January 29th, 2010
07:17 PM ET
12 years ago

Palin continues shots at the National Organization for Women

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/01/11/art.palin.flag.jpg caption="Sarah Palin has taken another shot at the National Organization for Women."](CNN) - Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is not backing down from her criticisms over the National Organization for Women's demand that CBS cease from airing a pro-life commercial during the Superbowl.

"For a pro-life, pro-woman, pro-family ad to be seen as offensive and not empowering women is puzzling," Palin told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren Thursday. "It makes you wonder what is NOW afraid of?"

The ad in question is paid for by the conservative political action group Focus on the Family and features Heisman-winning college quarterback Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam, discussing her decision not to have an abortion even though doctors recommended it at the time. Deciding against an abortion, she gave birth to Tim, who grew up to be an all-star quarterback at the University of Florida and perhaps one of the best college quarterbacks of all time.

Several abortion rights groups have taken issue with the ad, saying the Superbowl is not the correct forum for politically-charged messages. But Palin, who originally took issue with NOW's request on her Facebook page earlier this week, said the group is picking the wrong battle.

"It certainly isn't an offensive message," the former Alaska governor said on Fox. "For NOW to have chosen this, [they are] picking a wrong battle I think, to come across sounding quite offended by hearing that a pro-life commercial will air on the Superbowl, it's baffling."

Meanwhile NOW President Terry O'Neill said Palin is "missing our point."

"The goal of the Focus on the Family ad is not to empower women. It's to create a climate in which Roe v. Wade can be overturned," O'Neill said in a statement obtained by CNN. "There are always going to be women who need abortions. In this country, one in three women will have an abortion."

While CBS used to adhere to a policy of not airing advocacy commercials during sporting events, a spokesman for the network told the Associated Press they have changed their stance to reflect "industry norms."

Filed under: Popular Posts • Sarah Palin
soundoff (302 Responses)
  1. Steve

    Why not a debate between Sarah Palin and Gloria Steinem on the issue?

    January 29, 2010 11:58 am at 11:58 am |
  2. Cathy in AZ

    I agree – Ms. Palin is missing the point. This ad is all about creating a climate in which Roe v Wade can be overturned. Can you imagine the outcry if CBS ran an ad presenting the other side?
    NOW is not afraid Ms. Palin, stick to the very little you know about.

    January 29, 2010 11:59 am at 11:59 am |
  3. Helena

    Of course Sarah Palin is missing the point. Which is why I & the women I know didn't vote for her and will never vote for her.

    January 29, 2010 11:59 am at 11:59 am |
  4. bc

    Every male birth will not result in a star athlete. Every preganacy is NOT owned by any political or religious group. The health and welfare are the responsibility of the woman involved. The exact reason Ms. Tebow gave birth to Tim Tebow is not something to be aired during a football game.

    Just think. With all the economic difficulties, how would we cope with the millions more mouths to feed that the pro-lifers say we should have not aborted!

    January 29, 2010 12:00 pm at 12:00 pm |
  5. Chris

    I don't care what your feelings are on this subject, but I find this an inappropriate forum for this ad. It's the Super Bowl, can't we just leave it at football and awful beer commercials?

    January 29, 2010 12:03 pm at 12:03 pm |
  6. Orange Curtain, CA

    Typical...air one of the most divisive political topics on what should be a non-political sporting event.

    I won't even bother to watch the entire game. It's really shameful politics to resort to that.

    January 29, 2010 12:03 pm at 12:03 pm |
  7. Charlie the Tuna

    By industry norms, I assume CBS means "we need the money."

    January 29, 2010 12:03 pm at 12:03 pm |
  8. Bill from CA

    Sarah Palin misses a lot of points. The ad is not 'pro-life', it's 'anti-abortion' and yes, there is a difference. When the same people who oppose abortion also stop supporting every war and the death penalty, and stop opposing health care reform then they can truly consider themselves 'pro-life.' In the meantime, anytime they use that term they expose themselves as hypocrites, and Sarah Palin is no exception.

    January 29, 2010 12:06 pm at 12:06 pm |
  9. a real American

    Bravo to Tim Tebow and his brave mother for taking a stand for what they believe in. These feminists groups haven't even seen the ad-if they are so "pro-choice", then they should be applauding Mrs. Tebow's choice, right? Somehow, though, I don't think they support choices other than the ones they promote.

    By the way, just because 1 in 3 will have abortions doesn't make it a good thing.

    January 29, 2010 12:06 pm at 12:06 pm |
  10. I'm a Liberal-You got a problem with that?

    I'm pro-choice. I don't really care for Tebow and his bible verse eye art (and yes, I'm a Christian). But I don't see why any pro-choice group would advocate censoring this ad. It kind of makes us look like hypocrites, in my opinion.

    January 29, 2010 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  11. Jerome Milwaukee WI

    Both Palin and NOW are picking the wrong battle.

    To NOW its a commercial, if you dont want to see it change the channel or turn the TV off.

    For Palin, This is your battle when there is earthquake victims that need help, and americians that need job. Come on! Grow up and take on some real issue. Seems your goal is just stay in media coverage.

    Whether you are Pro Life or Pro Choice a commercial isnt going to change the face of abortion.

    January 29, 2010 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  12. madmatt

    Just another fundamentalist trying to force their belief system onto people who have no interest in them. Whatever happened to a "personal relationship" with your lord? Now they have taken proslytizing to a whole new level and they wonder why the rest of society dislikes it!

    January 29, 2010 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  13. BJs65

    Sarah darlin', if it weren't for NOW – you wouldn't be in the position you're in. Be careful who you diss.

    January 29, 2010 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  14. Dizzy Man

    Watched Sarah Palin on TV last night reporting on this issue ....
    she didn't seem "upset" to me .... she merely reported her point of view .... and puzzled reaction to NOW.

    January 29, 2010 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  15. Jane

    It's not the place for political forum.

    January 29, 2010 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  16. Greg, San Francisco, CA

    Meanwhile NOW President Terry O'Neill said Palin is "missing our point." Palin misses every point. Why should this be any different?

    January 29, 2010 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  17. Louise

    Gee whiz Sarah, remember when CBS wouldn't air United Church of Christ commercials which dared to suggest that their church would model tolerance. That idea was too radical for you. But this is something you can get behind? What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

    January 29, 2010 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  18. Julie

    Why do people have to ruin everything, especially politicians. This is a Super Bowl, not a venue to get your political views across. We as parents pick and choose which programs we want our children to watch, how can we pick and choose a commercial without knowing when it will be played, so we cannot let our young children, watch the super bowl in fear they will see an add we don't approve of that is not age appropriate for youn children who have not idea what an abortion is, and are not at the age where they can even begin to comprehend it. So Thank you SARAH and your selfishness. It would be better to get your point across on 60 minutes where people have the choice to watch or not.

    January 29, 2010 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  19. Greg

    I think it's wonderful that Palin is endorsing an add that talks about how wonderful it is that Mrs. Tebow had the option to choose what to do with her own body in this great country. NOW should spin that story to focus on the fact that every woman in this country has equal right to make the same choice or to make a different one...and that both should be considered valid, legal, and morally correct.

    January 29, 2010 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  20. robert bishop

    I predicted this 2 weeks ago when I first heard about it. The NFL is treading on thin ice and would it would be in their best interest not to give James Dobson's wacko group such a large forum.....Maybe NOW should just buy time for rebuttal. Religion in the Super Bowl ? Un-acceptable......I, for one, will NOT watch.....I hope all the other ad people take notice. Many people will simply not watch. Wake up NFL. We already know you are the No Fun League, now you're the Anti-Abortion League ?

    January 29, 2010 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  21. Reality

    NOW is indeed missing the point on this issue. How easy for them to insinuate that Palin doesn't know what she is talking about. Isn't "pro-choice" the ability to choose either to have an abortion or NOT to have an abortion. Why is it only okay to associate Pro-choice with abortion? Why does NOW get to dictate the appropriate forum? Why does CNN continue to seek out articles that they can twist in a negative mannor about Palin?

    It is because she is a successful conservitive, mother, wife, woman, govenor and proven leader who is beautiful, smart and full of commonn sense. All of which, baffle the media, but not the American public.

    January 29, 2010 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  22. Darth Vadik, CA

    I am as LIBERAL as they come, and my only problem would be whether the add is focused towars changing a womans opinion about her choice, which is OK to do (if you want to convice someone to have the baby, by all means go ahead), that's what the adds are for to give us perspectives...

    ...or whether the add is made in order to change the the laws and make abortions and womens chioces to do what they want with their bodies not their choices any more, which "Focus on the Family"s goal is. Which I'm completely against.

    Foucus on your own darn family and leave the rest of us be, you freaks.

    As far as Tebow, bad choice of him to get involved into politics, and this is before he even tried out pro football. At least Peyton "Milkshake" Manning was an established quarterback before he showed his ogre mug at Bush rallies. Oh yes Peyton, we remember.

    January 29, 2010 12:12 pm at 12:12 pm |
  23. P Johnson

    I find it strange that she and the other republicans want to bring every baby possible into this world, but once they get here, it is OK to deny them the assurance of health care. Something is very wrong with this kind of thinking...or are they thinking at all.

    January 29, 2010 12:13 pm at 12:13 pm |
  24. T.Will-CA

    I am a man- so all I can really do is comment on the situation, not the act of abortion itself, as I am a male therefore I can't have an abortion so its irrelevant.
    I agree with NOW ONLY because the super bowl seems like the wrong venue for this type of ad. This is America, the super bowl is practically a holiday, and I don't care for football. People are getting together to eat hot wings and drink beer. It seems out of place for an abortion ad. Really? We're all gathered around a big TV, everybody is happy then BAM!!
    If you don't want or need an abortion DON'T GET ONE

    January 29, 2010 12:15 pm at 12:15 pm |
  25. larry

    she has a right to criticize anyone but she also shouldn't complain when she is criticized. She can't have it both ways...CBS was just plain stupid to accept this ad for the Super Bowl.

    January 29, 2010 12:15 pm at 12:15 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13