# NARAL...taking the low road. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 10, 2005, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431 "2005-08-10T12:55:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![beagledave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6de8d8/32.png) [@beagledave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beagledave)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/1 "2005-08-10T12:55:49Z")
What do you do when a SCOTUS nominee, whom you think that you philosophically disagree with…seems to be relatively well respected, even by some of your political allies? Apparently if you’re NARAL…you lie and start a rumor campaign. [Nothing is out of bounds](http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8554)… > [@](#): > > “They [NARAL and other anti-Roberts groups] went into this with a laundry list of things, and the idea that given what was at stake nothing was out of bounds,” says a Democratic lobbyist who is part of the Roberts fight. “That’s why you saw that ridiculous Roberts-is-gay thing spinning through the blogosphere, and why you had serious reporters looking at the adoption issue.” > > Another Democratic operative said that NARAL officials hit on the adoption issue because “Some of these NARAL and really aggressive pro-choice groups see political motivations behind everything. They see people who adopt children – beyond the desire for children – having an ideological predisposition against choice issues. It isn’t just about kids, it’s about politics.” {snip} > [@](#): > > “There is a lot of Roberts writing, but there isn’t anything much to hang our hat on. He’s clean, and it’s frustrating our ability to paint him anything other than what the White House put forward: a smart, sharp and fair legal mind.” That route not working really well? Time to borrow a page from the Swift Boat Vets playbook… Howzabout flat out [lying](http://www.factcheck.org/article340.html) in an attack ad? > [@](#): > > Summary > > An abortion-rights group is running an attack ad accusing Supreme Court nominee John Roberts of filing legal papers “supporting . . . a convicted clinic bomber” and of having an ideology that “leads him to excuse violence against other Americans” It shows images of a bombed clinic in Birmingham , Alabama . > > The ad is false. > > And the ad misleads when it says Roberts supported a clinic bomber. It is true that Roberts sided with the bomber and many other defendants in a civil case, but the case didn’t deal with bombing at all. Roberts argued that abortion clinics who brought the suit had no right use an 1871 federal anti-discrimination statute against anti-abortion protesters who tried to blockade clinics. Eventually a 6-3 majority of the Supreme Court agreed, too. Roberts argued that blockades were already illegal under state law. > > The images used in the ad are especially misleading. The pictures are of a clinic bombing that happened nearly seven years after Roberts signed the legal brief in question. The stench of political desperation is not a pretty thing. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/2 "2005-08-10T13:29:39Z")
Truly ugly. NARAL is not simply shading the truth here. They are out-and-out lying. How repulsive. ---
**Author:** ![GLWasteful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f05b48/32.png) [@GLWasteful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GLWasteful)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/3 "2005-08-10T13:41:11Z")
Pro-choice individual checking in to say that this sort of thing is a very bad idea. Unless they’re actually _striving_ for the same level of believability that is usually reserved for the Swifties and their ilk. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/4 "2005-08-10T13:42:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > How repulsive. I agree. Now we just need someone to come along and defend NARAL so we can have another mud-flinging trainwreck. How long will it take? ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/5 "2005-08-10T13:46:00Z")
Agreed, that such smear campaigns are despicable no matter who runs them. Stupid, too, in this case, since the nomination will succeed no matter how much mud gets flung. (Unless there’s some major skeleton in Roberts’ personal closet,which I doubt.) NARAL is damaging itself and its cause to no good end. ---
**Author:** ![Mollie\_Magill](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mollie_magill/32/20882_2.png) [@Mollie\_Magill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mollie_Magill)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/6 "2005-08-10T14:03:30Z")
Note to NARAL: Just because “the other guy does it” does not make it okay to lie and smear.[1] [1] - Refering to the Swift Boat Veteran who have been soundly discredited. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/7 "2005-08-10T14:12:51Z")
Lying to get ahead is unacceptable, be it from politicians or pundits. Winning through lies isn’t winning at all–it’s manipulation. The research into the adoptions doesn’t bother me if they don’t attempt to lie or spin the results. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/8 "2005-08-10T14:15:43Z")
The NARAL ad is misleading as to Roberts’ role in submitting a friend of the court brief and his positions on related issues. The fact remains that he supported Administration policy which impeded efforts to protect clients at abortion clinics. The Supreme Court decision which sided with the Administration is dubious at best. From **beagle’s** link:“The court, in a 6-3 decision, ultimately agreed with much of the government’s argument, saying that “the characteristic that formed the basis of the targeting” for protest “was not womanhood, but the seeking of abortion,” which is entirely voluntary.” Yep, nothing particularly relating to womanhood there. :rolleyes: “… some saw Operation Rescue’s actions as relying on the threat of violence, at least. In his dissent, Justice Stevens, describes the protests as instances where “the duly constituted authorities are rendered ineffective, and mob violence prevails.” Justice O’Connor, in her own dissent, spoke of “the threat of mob violence” raised by the blockaders.” When you attempt to separate the federal government from any responsibility to discourage these actions, that is worthy of criticism. As to “lying and starting a rumor campaign”, what do we make of this: “That’s why you saw that ridiculous Roberts-is-gay thing spinning through the blogosphere…” How exactly is NARAL connected to that? All I see is an undocumented allegation by an anonymous columnist. The pious declaration in the Spectator column that the other side is resorting to (gasp) _politics_ (unlike Roberts’ defenders, who are interestingly trying to paint him as a Friend Of Gay Rights) is truly the most shocking thing I have read today. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Zagna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d2c977/32.png) [@El\_Zagna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Zagna)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/9 "2005-08-10T14:26:20Z")
I noticed tha NARAL dedicates an entire page to the “far-right spin” on their ad, but they never offer cites indicating who these “far-right” groups are. Surely they are not claiming that [FactCheck.org](http://www.factcheck.org/article340.html) is far-right. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/10 "2005-08-10T14:28:29Z")
> [@Metacom Today](#): > > I agree. > > Now we just need someone to come along and defend NARAL so we can have another mud-flinging trainwreck. How long will it take? I’d say about 33 minutes. > [@Jackmannii Today](#): > > The NARAL ad is misleading as to Roberts’ role in submitting a friend of the court brief and his positions on related issues. > > The fact remains that he supported Administration policy which impeded efforts to protect clients at abortion clinics. The Supreme Court decision which sided with the Administration is dubious at best. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/11 "2005-08-10T14:35:57Z")
> [@](#): > > from **beagledave** ’s cite: > It is true that Roberts sided with the bomber So, other than Robert’s support for terrorists and terrorist organizations, he doesn’t support terrorists. Thanks for the heads up **beagledave** , I fear that subtlety may have been missed by a few who’ve gotten too involved in the “with us or against us” movement. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/12 "2005-08-10T14:41:49Z")
_In re_ plaid pants: There’s nothing _wrong_ with plaid pants. If Robert’s wants to wear plaid pants, that’s his business, no one elses. I’ve worn plaid pants myself. They made my legs feel colorful. [Roberts Papers Being Delayed Bush Aides Screen Pages for Surprises](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080901232.html) ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/13 "2005-08-10T15:08:58Z")
> [@GLWasteful](#): > > Pro-choice individual checking in to say that this sort of thing is a very bad idea. Unless they’re actually _striving_ for the same level of believability that is usually reserved for the Swifties and their ilk. That’d be the believability that won them the most recent presidential election? I keep hearing from a lot of people around here that a win justifies the means. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/14 "2005-08-10T15:11:08Z")
Maybe **Bricker** can explain how my post can be summarily dismissed as “defending NARAL” (especially when he _quotes_ me as saying “The NARAL ad is misleading as to Roberts’ role in submitting a friend of the court brief and his positions on related issues.” I can understand not bothering to read someone else’s post accurately, but the least he could do is actually comprehend his **own** post. Or he could actually refer to the issues raised. Too difficult? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/15 "2005-08-10T15:14:43Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > from beagledave’s cite: > > It is true that Roberts sided with the bomber > > So, other than Robert’s support for terrorists and terrorist organizations, he doesn’t support terrorists. Thanks for the heads up **beagledave** , I fear that subtlety may have been missed by a few who’ve gotten too involved in the “with us or against us” movement. The whole sentence, and the following one, from beagledave’s cite: > [@](#): > > It is true that Roberts sided with the bomber and many other defendants in a civil case, but the case didn’t deal with bombing at all. Roberts argued that abortion clinics who brought the suit had no right use an 1871 federal anti-discrimination statute against anti-abortion protesters who tried to blockade clinics. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/16 "2005-08-10T15:28:16Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > So, other than Robert’s support for terrorists and terrorist organizations, he doesn’t support terrorists. Thanks for the heads up **beagledave** , I fear that subtlety may have been missed by a few who’ve gotten too involved in the “with us or against us” movement. Right, because supporting a bomber on a legal point entirely unrelated to bombing is wrong and evil. After all, we can’t have any bombers getting any legal rights–let’s stick him in Guantanamo Bay. _double-checks that it’s the pit_ What the FUCK is wrong with you? The opinion in question had entirely to do with a single point of law and nothing to do with supporting bombing. On preview: Thank you, Bricker, for quoting so I don’t have to interrupt my vitriol. =P ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/17 "2005-08-10T15:32:19Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > So, other than Robert’s support for terrorists and terrorist organizations, he doesn’t support terrorists. I think that’s unfair. I support the KKK’s right to free speech, but it would be unfair to say I support the KKK’s actions or the KKK in general. Agreeing with someone on one or even many issues doesn’t mean that you agree with them or support them when they commit violence. ---
**Author:** ![NurseCarmen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5daacb/32.png) [@NurseCarmen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NurseCarmen)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/18 "2005-08-10T15:33:12Z")
These one trick pony organizations really start to bore me after a while. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/19 "2005-08-10T15:40:52Z")
The article says that Roberts sided with bomber on the civil rights issue 7 years before the bombing in question. Were there previous bombings this guy did? ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431/20 "2005-08-10T16:06:44Z")
Let’s hear it for raising the bar on political discourse. Who’s looking forward to the upcoming elections? If this shit keeps up, my eyes will be spinning like a slot machine, and I’ll be to dizzy to vote. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/naral-taking-the-low-road/316431.md?page=2)