She almost sounds as if NOW is a great organization were it not for this one little flaw about abortion. Quite the contrary. And, for example, note their defense of Bill Clinton over having sex with an employee more than half his age.
Sarah either is naive or she’s trying to persuade NOW by choosing to highlight what she thinks are their positives - sort of like praising Mussolini for his devotion to train punctuality.
I agree. She is trying to change them. Or splinter them.
After all - as the ex-leader of Planned Parenthood can attest - sometimes lefties hear the truth.
Sarah Palin is commenting on one particular organisation and its stance on one particular issue. Specifics always work better than generalisms.
I thought “Barack” meant “Blessing”?
> sort of like praising Mussolini for his devotion to train punctuality.
LOL!!!
My dad grew up in Mussolini’s Italy. He was able to emigrate to the US when he was about 14.
He told me that when he was growing up, if anybody asked you what you thought of Mussolini, the safest thing to say was, “He makes the trains run on time.”
When Mussolini came to power, the Italian train system was the laughing stock of Europe. How did he get the trains to run on time?
Soldiers were posted at the train stations. If any train arrived late, the entire crew was marched to a siding and executed immediately, in front of everybody at the train station.
That only had to happen a couple of times.
. . . or else she is showing moderates that NOW is extreme . . .
Didn’t get that tone at all. In fact, I got an admonishment, almost sarcastic tone from this. She knows they’re a bunk organization, so why not use their own alleged philosophy of empowering women against them? Brilliant.
Sometimes you appeal to an opponent’s better nature in public even though you know they’ll never do the right thing. It keeps you on the high road and highlights how easily they could do the right thing. It’s ffective rhetoric. Keep in mind that whether she runs for President or just promotes conservatism, winning over independents and other people who think these groups are mainly or somewhat positive is going to be necessary.
I understand what you mean! But I think Sarah is casting light on the inherent contradictions in NOW’s position -— not only about abortion but about their whole agenda.
On the one hand, NOW promotes women as strong, smart, etc. But then they pivot and say women are so incompetent at managing their lives that they have to kill their babies. NOW says we can handle the presidency, but can’t handle a pregnancy.
Sarah cuts right through that. She rightly points out that it’s a woman’s strength that empowers her to uphold the integrity of her principles through an untimely or difficult pregnancy, to get on brilliantly with her own life without sacrificing her child.