TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

In Gillibrand v. Ford, Women’s Civil Rights at Stake

Who knows, maybe New York will make Harold Ford, Jr. lean left. But that simply hasn’t been his record, regardless of his protestations in the New York Post, of all papers, today.

Recently, Mr. Ford said he’d “evolved” on gay marriage (“Today” show video), having voted against it in Tennessee, supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, he now supports civil unions and gay marriage.

But on women’s civil rights he’s yet to, using his word, evolve.

After what we’ve seen unravel for women on the health care debate, we cannot afford one new member of the Senate or House who thinks compromising women’s civil rights, the basic freedom to control one’s body, to be bargained away further. Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic leadership, including Pres. Obama who remained mute, have done enough damage, with their compromises on our rights about to become law in sweeping health care legislation that backtracks on what’s already been won in law, going back to 1963, well before Roe v. Wade.

Via the New York Post, where Ford says his piece today:

It’s true: I am strongly considering running for the United States Senate.

I do so because our best as a nation has always come when we test our ideas and ourselves, and when we trust competition to refine the steel of our convictions and the truth of our arguments.

Some have already questioned whether I should be running.

Others are falsifying my record in public life.

New Yorkers deserve a free election. …

This is obviously up to New Yorkers. It’s an important race and even though I’m not an advocate for any candidate and won’t be, it’s clear that there is much at stake.

As long as Democrats are allowed to bargain women’s civil rights away, giving states more power and control over our reproductive health care, which has always been the right’s goal, even if they can’t get it done via the courts. With Congress now willing to assist the right, we will remain forever locked in an abortion debate, instead of a prevention debate. The degree to which our lawmakers keep us tied to a notion that full reproductive health care must be held hostage by the Hyde amendment, and that poor women don’t deserve what wealthier women can provide themselves, the longer it will take us to employ educational, scientific and pharmaceutical discoveries to their fullest extent to finally wipe the majority of abortions from the “choice” menu. Because if women have full means to prevent pregnancy there will simply be fewer unwanted ones.

Right now none of our leaders have the kind of courage it requires to really take this issue on. The Caseys and Stupaks of our party certainly aren’t the answer, and Harold Ford, Jr. isn’t either unless he proves to Democratic voters that he will champion women’s civil rights all the way.

About Taylor Marsh

Veteran political analyst and author of "The Hillary Effect - Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss," now available in print at Amazon.com, and 1 of 4 books chosen by Barnes and Noble to launch their "NOOK First" Featured Authors Selection program. Former Miss Missouri, Broadway dancer, & relationship consultant at LA Weekly, produced & wrote one woman show "Weeping for JFK."

, , , , , ,

20 Responses to In Gillibrand v. Ford, Women’s Civil Rights at Stake

  1. Don Bacon 12 January 2010 at 10:03 am #

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,. . .

    The government is supposed to be protecting the rights to life, liberty and happiness that we were created with, and not taking them away. There is no more fundamental right than our right to deal with our own earthly bodies in our own fashion.

  2. Ramsgate 12 January 2010 at 10:11 am #

    I still believe that this is all a very good bluff on HF’s part. I doubt he will run.
    If he does, we’ll see what Gillibrand is made of.

  3. Taylor Marsh 12 January 2010 at 10:13 am #

    I’m not convinced either, Ramsgate, but his “gearing up” requires to let him know what he will face if he enters. He’s simply putting out feelers, as he doesn’t know New York at all yet.

    amen, DB, someone tell the Democrats.

  4. daubry 12 January 2010 at 10:22 am #

    Well if he decides to run, I’ll be joining Gillibrand’s campaign without hesitation. A anti-union, anti-gay rights, anti-women’s choice candidate just doesn’t work for me.

    Who does he think will back him? Or vote for him, with a record like that? African Americans?

    Get real.I don’t buy his evolution, he spent a campaign going further and further right, even touting God in Tennessee.

  5. Ramsgate 12 January 2010 at 10:29 am #

    Taylor, I think he’s looking to the future more than anything.

    His name recognition alone has increased substantially over the past week. Moreover, his “gravitas” if you will, has been burnished as he is being talked about and perceived as a potential “Senator from NY”.

  6. Taylor Marsh 12 January 2010 at 10:35 am #

    daubry says:
    12 January 2010 at 10:22 am

    I’ve got no skin in this game at all, but….

    Ford did actually “evolve” and says he now supports gay marriage. Many candidates change on this and other issues, if they didn’t Hillary Clinton wouldn’t have had a remote chance of running in 2008, let alone winning.

  7. Joyce Arnold 12 January 2010 at 11:29 am #

    I lived in Tennessee during Ford’s Senate run, so I’ll admit my take on him now is based on listening to him go out of his way to be “anti-gay,” particularly regarding “gay marriage.” Still, I suppose it’s possible he’s actually “evolved,” in that if he is in a position to so vote, he’d do so in support of LGBT rights, including marriage. But I’ve heard too many “elect me and I’ll work for you” promises to the lesbian and gay communties to be anything but skeptical.

    I also wonder if the less than positive political reputation of the Memphis Ford family will play a role. One thing seems certain, Ford Jr. has given up on continuing the family tradition in TN.

    And daubry, you are definitely correct that he “touted” God. Of course, you’d have a difficult time finding any election in TN in which the candidates of whatever party didn’t invoke God :) .

  8. Imhotep 12 January 2010 at 11:35 am #

    “no skin in this game” which goes directly to the point of this whole exercise. Ford is just one more “light-skinned, smooth talking negro” opportunist looking to make a quick buck. If a good looking dummy and crackpot like Palin can cash in why can’t a nice looking, articulate, clean, young man from Tennessee? Follow the money. Peace

  9. daubry 12 January 2010 at 11:45 am #

    He went out of his way to brag about voting to amend the U.S. Constitution to outlaw gay marriage. As if that wasn’t bad enough, pro life Harold Ford then bragged that he intended to vote for the ballot initiative banning same sex marriage in the state of Tennessee.

    Yep, he’s evolved alright.

    And maybe tomorrow I’ll evolve into a heterosexual.

  10. JoeCHI 12 January 2010 at 11:49 am #

    “Present”

  11. Lake Lady 12 January 2010 at 12:06 pm #

    Oh please spare Morning Joe watchers from a Harold Ford campaign. He is a favorite on that show and he will be on all the time with his rote recisitation of his three talking points per issue.He strikes me as a very typical chameleon on the take exactly the opposite of the kind of change we need in Democrats.

  12. djjl 12 January 2010 at 12:40 pm #

    Joyce Arnold:

    “I also wonder if the less than positive political reputation of the Memphis Ford family will play a role. One thing seems certain, Ford Jr. has given up on continuing the family tradition in TN.”

    Ya think he’ll be continuing the family political style in NY – a la his uncle’s?

  13. daubry 12 January 2010 at 12:49 pm #

    “They said I’m for gay marriage when I voted against it, for giving school girls abortion pills. All of a lie. Here’s what I believe: In God…..”

  14. alphonsegaston 12 January 2010 at 2:38 pm #

    As a displaced upstate New Yorker, I am disgusted by any attention given Ford by the party. NEW YORK CITY IS NOT THE ENTIRE STATE. Sorry for the caps, but we get ticked off when New York means New York City. I love New York City, and unlike some other upstaters whom I know, I do not think we should form a separate state, make Syracuse the capital, and maybe close the Hudson to traffic (well, that was a while back). But seriously, we cannot abandon Amy G. who has herself evolved to represent the whole state.

    The bad news just keeps piling up.

  15. djjl 12 January 2010 at 4:35 pm #

    Well, you know this fifty state strategy may work really well to dilute the former democratic Democratic Pary and lead to further enabling of the establishment’s establishment. The rich get richer………the rest of us get screwed.

  16. Joyce Arnold 12 January 2010 at 4:59 pm #

    djjl: “Ya think he’ll be continuing the family political style in NY – a la his uncle’s?”

    I’m not sure he knows any other way of playing the political game :)

    daubry: The Ford quotes bring back painful memories, but they need to be made public well beyond Tennessee, so good that you post them.

    “Junior,” as he was often referred to, made a break with his Tennessee roots, in part because there was a lot of unpleasantness associated with the family name. Somehow I just don’t see him making it in New York.

  17. djjl 12 January 2010 at 5:23 pm #

    I think he doesn’t Joyce Arnold. But, I’m not so sure the citizens of New York state are ready for another hoodwink’in. They’ve been bamboozled as have the rest of us. We’re more aware – not so fast – ole okie doke.

  18. lynnette 12 January 2010 at 6:26 pm #

    Like I said before, I’m an Upstater and will not vote for Ford, and I’m a loyal Democrat but not for the likes of him. No way. He is another Stupak for sure.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. In Gillibrand v. Ford, Women's Civil Rights at Stake | Taylor … | Drakz Free Online Service - 13 January 2010

    [...] more: In Gillibrand v. Ford, Women's Civil Rights at Stake | Taylor … Share and [...]

  2. So, You Want to Be a New York Senator? | Taylor Marsh – TaylorMarsh.com – News, Opinion and Weblog on Progressive Politics - 13 January 2010

    [...] I want to hear is if Mr. Ford has “evolved” on women’s civil rights like he says he has on gay [...]