Obama 'Present' Votes on Choice Don't Add Up
The above video comes from Barack Obama's official presidential website. It's meant as proof that his "present" votes on choice were the right thing to do and supported by Illinois NOW. However, the truth is quite different from what Lorna Brett is saying in the video. How do I know? Just today I've been trading emails with Bonnie Grabenhofer, IL NOW State President. She's pushing back hard on the outright misinformation in Obama's YouTube video, because what Brett is saying in it is evidently pure fabrication.
Below is part of the email Grabenhofer has sent out, which I received via email from readers. I have confirmed with Bonnie that she sent it. She's also very adamant about getting the truth out about Obama's "present" votes, which don't pass the smell test any more than Lorna Brett's video that was made on Obama's behalf.
I thought I'd take a moment to try to add some clarity to the anti-choice Present votes in IL.Lorna Brett was president of CNOW from 1996-1998. She was not president at the time we were lobbying on these bills. Five of those votes occurred in the 92nd General Assembly session in 2001. NOW records indicate that she hasn't been a member since 1999. She was not there when we were lobbying against these bills. She is using her very old affiliation with NOW to try to validate her criticism of Hillary Clinton.
Voting Present on those bills was a strategy that Illinois NOW did not support. We made it clear at the time that we disagreed with the strategy. We wanted legislators to take a stand against the awful anti-choice bills being put forth. Voting Present doesn't provide a platform from which to show leadership and say with conviction that we support a woman's right to choose and these bills are unacceptable.
The Present strategy was devised to give political cover to legislators in conservative districts. Barack Obama did not represent a conservative district; he could have voted No with very little negative consequence in his district.
- Bonnie Grabenhofer
IL NOW State President
Obama's "present" votes do not explain his willingness to provide cover for conservatives when he was in the Illinois senate, which is his record, at the expense of taking a stand on women's civil rights. Frankly, I could care less what rating Mr. Obama gets from Planned Parenthood or any other group. I care what Obama does when asked to take a stand.
Obama's actions do not match his talk, any more than the video he's been pushing tells the truth. That's because Obama's willingly to reach across the aisle and bring people together, while also offering cover to conservatives, trumped taking a stand on an issue critical to women's civil rights. His let's make a deal style belies the substance at the heart of this issue. It's anything but leadership.
Follow Taylor Marsh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/taylormarsh
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The problem is this will fall on deaf ears. Obama supporters hear but they don't listen. They look on him as the Second Coming. It's very scary.
Hum, who to believe? A current leader that supports Clinton or a past leader that supports Obama? Tough choice. I think I will still support hope over the hopebuster and think that maybe they are both bending the truth a little bit. The one thing I do know though is that Obama didn't vote to send us to an illegal war and hell I even knew that is exactly what Bush was going to do. Hillary equals bad leadership. She should have voted "present" at the very least and "NO" at the most!
Has "the women's movement" become a single-issue constituency like the evangelical republicans?
Can there be any doubt that Barack Obama is NOT pro-choice, especially when compared to ANY candidate offered by the Republicans?
I take the man at his word: he is pro-choice. Period.
A "present" vote counts as a "no" vote. If Obama did not provide cover by voting "present", those others would have voted yes, and those bills would have passed. The democrats were in the minority in the senate at the time. I don't get Taylor Marsh's point. Is it better to "take a stand on women's civil rights" and have these anti-choice bills pass?
"The goal was to entice moderate Republicans and Democrats to also vote present, helping to defeat the bills. "The poor guy is getting all this heat for a strategy we, the pro-choice community, did," said Pam Sutherland, president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council." http://www
Frankly, I guess I do care what Planned Parenthood, an organization dedicated to making sure that women of all incomes and backgrounds have the ability to control their own bodies has to say on the issue of Obama and abortion rights. In fact, if there is a conflict between them, I would stand with Planned Parenthood's assessment rather than than that of NOW leaders (whether current or former) anyday.
This would be more convincing if the argument actually contradicted what the Obama people have said about the strategy. The claim is not that Obama needed to vote present to provide himself political cover. It is that he voted present along with the various members in conservative districts to make it appear less of a political move.
Maybe that was bad strategy. But it would be more convincing if the person claiming that it was bad strategy actually accurately presented the strategy.
After all if she did not understand the strategy she is not in much of a position to analyze it. And if she is not being honest about what the strategy is, then she is not much to be trusted in her criticism.
Yet another example of the HOPE GAG - they are shoving this guy down our throats as the 2nd coming of Christ and is just isn't so
The present votes are telling, his distortion tactics on this and his 'Anti-War' stance is a perfect example of his holier than tho, do as I say but not as I do crap.
This goes straight to the point of Obama and his prose - what happens after the speeches? What happens when the teleprompter goes away? Obama made a great speech opposing the war - he called it, he nailed it - he was right and the rest of us poor saps got it wrong. Given - Point - You win... But what has he done? Aside from a, meaning ONE speech prior to him becoming a candidate what has he done? Has he passed or even sponsered legislation to end the war? to oppose funding? Has he stood on the top of capital hill and stamped his foot to end the war? NOPE, NADA, NOt a damn thing.
And you followers can talk about being inspired all you want and he is the future - but he is wallowing in the distortion politics of the past - he is full of hot air
it is a fairy tale
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
