NYT: Women's Rally is "decidedly partisan"

[nostamj]

one reason the rally will be downplayed in the corporate media.



Abortion-Rights Marchers Vow to Fight Another Bush Term

WASHINGTON, April 25 — Hundreds of thousands of abortion rights supporters rallied Sunday in the nation's capital, protesting the policies of the Bush administration and its conservative allies and vowing to fight back in the November election.

<snip>

Speaker after speaker declared that President Bush and his allies in Congress were trying to impose an ideological agenda on abortion and family planning programs, both at home and abroad. The advocates warned that the erosion might be stealthy and incremental — regulations and restrictions rather than outright bans — but asserted that the trend was unmistakable.

"We are determined to stop this war on women," said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority, a sponsor of the march. Gloria Steinem, one of many feminist icons who turned out Sunday, said, "We are here to take back our country."

The day had a decidedly partisan edge, with many in the crowd carrying signs for Senator John Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential nominee; several members of his family were among the marchers, as was Howard Dean, who had also sought the Democratic nomination; Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader of the House; and Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic Party chairman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/26/politics/26RALL.html

[leesa]

1. Well, duh! What would they expect when the GOP is ramming

their "barefoot and pregnant" agenda at us. Always the deflector charge of "partisanship". Oh well, the whole thing is insignificant because they are only partisans.

[prodigal_green]

2. LOL

Isn't that the definition of a protest?

[Vickers]

3. Well I'll be damned! So it is!

Well gee, if enough women see that the Republican Party is filled with a bunch of anti-woman CRAP, maybe some Republican women will wake up and vote for the party that LOVES them and RESPECTS them and considers folks EQUAL!

Good grief, is the whole country MAD?!?!?!?!?!?!

[DancingBear]

4. Aw, well

Leave it to the Times to be on the cutting edge when it comes to defining political discourse.

I'm waiting for this headline: Democratic Convention 'Decidedly Partisan'.

[Sparkly]

6. Haha

Right. "There were Kerry signs at the convention!"

They think it's NEWS that Democrats are pro-choice and Republicans are not? They think it's "partisan" to suggest, at a pro-choice rally, that we consider our votes?

[Jacobin]

5. The "Gray Lady" has become a whore

David Brooks
Tom Freidman
Kicking out Ted Rall.


"Decidely partisan" indeed. So, does the NYSlime really believe the Smirk administration's form of partisanship attempts to protect a woman's right to choose?

What blather

[pretzel4gore]

7. NYT on 'partisanship'! the sink calling bathtub white...

bloody retards....

[Vogon_Glory]

8. Gee, Doesn't Anybody See How It Got That Way?

So yesterday's Reproductive Rights rally was "partisan"? Gee, how did it get that way? Maybe it had something to do with the fact that the Republican Party has chosen to make itself into an organization that not only opposes abortion rights, but also one that opposes birth control, health information, and social equality.

When pro-choice moderates and moderate-conservatives find themselves not only frozen out of leadership positions in the GOP but are even frozen out of discussions regarding the Republican Party's position, is it any wonder that they're becoming estranged from their old party? When they find themselves under attack by hard-line right-wing ideologues who try to force an "all or nothing" hard-right party line on the GOP, it shouldn't be too surprising to the remaining GOPers that many moderates and moderate conservatives are deciding to drop their support for the GOP and its leadership.

To former Republican moderates seeking a new home where their views can be heard and they can be treated with dignity and respect, welcome to the Democratic Party!

[no_hypocrisy]

9. What did the NYT expect: "I'm Pro-Choice AND voting for Bush"?!!!!

[youngred]

10. I did see Several Republicans for Choice signs

but yeah, it was a decidedly Lefty-friendly event

[robbedvoter]

11. Unlike NYT which is totally "objective". Please....

They are disturbed by the fact that, unlike the sucky IAC fringy events, this one said "VOTE" in signs and speeches. That's when they really fear us - when we stop listening to extremists and we participate in the process.

[Lars39]

12. I watched the speakers on c-span. I think they showed commendable

restraint. Those speaking could have been much worse, imo.

[samsingh]

13. hello media whores - the march was against bush

so it had to be partisan by definition.

shrub has really made stupidity fashionable.

[Cat Atomic]

14. Oh my god! A partisan protest!?

L.M.A.O.

[skippysmom]

15. Shocker

A pro-choice rally targeting an anti-choice president? God forbid...

[Q]

16. Ah...the RWing tactic of divide and conquer...

- They can call it anything they want...but it was democracy in action. The voice of the People.

- But what else can we expect from the fascist Bush* government? They'll allow nothing to interfere with their agenda. Nothing. They don't care about what the people have to say because their only duty is to the ruling class.

[Nailzberg]

17. The Republican's For Choice were there.

Both of them.

[loudsue]

18. Wow! I wish those 1.5 mil women would watch the polls in November!

If they think we can take back ANY government when our votes are being stollen, is beyond me! If we don't make sure EVERY vote in this country counts (and counts ACCURATELY) come November, bush will just be allowed to steal another one.

I have NO DOUBT whatsoever, that if the votes were truthfully accounted for, bush would lose by the biggest landslide in history. Same goes for most of the repuke congress-critters. If we really could tally the votes accurately, I have NO DOUBT we'd have winning Dems running out our ears next November! (Wouldn't THAT be nice?!)

:kick::kick: