Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Friday, June 8, 2012

Nancy Keenan on the War on Women, and Why Mitt Romney is More Evil Than Bush

Posted by on Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Nancy Keenan
  • Nancy Keenan
This morning I sat down with Nancy Keenan, the current president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. Below, she and two other NARAL leaders talk about how gay marriage and the War on Women are intrinsically tied, what Washington voters need to do to continue being the most progressive state on women's health, and why Mitt Romney has a heart like a holocaust.


Women aren't only fighting for their right to abortion access, they're now fighting to keep their birth control. How the fuck did that happen?
The 2010 elections happened, and women didn’t turn out to vote as they should have. So we saw this huge turn in anti-choice laws, more than we’ve had in the last decade. Our backstop was in the Senate but even there we were defeating some anti-choice legislation by just one vote. Having people in office that are pro-choice is critical for protecting the rights of women.

But how did we make that two-year jump from anti-abortion legislation to anti-birth control?
These are anti-choice politicians who've run on jobs and economy platforms and who have spent their whole time in office attacking women's rights to choose. They’ve been there, wanting to take away contraceptive coverage for years—they've been trying to de-fund family planning, Title 10. It’s been going on, it was just such a cumulative effect this year that it literally exploded on people’s radar screens. When the Komen situation happened, people sat up and took notice.

You've mentioned that Mitt Romney is evil. Please tell me more!

Bush never called for the overturning of Roe Vs. Wade—Romney has called for that. Romney also "absolutely" supports the personhood amendment, which not only outlaws birth control but in vitro fertilization. He's said he’d defund Planned Parenthood and other family planning agencies. Think of the hypocrisy of denying women access to birth control and outlawing abortions. With Supreme Court nominations, Romney has said that they’d have to support his views on abortion: Outlaw it. At least Bush was smart enough to only commit to changing "hearts and minds" when it came to the abortion issue. Romney is far more extreme than Bush.

So Romney can’t just say all that, and wink and nod to American women like it'll be okay. I don’t trust him. And American women shouldn't trust him.

Worst state in the country to be a woman: Go.
Oh, man. I would say Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska... Washington and California are the best states in the country. (Check out WhoDecides.org for a complete hellish rundown of the anti-abortion laws in your state).

Let's talk about Washington. Reproductive Parity died last year, will we see it introduced again?
Alison Mondi, spokeswoman for NARAL Pro-Choice WA: We'll hopefully run that again next year but it depends on what happens with the Supreme Court decision [challenging Obama's Affordable Care Act]. We’re working on the assumption that it will be upheld.

Which brings us to Rob McKenna, who's currently being sued by Washington women for challenging the health care law...
Mondi: He’s not someone women can trust to stand up for their access, and voters want a strong pro-choice leader in the governor's office. When it comes down to who’s going to be signing or vetoing bills, we need someone like Inslee in office, not someone who's suing to take away women's healthcare, and who refuses at length to answer the questions of media, constituents, and the groups working on these issues.

What other races should Washington women be watching closely?
Jennifer Brown, ED of NARAL Pro-Choice WA: The 27th district in Tacoma is one. Jeannie Darneille is running against Jack Connelly, an anti-choice democrat whose law firm is a big sponsor of crisis pregnancy centers. We need to keep the legislature pro-choice.

What questions do women need to be asking candidates in 2012?
Do you believe that women have the right to make the choice about abortion care without government interference? Do you support family planning? Do you support medically accurate sex education in our schools? Those are fundamental questions. And if they hedge on any of those, vote for the person who won’t. But women have got to ask them.

Do you think there's any connection between progressives winning more victories with gay marriage and conservatives attacking women's rights with renewed vigor? Like, the Freemasons are sitting around in their secret robes, saying, "Holy shit, we're losing the gay battle! Quick! Who else can we oppress???"
Keenan: Absolutely. Our fates are tied together. The right to the privacy to engage in a homosexual relationship, it was based on the right of privacy granted in Griswold v. Connecticut and Roe v. Wade. If the right to privacy under [either of those cases] were to fall, the right to privacy in the gay community would also fall. Our fight is tied to theirs because it's all based on that simple right to privacy—the right to love who you want to love and decide for yourself when you want to have a child. Which is why there’s a lot at stake in this election.

So how do we win?
Keenan: We harness the millennial generation—the people who are now between the ages of 18-30. Those 76 million people are larger than the baby boomers and by 2020 they’ll be the largest part of the voting population. And they’re pro-marriage equality and pro-choice. This is the next generation that will have such a huge impact on this country.

And we’ve seen an unbelievable increase in activism, in younger people becoming involved, connecting people to the political. For the next generation, this year's birth control fight has been their Anita Hill moment. It was like, you’ve got to be kidding me. They want to take my birth control away?

Last month, you announced that you're stepping down as president of NARAL after the 2012 election. What are you going to do with your time?
Keenan: Fly fish in the morning, drink scotch in the afternoon. I’m going back to Montana. People think I’m running for office and I’m like, "NOOOOO!!!!"

 

Comments (32) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
biffp 1
Gay for Mitbot, where are you astroturfer? Got to get on this with your nonsensical jibberish comments. "In fact, Mitt Romney is an ardent feminist, and believes women are enfranchised by being required by the government to bear children . . . ."
Posted by biffp on June 8, 2012 at 4:22 PM
Gay Dude for Romney 2
@1: No, but he'll surely return to moderate positions on abortion once elected president as he is inherently a mainstream Republican. He is indeed a shameless, tin-eared flip flopper, appeasing his base which he has now solidified and is now reaching back for independents.

Oh but yes. Let’s man our battle stations against those evil republicans, and accept four more years of glacial economic recovery, printing money, and vilifying the rich as the better choice.
Posted by Gay Dude for Romney http://mittromney.com on June 8, 2012 at 4:38 PM
3
I think we can safely assume that from here on out Republican politicians will just get exponentially more evil... until one day, on live TV, one will be fucking a goat, eating a live baby, shoot their own mother in face, and sign-off by promising to abolish taxes. And air.

And they will still get elected.
Posted by tkc on June 8, 2012 at 5:06 PM
Dr_Awesome 4
Gay dude: you suck at understanding facts.
Re read prior posts noting better economic performance under Democrats. And please go the fuck away until you understand it.
Posted by Dr_Awesome on June 8, 2012 at 5:11 PM
biffp 5
@2, that is such bullshit. Seriously, how much is Crossroads paying you per comment?
Posted by biffp on June 8, 2012 at 5:14 PM
Free Lunch 6
He is indeed a shameless, tin-eared flip flopper, appeasing his base which he has now solidified and is now reaching back for independents.
Wow, what a glowing endorsement of your candidate! A man who can't open his mouth without lying. But since you have the same flaw, I can see why you are for him.
Posted by Free Lunch on June 8, 2012 at 5:58 PM
COMTE 7
@2:

I'll take four more years of "glacial" economic recovery, anti-inflationary fiscal policy and vilifying the super-rich over four years of don't-tax-the-rich-and-spend economic policy (you know, what got us into this mess in the first place?), giving all the money to the rich - and offering them a dynamite cock-sucking for their trouble - any day.
Posted by COMTE http://www.chriscomte.com on June 8, 2012 at 6:47 PM
Stewie Griffin 8
Romney is clearly a greater threat than Hitler
Posted by Stewie Griffin on June 8, 2012 at 7:18 PM
Stiny 9
@8, I should think so, since Hitler's been dead for a few decades.
Posted by Stiny on June 8, 2012 at 7:48 PM
Mark in Colorado 10
Nice to see one of Rmoney's BUTTBoys back @2!!!!

Honoring your dead of AIDS boyfriend I see. Good for you!
You care so much and there is no evil you don't know and express.

Rmoney loves you BUTTBoy of the AIDS dead boyfriend!!!
Retribution might never know you.
Posted by Mark in Colorado on June 8, 2012 at 8:22 PM
11
I seem to recall that in North Dakota, Planned Parenthood has to periodically fly doctors in from Minnesota to do abortions because there's not a single doctor in North Dakota who's willing to. Obviously, you've got to factor in a lot of things to decide just how anti-woman a state is, but zero abortion doctors in the entire state has to be a negative.
Posted by PCM on June 8, 2012 at 9:35 PM
Gay Dude for Romney 12
@10: He would have been the first one to scold you. You are as low as Phelps from Westboro Baptist Church for such bizarre, and idiotic equivocations. Not to mention you have incredibly insensitive bad manners, sir!
Posted by Gay Dude for Romney http://mittromney.com on June 8, 2012 at 9:45 PM
MarkyMark 13
Bush personally didn't give a damn about most of the social issues, and privately probably couldn't care less about abortion, gays, feminists, and drug use. He certainly was a major substance-abuser early on, and probably paid for an abortion or two. Romney, on the other had, is a social super-conservative who REALLY believes in his positions, which are way more draconian than most voters will ever understand.
Posted by MarkyMark on June 8, 2012 at 9:47 PM
14
@11 that would be South Dakota. They also have lovely anti-abortion billboards all along the highways. I was wishing I had a paintball gun the last time I had to go there. Luckily the last of the old relatives who lived there died last year, so I don't have to unwillingly visit/spend any money in that state ever again.
Posted by StuckInUtah on June 8, 2012 at 9:50 PM
Mark in Colorado 15
@12 Rmoney loves you BUTTBoy of the AIDS dead boyfriend!

Perhaps I'm part of your retribution. Have you ever watched the most wonderful film entitled "Red State"?

Think of yourself as that poor boy being wrapped in saran wrap and me as the gun. Then you'll know how much I hate you. Your dead of AIDS boyfriend should be so lucky.
That anyone, gay or lesbian, tolerates your existence among them is a testament to ignorance of you or their geniune stupidity.
Posted by Mark in Colorado on June 8, 2012 at 10:20 PM
Gay Dude for Romney 16
@15: Calm down, have a pickle.
Posted by Gay Dude for Romney http://mittromney.com on June 8, 2012 at 10:44 PM
COMTE 17
@16:

Or a shot-and-pickle-brine-juice....
Posted by COMTE http://www.chriscomte.com on June 8, 2012 at 11:06 PM
18
We may need someone "like Inslee" in office, but unfortunately Inslee himself is running and will lose to McKenna because he's a lousy campaigner.
Posted by sarah70 on June 8, 2012 at 11:32 PM
19
nice interview,
if you're into cunt on cunt stupidy....

War on Women = the abortion slaughter of Tens of Millions of girls every year just because they are girls. aka Evil.
Posted by Cienna's Face = 100% Foolproof Birth Control on June 9, 2012 at 1:15 AM
Brunobär 20
We harness the millennial generation—the people who are now between the ages of 18-30. Those 76 million people are larger than the baby boomers and by 2020 they’ll be the largest part of the voting population. 76 Million? That doesn't sound right. Or maybe she includes those who are not yet 18 but will be in 2020, in which case it could work.
Posted by Brunobär on June 9, 2012 at 5:45 AM
Brunobär 21
Ah, dang it, didn't mark the quote properly...I hope it becomes clear what I mean.
Posted by Brunobär on June 9, 2012 at 5:47 AM
malcolmxy 22
1. ROMNEY CAN'T OVERTURN ROE V. WADE.

Only the Supreme Court, or Congress via legislation, which could then be deemed unconstitutional because of Roe v. Wade (or not, thus affirming the legislation and effectively overturning Roe v. Wade) can do that.

2. ROMNEY CAN'T DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD.

Congress could cut off federal funding, or Romney could veto any budget with Planned Parenthood in it that didn't have a supermajority, but Congress holds the pursestrings, not the president.

3. OVERTURNING ROE V WADE DOESN'T OUTLAW ABORTION.

All it does is eliminate federal protection for the medical procedure. So, Texas will outlaw it, and Washington won't...which is effectively what we have today anyway, so why do you care?

4. THE PERSONHOOD AMENDMENT IS WHAT ROMNEY NEEDS TO DO TO PANDER TO THE EXTREME RIGHT.

Only a congressman can propose a constitutional amendment, and that proposed amendment must pass both houses of congress by a 2/3 supermajority. The last amendment to pass, the 27th, was the one where congress gets to give themselves pay raises in the same term in which they serve. Tough vote for those guys and gals, I guess...or not.

There is no way in hell the personhood amendment would pass congress, but regardless, ROMNEY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THIS SHIT!!! NEITHER DOES OBAMA!!!

READ THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE.
Posted by malcolmxy on June 9, 2012 at 6:42 AM
Dr_Awesome 23
MalcolmXY: While it's true that Romney cannot do those things, a Romney-stacked conservative supreme court will drag us backwards on those very issues. Having the public discourse shift so far backwards will give a huge amount of clout to all the mouth-breathing red-staters.
Posted by Dr_Awesome on June 9, 2012 at 7:22 AM
24
@22. There's no way in hell that someone would get votes in the GOP primary in 2012 saying there should be reduced access to birth control, but Santorum happened.
Posted by MikeB on June 9, 2012 at 8:26 AM
25
No offense intended, but this is a really, really silly blog posting.

Parsing between the jackholes is moronic at best. Romney, the Bush family, etc., wish ill will and serfdom from all angles, differentiating between the neocon continuum (Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama) is an exercise in futility.

Obama did nothing for the vote in Wisconsin, and Clinton's trips there are ludicrous at best, since he really supports what Gov. Walker is doing there, as it is exactly what Clinton did in Arkansas as governor, although the 10-second attention span types conveniently have forgotten that!

This is yet another reason to vote Green Party this 2012.

Dr. Jill Stein for President --- this country is need of some emergency RX.

http://nothingchanged.org/
Posted by sgt_doom on June 9, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Pridge Wessea 26
@22 - Oh MalcolmXY, you're still here blathering?

So here's the deal, Rmoney can't do any of that by himself, correct, just like Congress can't do any of that by itself either. But it's not just one man when a President is elected, it's his entire administration and, as we saw with Bush 2, that administration can do a ton of shit to make things infinitely more difficult. That doesn't even count Supreme Court noms or a lapdog Congress.

Also, you're saying abortion is currently illegal in Texas? Interesting, I thought Roe v Wade protected against that which is why it's so important that it not be overturned via a stacked supreme court or a lapdog congress with a republican administration.

So yeah, you're talking out your ass again. I know sputtering out the word "Constitution!" makes you feel like a big boy, but there's a much bigger picture than just that document in the running of our country. Hence why people get freaked out over the prospect of Rmoney being president.
Posted by Pridge Wessea on June 9, 2012 at 11:48 AM
27
Alternative article title: "The Stranger and NARAL Preaches to the Choir"
Posted by madcap on June 9, 2012 at 12:11 PM
malcolmxy 28
@23, @24, @26

We winning a lot of important Supreme Court Decisions with Obama chosen justices?

What does it matter if a case loses 7-2 instead of 5-4? It's not as if they replay the close ones.

AND, READ THE CONSTITUTION - CONGRESS CAN, IN FACT, DO THINGS BY THEMSELVES (like pass a constitutional amendment and override a veto).

It's really hard to debate with people who have no clue either how government effectively works, nor how it is legally supposed to work.
Posted by malcolmxy on June 9, 2012 at 12:54 PM
Pridge Wessea 29
Constituitonal Amendments initiated by the Congess require state ratification so that's not really by themselves. I will concede the veto override, but a much higher bar for passage is set for the veto (much like the amendment!).

As for the court being "7-2" and thinking that's the same as what we have now, you're insane for multiple reasons that we've already established. Tool.
Posted by Pridge Wessea on June 9, 2012 at 3:29 PM
30
Fortunately most folks don't vote with their genitals but with their pocket books. Expect the good people of WA state to elect Mckenna and yet again, defend ourselves from capricious tax-a-holics in Olympia.
Posted by Sugartit on June 10, 2012 at 8:08 AM
malcolmxy 31
@29

Name a would-be amendment to the constitution passed by congress that didn't make it through the ratification process by the states.

I suppose they need a scribe as well, but I didn't really think it important to mention that.

And, seriously, please tell me how a 5-4 loss is better than a 7-2 loss. I'm confused.
Posted by malcolmxy on June 10, 2012 at 2:25 PM
32
@31 As I recall the Equal Rights Amendment was passed by Congress and never made it through the States. That was back in the 70's and 80 ' s.
Posted by Clayton on June 11, 2012 at 6:02 AM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy