Anti-Abortion Madness
TChris wrote about the proposed South Dakota bill, introduced in the wake of the Supreme Court decision to rehear a case involving the legality of a partial-term abortion law, that would ban all abortions, except for those in which the life of the mother was in danger.
Jane at Firedoglake Lake devoted Thursday to abortion law posts. You should read them all. Markos of Daily Kos picked up on one of Jane's posts and ran with it.
With the news out of South Dakota, it's obvious that a woman's right to choose is in graver danger today than it has been in decades. (SD has passed an outright ban on abortion, as opposed to the "partial birth" case which the court will hear in the next session.) And one of those reasons is the replacement of pro-choice Justice Sandra Day O'Connor by Samuel Alito.
Joe Lieberman had the chance to take a stand on behalf of critical privacy issues, but abdicated.
With respect to the filibuster vote, as you may know, I was a member of the Senate "Gang of 14" that last year worked together to save the right of Senators to filibuster judicial nominations. As part of that agreement, I agreed to filibuster only in extraordinary circumstances. To me, this situation did not meet this extraordinary circumstances standard.
Lieberman then went on to cast a meaningless vote against Alito. Shockingly, NARAL couldn't contain its excitement at Lieberman's meaningless "no" vote. The Connecticut chapter of NOW understood the lack of significance of Lieberman's vote and issued a press release about it:
Senator Lieberman turned his back on this country''s women by refusing to support a filibuster against the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Judge Alito was confirmed yesterday by a vote of 58-42. While Connecticut NOW recognizes the 42 senators who voted against confirmation, the crucial vote happened the day before, when senators voted on whether or not to end debate on this nomination. Since the Republican leadership had enough votes to confirm Alito, a filibuster was the only way to prevent his confirmation.
"Connecticut NOW applauds Senator Dodd for his support of the filibuster. Shamefully his colleague, Senator Lieberman, demonstrated a lack of respect and concern for the women and girls of Connecticut and the nation by his refusal to support the filibuster. Senator Lieberman pointed out that he had studied Samuel Alito''s record carefully and so he was aware of the threat Alito poses to a woman's most basic constitutional right: to control her own body and decide whether or not to bear a child. As reported by The Hartford Courant, Senator Lieberman stated that he did not support a filibuster because Alito's confirmation vote did not meet the standard of "extraordinary circumstances" decreed by the Senate "Gang of 14." "This is a slap in the face to every woman of this state, no matter her political beliefs, economic status or race," stated Rosemary Dempsey, President of CT NOW. ""What could be a more '`extraordinary circumstance'' than when a woman''s right to make her own reproductive health decisions is seriously threatened?"
Bottom line:
His failure to support women''s rights at a time when they are most severely threatened by a Supreme Court Justice whose record is replete with contempt for same, makes it highly unlikely that CT NOW will support Lieberman in his bid for re-election.
Jane is asking her readers to contact the CT NOW chapter and urge that they support Ned Lamont in the senate primary. Markos thinks it's a great idea.
Connecticut National Organization for Women
135 Broad Street
Hartford, CT 06105
860.524.5978
860.524.1092 fax
www.ct-now.org
ct_now@yahoo.comKathleen Sloan, Executive Director
Rosemary Dempsey, President
I hope TalkLeft readers will take the plunge and reach out to CT Now and offer donations for Ned Lamont's campaign.As I've said many times, Joltin' Joe, it's time for you to go.
| < Ghost Air Made 74 Landings in Canada | Libby Hearing Today on Motion to Compel Documents > |
