A Point of Clarification

Recently I was part of a group of women who filmed public service announcements for an organization called Women's Voices. Women Vote. The goal of the PSA campaign is to encourage high voter turn-out amongst women, especially single women, 20 million of whom have been known to stay home on Election Day. It is an issue about which I am deeply passionate. However, there have been reports about WVWV which questioned the intention behind my PSA and which candidate I am endorsing for president. For the record, I am proudly supporting Senator Barack Obama.

The news reports came about because there was evidence that an individual or a small group of individuals affiliated with WVWV may have issued misleading robo-calls in North Carolina designed to suppress voter turnout in African American neighborhoods. I find these activities appalling and hope WVWV will immediately disassociate themselves from such individuals and denounce such actions.

I am not affiliated with WVWV in any way other than participating in this PSA campaign, and I debated whether to ask WVWV to pull my PSA from their website. In the end, I realized the message of the PSA is more important than the actions of some its members. Every woman, 18 or older, should exercise their right to vote for the candidate and the issues they believe in. As women, we are a powerful voting bloc. But that does not mean we will automatically align with female candidates.

My spot was set in a replica of the Oval Office and entitled "Who Do You Want in Here?" This was meant as a legitimate question, not to serve as an endorsement for a particular candidate. The PSA was meant to inspire women to vote regardless of their party or their position. The PSA, like me, is not pro-Clinton, but rather pro-women. And yes, you can be both.

Comments

[SCG]

Julia Louis-Dreyfus Thank You!

[Denni]

Thank you for your statement. I was devastated by the WVWV attempt to disenfranchise voters and the link between that organization and Sen. Clinton. I think there are a number of ways of turning out the female vote, but WVWV no longer is no longer a credible voice, for me.

[EddieMcWords]

Man, I used to have such a crush on Elaine Benes (sic). This just reaffirms it!

[LeonBNJ]

The negatives as to Hillary Clinton are not about her gender, but her politics and her ex-President husband's problem baggage. That's why I can't support her. While we have too few women in elective and appointed government positions, their numbers are slowly growing and they should be encouraged. Hopefully in the near future an independently successful woman without the baggage of HC will run for President and win and not just because she is a woman.

[Dorian]

When you think of all the trash out there on the Clintons, you have to truly admire how civil Obama has been. He's looking ahead to uniting the Democratic Party for November while all the Clintons are interested in is winning at any cost. But, believe me, if Hillary did steal the nomination, the Republicans would rip her to shreds in no time.

[Melkor]

You know, both Clinton and Obama supporters are to an extent guilty of identity politics. Both have aggressively militant followers who post on sites like these, lowering the level of discourse. But only ONE campaign is engaging in the dirty, Republican-style tactics. I support Obama, but if he had launched the kind of attacks at Clinton from the Far Right the way she is attacking him, my INTEGRITY wouldn't allow me to continue to back him. I've been on sites like these typing away in frustration for a long time when Karl Rove was using these types of machinations to sink ALL Democrats. So to see Clinton supporters either willfully ignoring what their candidate is doing or cynically cheering her on in doing it makes me sick.

[belief08]

AMEN!!!! I say the same thing, it like the have their rose colored glasses glued to their faces when it comes to the Clinton's. That's what scary about this whole election process. She is willing to use those type of tactics to get back into the WH. The voters are just a way to get back in and the Clinton's already had 2 terms and only eaked a miniscule of what could have been done within those 2 terms.

[DavidKC]

Julia, thank you for your comments. However, I have to say that it is hard to look at your PSA for WVWV and not conclude that your are encouraging women to vote for Hillary, particularly given the current political environment. Whether YOU meant it that way or not, I suspect that WVWV meant it to be a pro-Hillary piece from the start. There are many ways to encourage women to vote without urging them to put a woman in the White House.

There are many, many serious questions about WVWV's shady dealings and voter suppression tactics that have gone unanswered to date. Hopefully the current investigation by the North Carolina AGs office - and the other investigations that I hope will begin soon - will help hold the appropriate people accountable for trying to use WVWV to support Hillary Clinton's failed presidential bid.

WVWV's strong ties to Hillary Clinton are clear and indisputable. NPR uncovered many of these ties and detailed some of its illegal voter suppression tactics, as well and uncovering some serious conflict-o­f-interest issues that should be of particular interest to the IRS. Every time WVWV is called out for its voter suppression tactics, it apologizes for the "confusion" but then moves on to another state and does the exact same thing. The timing of its robocalls right before the NC primary are beyond suspicious, as are its many efforts to target robocalls to African Americans. More here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90114863

[deb233]

she should go back to TV - how could she not know that there is some effort of this group to be pro-clinton - oh Rev. Wright never said that stuff in front of Obama for 20 years - seems like an Obama play - just to be negative - why did she find it necessary to be negative toward Clinton - it is the obama uniter way

[Daly]

I agree, Perhaps Julia you were tricked? Worst part is if Obama even broches the subject the msm will twist it so that he is against women.

[Wanjiru]

...I wonder who'll be blogging here next...Newman?...


...ugh...



Obama 2008!


.

[Myshkin57]

I'm not big for the celebrity blogs, either, but she did have a legitimate need to clarify that she had nothing to do with the people who are behind those abhorrent robocalls.

[VisiteDeVoltaire]

There is one thing which has always confused me about the aspersions of sexism against Hillary Clinton. To the best of my understanding, Senator Clinton is a Corporatist, in other words she propagates a pro-corporate rights agenda, not pro-individual rights which is the exact opposite. I was not aware corporations had gender.

[Zanti]

Ohhhh, clever. And it took you how long to come up with this fairly fresh angle?

Bravo, bravo.

[dawlishgal]

HC and her supporters will stop at NOTHING. Jonathan Alter said last night that the gas tax thing is just pandering to the "low information" crowd....people who are too lazy to look into the details of anything and are terminally gullible. I am still AMAZED that blue collar workers in PA voted for Hillary after her and Bill's broken NAFTA promises to oppose it. And amazed at the feminists willing support of a candidate who slimed the young women who were her husband's philandering partners by calling them "stalkers" when she defended his behavior on national television. What have they learned from 50 years of feminism?

It is so discouraging to contemplate that our next president could be a race-baiting, corporate-favoring chronic liar. All because one group of Americans is so purposely gullible that they are open to the crapola spewed by the Clintons or McCain.

And it is hard to forgive the Huffpost writer who pulled Obama's "elitist" remark out of context, a nasty deed that encouraged the Clinton campaign to use it as a "reason" to vote against a black candidate.

[lizzytysh]

Dear Julia Louis-Dreyfuss ~

I'm hoping that you will also be reading the comments in response to your piece. Vote suppression is a VERY serious issue... and especially so in THIS election; as it was when GWB stole the elections.

It's encouraging to read your disclaimer and your personal position, as a recognizable celebrity, here on Huffington Post. Not everyone reads Huffington Post, however, and particularly perhaps those whose votes are in the process of an attempted misleading.

I feel it's imperative that you send your DISCLAIMER to ALL of the major newspapers in North Carolina. A "point" of clarification isn't just a "point" ~ the one-two punch of your PSA, followed by the robo calls, could have an irreversible, negative impact; especially when the presumption is that women belonging to the Women's group are de factor for Clinton. Your speaking out ~ VERY publicly ~ could be an essential inroad against that perception, as well as a PSA regarding those robo-calls.

It'll take a little more work on your part than writing and submitting one piece; but the stakes are high. Have you tried doing any phone banking yourself in North Carolina? I hope to hear that you're taking ownership of what you're saying in more ways than simply this great piece that you've written for here.


~ Elizabeth Bacon-Smith [Florida]

[SethBLiNK]

With all do respect, Ms. Bacon-Smith, aren't you practicing the same guilt-by-a­ssociation here that has been practiced against Ms. Louis-Dreyfuss' and your (and my) candidate.

She made the PSA. Infer from it what you will, but she has told us sincerely what her purpose was. She has made it clear that she is not only apalled by what some members of the organization are doing, but that she in fact supports the candidate whom it was saught to suppress.

Do you really think a PSA by a TV star urging people to vote (for whomever they choose) has the potential to be a destructive weapon.

If she chooses to do more, great. If not, that's okay too.

[SethBLiNK]

You're not supportingObama because he's got a few jerks supporting him? Millions of voters love Obama. Out of millions, there are going to be some jerks. Is that really why you are withholding your support?

[TexanJane]

To Lizzytysh (and Julia),

I think it a great idea to make this disclaimer VERY PUBLIC. For one thing, I'm not sure how many people are aware of the robo-calls and how despicable they are. Bloggers now know - but does the general public? I'm not so sure.

Perhaps by going public and shining a light on the mistaken info in the calls, you would be helping those targeted to better understand their rights.

Please do it , Julia..... time is of the essence...

[Dorian]

Obama has been downright civil to the Clintons. The Republicans have been salivating at the opportunity to go after the Clintons for just the reasons you outline. They would rip her to shreds.

[dadw5boys]

What good would Clintons opposing NAFTA have done with a Republican Congress??
He was lucky he got anything done to cut the $ 3 Trillion Dollars debt olde DRUG SMUGGLING IRAN/CONTRA LOVING REGEAN left in his wake.

[YenNguyen]

As a female, I'm in COMPLETE agreement with everything you said. Both Bill and Hill have been exploiting the vulnerable (gullible female and working class voters) for YEARS by loading them up on FEAR. They are no better than Bush/Cheney/Rove.

This is why education is so important. And to make a plug, Obama wants to provide a $4,000 credit for higher education. He clearly supports President Thomas Jefferson's viewpoint that "an informed citizenry is the bulwark of Democracy."

[lodipete]

When do Paris Hilton,Britney Spears,Lindsay Lohan and Myley Cyrus get to blog on this website?

[PeterTheChanter]

I know what you mean: they allow *you* to post responses to what the grown ups have to say...

[naschkatze]

I am impressed by Julia Louis-Dreyfuss coming out to make this statement, but I am also equally or more impressed by some the comments in reply, in particular the one by Elizabeth Bacon-Smith right above us. Ms. Louis-Dreyfuss, please heed the advice of Elizabeth Bacon-Smith and go further than limiting your apologia to the readers of Huffington-Post. You need to make as broad a clarification or rectification to the voters of North Carolina as you can within the next days. I accept that your anguish is genuine, but since that is the case, you must do everything you can in good conscience to offset the actions of the group which has abused your trust.

[Zanti]

When they learn to form words into sentences?

[oncesung]

Apparently you or someone from Women's Voices, Women Vote engages in this same after-the-fact apology EVERY TIME you folks have made the same phone calls in prior primary states. Thanks for your totally empty apology. Hey! Instead of any more apologies, I have an idea! How about stop making the robocalls? Wouldn't that be fair, democratic, decent, honest, legal and grownup? People like you make this one crappy world to live in.

[tsktsktsk]

Did she conveniently forget that fact? Or did she really not know that NC was not the first state in which WVWV engaged in their illegal and unethical tactics to confuse and possibly disenfranchise voters? Should I give her the benefit of the doubt? Hmmmm.... NO!

[on2them]

I'd like to know if Julia realize how many are on the board of WVWV and others who have direct ties to Clinton and donated generously to her campaign.

This is out and out a direct conflict of interest.

[VOTER]

HILLARY is the DEMS TITANIC!

She didn't have to be a mean- spirited divider. Women are supposed to nurture. Not HIllary.

Obama threatened her win so she went GOP negative.

Let just one reporter ask her the following question before Tuesday's primary:

"Senator Clinton will you please tell us about your good friend and supporter, Peter Paul?"

If the question is asked her campaign is over. Instead of letting the GOP ask her, shouldn't we?

EXPERIENCE:

Alexander Carlisle, Thomas Andrews, Edward Wilding and Lord Pirie - four highly intelligent

men with over 110 years of experience between them.

They designed the Titanic.

Hillary is the Democratic Party's Titanic.

ABANDONED SHIP!

VOTE FOR OBAMA AND WIN BACK THE WHITE HOUSE AND CONGRESS.

[nyboomer]

Hillary nurtured her daughter. Is she also obliged to nurture you? Who else?

[tsktsktsk]

She "nurtured her daughter"? How do you know that? You have some insight into their private lives the rest of us don't have? Her daughter has managed, thus far, to live a seemingly successful life and you immediately conclude from that HRC nurtured her?

[annawing]

You don't know that for a fact.

[VOTER]

I would never question Hillary's role as a mother.

However, our country needs nurturing by someone capable of

promoting and sustaining the growth and development of all citizens

and restoring our nation's reputation worldwide. That person is

Senator Obama.

[SouthpawSass]

I'm with "Old Christine" ... You don't have to be pro Clinton to be pro woman....

[rinpochet]

I am a woman and coujld never support Hillary.

Julie needs to do more as her face is out there on those ads that seem to support voting for Hillary. She should either ask them to be taken donw or at least speak out publicly against this.

That ad comes across as a 'vote Hillary' and and it will take more than an article in Huffpo to change that perception.

[richcpl]

You know, now that I think about it, I've always liked her.

[1Eco]

Julia. Very nice to find out that you value Obama. I do as well. I also understand the fact that the female VOTE in our nation is somehow lost on election day. HRC has as many lobbyist friends as McGain so I see very little difference in the two. She was also on the sidelines during the Bankruptcy bill Vote and that is simply to SAD for words. Thank you for your thoughtful blog on this most important issue and please do blog as often as possible. I have added you to my favorites list. I simply feel it is time for a change. Enough with the same two families running things for the last 16 years already.