting them.

  • Marty

    What do 200,000 abused women have in common?

    Hmmm?

    Well????

    I’ll tell you what they have in common — they DON’T FRIKKIN LISTEN that’s what!
    :P

    (just taking my turn in the psy-gang-bang)

  • Jeugenen

    SEN. KENNEDY’S ENDORSEMENT OF OBAMA IS A HARD SLAP TO THE FACES OF HILLARY RODHAM AND WILLIAM JEFFERSON, SUCH AS ONLY A KENNEDY CAN DELIVER.

    IS THIS THE THUNDERBOLT THAT SEALS THEIR DOOM; THAT HASTENS JOURNEY TO HELLSGATE?

  • robert108

    MikeA: As one who has tracked American feminism over its entire existence, their pronouncement is right in line with their thinking. No surprise at all. Having no sense of humor, they are incapable of parody.

  • pparets

    NOW has a very short memory. Mary Jo Kopechne was Kennedy’s first victim and Hillary is just his latest.

    NOW is one of the sleeziest interest groups in the nation. Their silence on the abuse of women under Islamic Sharia Law is only the most blatant example of their hypocracy.

  • MikeAdamson

    When I first read the NOW-NY release I assumed it was a parody. Turns out it’s not…bizarre is the only description I can think of.

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    We’ve all witnessed scenarios where, on the playground little girls are being taunted by little boys while both girls and boys stand idle, afraid to speak up or even cheering. Or, in the workplace males tease young and older female co-workers; make obscene gestures, inappropriate comments, laughing and expecting (often correctly) that everyone will join in. Then there was that movie where Jodie Foster portrayed the true story of woman who was ganged raped in a bar while others looked on and encouraged the realization. Still others pretended the rape didn’t happen. In short, gang raping of women is commonplace in our culture both physically and metaphorically.

    That is as disgraceful piece of work, all Ted did was say that he was supporting Barrack Hussein Obama.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development