A Christian Liberal is NOT an oxymoron.

Posted by XT on February 2nd, 2008 in Campaign News

I’m going to blockquote some emails I’ve received about Barack Obama and some replies from both myself and others that refute the charges.

After being attracted to the Obama campaign I checked his voting record on Women. HIS VOTING RECORD ON WOMEN IS ABYSMAL.His record is very different from my first immpression. OBAMA DOES NOT SUPPORT WOMEN ON CRUCIAL VOTES AND HIS RECORD CLEARLY SHOWS THIS. I was very shocked. Once again appearance and reality differ , and once again men do not stand up for women’s rights – there is always some other consideration more important than women and their rights to be be equal fully independent human beings with agency for their own lives.
When it’s time for our next President to stand up for
Women’s Reproductive Choice
Who do you think will make the difference?
LOOK AT THE FACTS!
Hillary Clinton:
Clinton co-sponsored the Prevention First legislation in the senate and has long advocated for strengthening access to contraception, identifying realistic solutions to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, and improving access to women’s health care.Emergency Contraception (EC): Clinton led the fight, along with Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) to force the Food and Drug Administration to allow emergency contraception to be sold in pharmacies without a doctor’s prescription, increasing its accessibility for emergency use. Senator Clinton also supported legislation to create, expand and fund teen pregnancy prevention programs and education programs that would include access to emergency contraceptives.Abortion Procedures Ban: Clinton voted both times against the federal abortion procedures ban; the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of that ban because of Alito’s confirmation.Young Women’s Access: Clinton opposed a bill that would have made sisters, aunts, grandmothers, counselors, religious advisors — indeed anyone who assists a minor in crossing the state line for an abortion without parental consent — a felon. She actively campaigned against requiring parental notification for teen abortion, saying it would “put our most vulnerable teens at risk teens who may already be endangered by negligent or even abusive homes.”
Barack Obama:
Obama refuses to stand up for a woman’s right to choose and repeatedly voted `present’ on important legislation. As a State Senator, Obama voted `present’ on seven abortion bills, including critical late term abortion procedure, two parental notification laws and three ‘born alive’ bills. Bonnie Grabenhofer, Pres. of Illinois NOW stated: “When we needed someone to take a stand, Senator Obama took a pass. He wasn’t there for us then and we don’t expect him to be now.”
*************************
KNOW THE FACTS AND VOTE ON FEBRUARY 5TH!

NOW New York State, 1500 Central Ave.,Albany, NY 12205, 518-452-3944

It is, to put it mildly, a big fat hairy lie.

This was answered by another person who sent:

The Ladies of Salons Broadsheet weigh in on NY NOWs press releases re the Ted Kennedy endorsement:
Feisty bloggers vs. old-school Steinem-ites!
Remember this week’s press release from Marcia Pappas, president of NOW’s New York State chapter? The one that claimed Sen. Ted Kennedy had committed “the greatest betrayal” against women by endorsing Barack Obama for president? It’s the sole piece of evidence used today in a New York Times article headlined: “Feminists Find Unity Is Elusive.”
The Times depicts the disagreement as proof of a generational divide between feminists. Pappas, the 57-year-old president of NOW’s New York state chapter, is pitted against Jessica Valenti, the 29-year-old founder of Feministing, which called the press release “unhinged” and “mind-boggling.” As author Susan Dominus frames it, it’s flirty banter versus feminist fury; video blogs versus press releases; and sassiness versus sisterhood. But for all these generational differences, Dominus takes great pains to highlight their similarities: They both went to state college in Albany, N.Y., “focused intently on women’s studies,” and come from middle-class homes. Why, they’re practically twins! The piece even concludes: “The two women should probably talk. Surely, there’s a message board somewhere big enough for both of them. We already know they have a lot in common.” In other words: Just, please, shake hands and make up!
Somehow, I’m not disturbed by disagreements among feminists; I’d like to think it suggests that men and women from across the political spectrum can rally around a fundamental belief in women’s equal rights, while debating the best way to secure and defend those rights. But, I’m not so sure that the response the NOW-NY press release garnered from feminists is actually evidence of serious disunity. In fact, the widespread disavowal of Pappas’ position seems to come closer to defining, rather than calling into question, the party line. NOW’s very own president, Kim Gandy, publicly disagreed with the chapter’s press release and several top staffers were reportedly mulling whether to order Pappas to issue a retraction.
Whether in blogs or old-school press releases, it seems clear that most feminists have agreed to disagree with the suggestion that the best candidate for the Oval Office is the one with ovaries and that voting for anyone else is a betrayal of womankind.
– Tracy Clark-Flory
NOW, wait a second …
The other day we received a press release from the New York state chapter of NOW that was so ridiculous it almost seemed like it must be a parody. Titled “Senator Ted Kennedy Betrays Women,” it claims that by endorsing Barack Obama for president, Kennedy committed “the greatest betrayal” against women. “We are repaid with his abandonment!” the author writes. “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).”
It then goes on to assert that it is 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.’”
When we first got wind of this press release, we double-checked the source to make sure it wasn’t from the Onion — because this has to be a joke. A state chapter of a national feminist organization is saying that we should vote for someone just because she’s a woman? Really? I suppose that also means that all white men should vote for John Edwards and all black people should endorse Obama (although by that logic, black women are screwed — they’ve got two groups to betray). Call me naive, but I’d planned on basing my political decisions on the candidates’ ability and political positions, not on whether we both have ovaries.
Unsurprisingly, the press release caused quite a stir — the Politico confirmed that, unfortunately, it wasn’t a joke; several blogs, including Feministe, called out New York NOW for its hyperbole (and for making it seem as if feminists should vote for anything with breasts).
Also unsurprisingly, the national head of NOW does not agree with the New York branch (why there isn’t a better vetting process for crazy press releases is unclear). It put up a much more rational response to Kennedy’s endorsement. Shorter, and with a notable lack of exclamation points, it settles its differences with Kennedy by saying, “Though the National Organization for Women Political Action Committee has proudly endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president, we respect Sen. Kennedy’s endorsement. We continue to encourage women everywhere to express their opinions and exercise their right to vote.”
That sounds more like it.
– Catherine Price

I sent along this info:

http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=9490
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 100 percent in 2006.
2005-2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association 100 percent in 2005-2006.
2005-2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 0 percent in 2005-2006.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2005.
2003 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council 100 percent in 2003.
2002 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Illinois Federation for Right to Life 50 percent in 2002.
2001 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council 100 percent in 2001.
1997-2000 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Illinois Federation for Right to Life 0 percent in 1997-2000.
1997-1998 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council 100 percent in 1997-1998.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Children’s Defense Fund 100 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Family Research Council 0 percent in 2006.
2005-2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the American Family Association 0 percent in 2005-2006.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Children’s Defense Fund 100 percent in 2005.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 95 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Composite Liberal Score 86 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Liberal on Economic Policy 87 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Liberal on Foreign Policy 85 percent in 2006.
2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Liberal on Social Policy 77 percent in 2006.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 100 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Committee for an Effective Congress 95 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Composite Liberal Score 83 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Liberal on Economic Policy 87 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Liberal on Foreign Policy 76 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Journal – Liberal on Social Policy 77 percent in 2005.
2005-2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 90 percent in 2005-2006.
2005-2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Business and Professional Women USA 100 percent in 2005-2006.
2005-2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the Federally Employed Women 100 percent in the 2005-2006.
2005-2006 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Organization for Women 91 percent in 2005-2006.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 83 percent in 2005.
2005 Senator Obama supported the interests of the National Organization for Women 100 percent in 2005.
I think that his record would indicate exactly the opposite of being anti-women. It sounds like more mis-direction – in other words, lies – from the Hillary Clinton side of the race.

To which came this response:

Here is a link to actual votes on bills brought before the senate. Obama has a lot of “no votes” (i.e. where he voted neither specifically for or against a bill). For example he did not actually vote against a bill proposing to deny funding to groups that preform abortions. However, it isn’t clear from their list if he was present when the vote occurred or not as “NV” can mean present, absent, excused, or just not voting.
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

So I followed the link. Here’s the response I sent:

Well, it the votesmart page provides a link to THOMAS. Here’s what I found about the bills Obama did not vote on:
Abortion:
SA 3330 – Obama did not vote. Neither did Biden, Dodd, or Clinton – all Senators running for President. The vote was taken on 10/18/07
SA 2707 – Obama did not vote. Neither did Biden, Dodd, or Clinton. Again. Vote was taken 9/6/07
Reproductive Rights:
SA 3330 – As above
SA 2707 – As above
Women’s Issues:
SA 3330 – As above
You actually have two votes listed as five Not Voting instances. But if the argument is that this is evidence to support Hillary, then she will have to explain why she missed the exact same votes. For SA2707, it’s pretty easy to understand why they missed it – they were in Coral Gables, Florida for a Democratic Primary debate. On October 18, they were all at the Democratic Women’s Leadership Forum
So I thought I’d compare Hillary’s voting record with Obama. Here’s are the times when they voted differently:
On 4/18/07 – Hillary votes “YES” to express the sense of the Senate that future Iraq funding should go through the normal appropriations process and not supplemental processes. Obama does not vote.
10/3/07 – Hillary votes YES to spend $3 billion to build a fence along the Mexican border. Obama does not vote.
9/27/07 – Hillary votes YES to reauthorize and extend SCHIP. Obama does not vote. (This bill ultimately was vetoed by the President as promised – which is why Obama states he did not vote for it.)
7/26/07 – Hillary votes YES to implement 9/11 commission recommendations. Obama does not vote.
7/26/07 – Hillary votes YES to Homeland Security budget. Obama does not vote.
7/26/07 – Hillary votes YES to fund building a fence to keep Mexicans out. Obama does not vote.
7/26/07 – Hillary votes YES to REAL ID bill. Obama doesn’t vote.
7/20/07 – Hillary votes YES to Student Loan Subsidy Cuts. Obama doesn’t vote.
2/2/06 – Hillary votes YES to Tax Reconciliation Bill. Obama votes NO.
11/18/05 – Hillary votes YES to Tax Reconciliation Bill. Obama votes NO.
5/7/07 – Hillary votes NO to Drug Reimportation Bill. Obama doesn’t vote.
3/10/05 – Hillary does not vote on Bankruptcy Reform Bill. Obama votes NO.
9/20/07 – Hillary votes NO on support Petraeus and all members of US forces. Obama doesn’t vote.
7/19/07 – Hillary votes NO on a sense of Senate bill on GTMO. Obama doesn’t vote.
8/1/06 – Hillary votes YES to allow offshore drilling in the Gulf. Obama votes NO.
6/11/07 – Hillary votes NO on no-confidence in AG. Obama doesn’t vote.
6/14/07 – Hillary votes NO on nomination of Thomas Griffith for US Circuit Judge. Obama votes YES.
6/9/07 – Hillary votes NO on nomination of Robert Griffith for US Circuit Judge. Obama doesn’t vote.
9/26/07 – Hillary votes YES on sense of Senate on Federalism in Iraq. Obama doesn’t vote.
9/26/07 – Hillary votes YES on sense of Senate to condemn Iranian Revolutionary Guard as terrorists. Obama doesn’t vote.
7/13/07 – Hillary votes NO to firearm confiscation prohibition. Obama votes YES.
9/6/06 – Hillary votes YES to prohibit funding of cluster munitions (unless assurances that it won’t be used “near civilians”). Obama votes NO.
7/11/06 – Hillary votes NO to replacing FEMA with USEMA. Obama votes YES.
So, twenty-three times they voted differently. Of these times, there are eight times when Obama voted. So we are quibbling about fifteen non-votes on Obama’s part (as compared to the roughly sixty they have where they both didn’t vote).
Of the fifteen:
4 were on the same day – dunno what was going on. Maybe Obama was sick or something.
4 are “sense of the Senate” votes – which are meaningless, unenforceable, and non-binding on anyone or anything at any time
The remaining seven “non-votes” were:
building a fence to keep Mexicans out
Drug Re-importation
Support Petraeus and ALL members of Armed Forces
No-confidence in AG
Nomination of a federal judge
SCHIP
Student Loan Subsidy cuts
Some of these are undeniably important – some are undeniably unimportant and potential election-year traps. For example, the resolution didn’t just support Petraeus, it was ALL MEMBERS of the armed forces. I can guarantee that, if Hillary gets the nomination, she will be condemned for not supporting our soldiers over this – even though everyone knows she was only voting against one general.
Her voting to build a fence is unforgiveable in my eyes. Having lived in that part of the country, it’s the stupidest idea to come along in a very long time.
No confidence in Alberto? Who cares? It’s just a feel-good vote.
Nomination of a judge? A deal had already been made to send him through.
I already metioned that the non-vote for SCHIP was over a promised veto. I still find it unconscionable that he didn’t vote for it in protest of the veto. Likewise the drug reimportion and student-loan bills. But as often as Obama didn’t vote, Hillary voted on the wrong side of the bill – like in the case of the Bankruptcy bill when she voted for it. She voted “YES” to ban cluster munitions – unless someone said they wouldn’t be used on civilians. How stupid can you get? Have you ever heard a general say, “We use these to target civilians…”? She voted against an amendment that would ban the confiscation of firearms during an emergency unless it was a weapon already banned by law. Come on – why not just ask the NRA to make targets with your face on it? Plus – this is hard to believe in New York City – but there are times in natural disasters when having a firearm means you live and your wife/daughter doesn’t get raped. It sucks, but it’s true. Plus you can kill rats – yum!
But the whole thing is that Obama has exactly the same record as Hillary Clinton on reproductive rights and women’s rights issues. You know I love you, Aleta, but the NOW people are WAY off base with this attack. I have no problem with anyone attacking a candidate for their record, but to run someone down when they have a mirror-image of your own…well, Karl Rove made a nice living off of doing such, but I won’t vote for anyone who does it.

Then there is this final answer:

The votes were actually part of a strategy developed by Planned Parenthood to stop Republican attacks on pro-choice candidates. “We had a very astute and devious Republican leader that we knew was using abortion votes as wedge issues, putting those votes into mailers to help defeat pro-choice Democrats,” Pam Sutherland, president and CEO of Illinois Planned Parenthood, told reporters on the call. “It was our strategy, Planned Parenthood’s, to decide that a “present” vote was the same thing as a “no” vote.”
Then-State Senator Obama “was always ready to vote “no” on these bills but he understood how it important it was to help his fellow colleagues,” Sutherland continued. Obama “was key to the strategy… not only did Democrats follow suit, so did many Republicans. The strategy actually worked… very few of those bills actually made it into law.”

I’m not a hundred percent behind either candidate, but the more this goes on, the less I can stomach the whisper-campaign-by-surrogate from the Clinton side (which does not mean it comes from Hillary herself).

Technorati Tags: Barack Obama

Sphere: Related Content