League of Women Voters Aren’t Nonpartisan
For decades, the League of Women Voters have presented themselves as an oracle of election related wisdom. They have sponsored presidential debates. They will be cited by the media over and over again this year.
The American public has been hoodwinked into thinking the League of Women Voters is a non-ideological good government group. After all, the group purports to be nonpartisan. The League has used the non-partisan brand to increase their credibility to government election officials and the American public.
2012 should mark the end of that charade. Next time you see the League cited in a news story, be aware of their broad, pro-Democrat Party agenda.
When I recently appeared on Al Jazerea and said that the League of Women voters could hardly be called non-partisan, co-guest John Nichols, from The Nation, exploded as if I had committed blasphemy. Nichols rushed to defend the honor of the poor women.
The League of Women Voters are merely focused on the smooth running of elections, right?
Wrong. Let’s just take a glance at the webpage of the League of Women Voters in Virginia. Here is a sampling of the stated real issues they are fighting over:
against: “pre-abortion ultrasound”
for: “Access to Women’s Health Care”
In case you didn’t understand it the first two times: “Abortion.”
“regionally balanced transportation systems”
“increase the use of public transportation”
“legal authority to control the use of land. Stronger state control”
“Wetlands”
“Endeavor to prevent mental illness”
“Adoption of the California Standards for low emission vehicles”
“A more progressive state income tax, with an increase in the number of income brackets and a raise in the rates in higher brackets”
“In divorce fault should not enter into the court’s division of marital property. ”
“the state has a role to play in child care . . . [and the government should provide some] form of financial assistance to increase the affordability and availability of child care.”
“smoking in public should be limited to designated areas”
You’ve come a long way, baby.
Their election listings are all outdated. I guess they’re too busy with those other things.
— since the suffragettes all voted for Handsome Harding.
The LWV participates in a range of left-wing political coalitions.
Even more disturbing, the LWV accepted money from George Soros to advocate AGAINST electing judges. That’s right: in tandem with the ABA, the LWV is supporting “merit-based” appointment of judges (by the leftists ABA, of course), to replace election of judges.
The LWV wants to take away your right to vote.
Lots of scurrilous “research” is getting churned out to support their view — funded by Soros grants to academicians. The campaign is being sold to the public by the ABA and LWV as “education” in the “dangers of partisanship” created by judicial elections. State bars are busy putting on song-and-dance speaking tours to tell the little people how they can’t be trusted to vote for judges and should surrender the right.
To add insult to injury, the same State Bar associations force all practicing attorneys to pay dues in the state chapters while they advance Soros’ agenda, with Soros’ money, through their deployment of the ABA agenda. Pretty nefarious stuff, all of a piece: abuse of non-profit status for political ends.
And yes, Harding was indeed the start of it. Funny.
League of Women Voters = DNC in support hosiery. (An organization I resigned from at the time they were pushing for the Motor Voter Law, legislation with a name as threadbare as the concept behind it).
The League of Women Voters is allowed to take sides on issues but not candidates. Personally, I don’t think they should take sides on issues, but it is allowed.
Not allowed to take sides on candidates? Tell that to Sen Scott Brown in the Peoples Repulik of Massachusetts — the LWV tried to smear him a few months ago as a child killer because he isn’t sufficiently anti-energy for their tastes. A truly vile and dishonest group.
This is very surprising news to me!
I mean, that they’ve stopped pretending.
They’ve been leftist as long as I can remember.
I’m shocked, hurt and beginning to believe we cannot trust anything! I belonged to the LWV years ago and thought their sole purpose was to educate and provide a forum for discussion, debate and public education.
Another disappointment — LWV. Trust seems to be a thing of the past. We cannot trust the media, the government or the LWV. Sad, sad, sad.
In my observation almost organizations which label themselves as non-partisan are Democrat and have a very left-wing agenda.
That has been my observation too. Conservative organizations are open about being conservative, but liberal organizations almost always pretend they are “mainstream” and have some non partisan agenda. The MSM helps with this charade in that they constantly labell conservatives and hardly ever do so with liberals. They pretend the far left is the center.
That is why Floridacampaignforsoundmoney.com and rudebutcoolproductions is putting together a MSM BOYCOTT ON ADVERTISERS WHO SUPPORT THE PROPAGANDA MACHINE. Beginning oct. 1st and for 1 month we will not purchase any product or service from these advertisers. STARVE THE BEAST NOW..Watch for us in sept. on Michael Savage .com and as we tour the USA….support us
Not quite true, there are many organizations which label themselves non-partisan and are rather conservative. The difference is that whenever the press refers to them, they refer to them as right or conservative instead of non-partisan. Cato, for instance, is a non-partisan group but you will rarely see them described as such in the press because their right (libertarian) viewpoint outweighs their being non-partisan.
Left-wing but doesn’t openly support the Democratic Party by name = non-partisan
Supported more by people on the right, endorses candidates of both parties (NRA) = right-wing
In other news, the sun rose in the east today… ;o)
Call me naive: is advocacy of a Supreme Court decision that’s been in effect for a generation “leftist”? Just curious.
Advocacy is, by definition, NOT “non-partisan”. Advocacy is not education.
“Endeavor to prevent mental illness” that’s a Democrat [sic] party program? What would be the other party’s program? To NOT prevent mental illness? Or to PROMOTE mental illness? What in the world is wrong with trying to prevent mental illness? Oh, I get it… that belongs to the Church.
Whether to the Church or not is an interesting discussion.
One thing is quite clear: It does NOT belong to the federal government.
My father died two years ago and I notified the VA DMV then. We just got a renewal form for his license. I contacted DMV and then got a number for voter registration to try to get him off the voter’s list. He was still listed as active. A woman did it over the phone but I have no way to know if his records will be deleted. Voter records should be tied into the SS database but for reasons we are all aware of, this is not done. Have you noticed that the only federal agency that can really track a person is the IRS. For some reason the politicians make sure that is up to date.
All these commentators have no idea how liberal the League is. As a fourty-five year member, the National League (there are three layers–national, state and local) is by far the most liberal and most in-sync with the DNC platform. For instance, we were advised by the National League to support Obamacare–long before Nancy Pelosi said they had to pass it to see what’s in it. Each Democratic proposal is to be encouraged by writing our legislators in its support. However, some local Leagues are not as liberal as the National League. From my experience, these usually well-informed and good women have no idea how far left they are. They think they are “right and just;” consequently, there is no room for possible bias.
In WI, they are suing the state over the new voter ID requirements.
This is definitely a left wing stance.
In my kid’s school the school board refused to remove a book containing extremely graphic sexual violence for various claimed reasons basically saying that was a parent’s job. I went to the next “Meet the Candidates” to hear school board candidates speak and take questions from the audience. The questions had to be written and submitted to a volunteer who passed them to the League of Woman’s Voters person who would ask the question. I asked whether candidates would review books containing sexually inappropriate material and make a decision or would just say it’s the parent’s job, as they had done before. The LWV person read my question to herself and decided not to ask it. The volunteer told me apologetically that the LWV person would not read the question because it contained the word, “sexually.”
So the children may read sexually inappropriate books in public schools but the LWV lady decided the adults ears were too delicate to even address the issue.
That was clear bias to me, the kind I see all the time in the American Library Association, but this time it was by the LWV, and that shocked me because I thought they were supposed to be unbiased. And the children are still reading sexually inappropriate books to this day while the school board keeps passing the buck to the parents, with unsullied ears, thanks to the LWV.
read the protocols!
Over here in California, the Pasadena League of Women Voters is not even being quiet about being lefty shills. They usually have “workshops” where they have a panel of speakers of all political stripes (from liberal to far left) who talk about some issue of the day, then break into groups to come up with a policy proposal (more redistribution of income!) that could have been written without the Potemkin/Delphi meeting to lend it authority. They just recently had a panel on global warming (is is really bad, or bad-bad-bad?). They recently headlined a press release about a speaker from Occupy as “Occupy is Alive And Well!” (Assumption: that it was ever “well.”) And LWV is planning to go to the June primary wearing “Occupy the Polls” T-shirts. And they still claim to be non-partisan.
In Illinois, we always referred to the League of Womens voters as the Plague of Womens voters. Attack politics is their game. They always ask candidates for their platform in advance of the debate and they immediately share the answers with the Democratic state committees.
I can understand why some of the items are considered Pro Democrat, But some seem they should be non-partison. Naive me, It just goes to show how politically polarized we have become. We have to label things as left or right wing.
Our language has become such that we cannot discuss things without labeling them. End of discussion.
Actually, the list contains highly partisan issues that usually result in greater control by the government and a loss of liberty. You might think they should be non-partisan, but when liberty is lost, some are willing to defend it.
Mr. Adams – I was a member of the League in the early ’70′s while living in Tulsa, OK, and helped produce pamphlets for the school system that were unbiased and informative. In 1976 I moved back to my hometown in upstate NY and joined the local League. There was a loud, angry, woman who was constantly screaming about how we had to go into every school and public library and remove every book that portrayed a traditional family. They also supported the ERA (remember that?) so that was it for me. They had clearly veered into partisan territory at that juncture and I’m surprised anyone today believed otherwise.
Yep. The big guy here is finally tax debt free. What these these Tax lawyers says sounds little too good to believe, but they totally explained how to make a very cool deal.