Display:


Re: and NARAL (2.00 / 4)

You're being disingenuous.  Diaries like Alegre's, and there are others on Taylor Marsh and all the usual places are rallying cries for people to stop supporting NARAL.  If you don't believe me, go into Alegre's diary and count the number of people who say they're not going to support NARAL anymore.

This diary is a needed antidote to that.


by Jordache on Thu May 15, 2008 at 10:59:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NAREL had no business (2.00 / 1)

He certainly can win the general, but by that rationale they had no business endorsing a candidate who cannot even win the primary.

NARAL is a pro-choice organization.  Obama has a 100% pro-choice record.  This is just sour grapes.


by Jordache on Thu May 15, 2008 at 11:16:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NAREL had no business (2.00 / 1)

Only MyDD Clinton supporters know that. But then again you knew Clinton would win.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Thu May 15, 2008 at 11:16:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NAREL had no business (none / 0)

So womens rights groups can only support women?  Are you trying to tell me that no men support womens rights?


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:03:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]