Too early? Too late? Or just opportunistically correct?
The National Abrotion Rights Action League has decided to endorse Senator Obama to the chagrin of Emily’s List, pro-choice, etc.
“Naral did not wait long enough to satisfy Emily’s List, which promotes female candidates and has been a longstanding backer of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign. Ellen Malcom, president of Emily’s List and a co-chairwoman of the Clinton campaign, issued the following statement in response to Naral’s endorsement:
I think it is tremendously disrespectful to Sen. Clinton – who held up the nomination of a FDA commissioner in order to force approval of Plan B and who spoke so eloquently during the Supreme Court nomination about the importance of protecting Roe vs. Wade – to not give her the courtesy to finish the final three weeks of the primary process. It certainly must be disconcerting for elected leaders who stand up for reproductive rights and expect the choice community will stand with them.”
This appears to be an opportunistic rather than principled move, which raises the question of whether NARAL (and perhaps Emily’s List as well) are not part of the past and that generational politics. Everything about pro-life/pro-choice/pro-abortion is getting more subtle, as the debate about Governor Kathleen Sebelius shows. Are these war horse organizations really on the cutting edge or the rear-guard as this contretemps suggests?
And more important, Is Senator Obama’s own generational shift able to get beyond the war-horse obstacles? Could he say, for example, “Yes, Hamas endorsed me too, but that certainly doesn’t mean I endorse them!” “Yes, NARAL [and presumably Emily's list] has endorsed me, but that doesn’t mean I endorse them.”