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. Mike from Michigan

    This is a non-issue. It is a simple matter of free speech. If FotF has the funds to pay for a superbowl ad they should be allowed to run the commercial. If there are negative consequences to them for voicing their opinion, they will have to deal with that....ask that Dixie Chick singer about that. It's funny how some organizations believe in free speech as long as it agrees with their views?

    January 29, 2010 02:38 pm at 2:38 pm |
  2. CF

    I am strongly pro-choice, and I disagree with just about everything that comes out of Sarah Palin's open mouth.
    However I believe this group has the right to create the ad in question, and CBS has the right to decide what to air (or not to) on their network. Just so long as anyone with an opposing point of view is also granted the same.
    If you don't like it, boycott it. Protest it. Start a Facebook group against it. Make your own ad rebuting it. We can and will disagree, but to silence someone or bash someone for not agreeing on something is just wrong.
    That's the kind of dirty trick that Republicans and Teabaggers use constantly. We must not stoop to that level.
    Interestingly, if the situation was reversed... if it was a pro-choice group wanting to air an ad... I wonder how accepting Ms. Palin and the Right would be of it?

    January 29, 2010 02:38 pm at 2:38 pm |
  3. Leon

    What is NOW afraid of.

    January 29, 2010 02:39 pm at 2:39 pm |
  4. Jeff of Peoria

    PRO-CHOICE people can be as crazy as their counter-parts. Why don't they run an ad justifying abortion??? It's a free country.

    January 29, 2010 02:39 pm at 2:39 pm |
  5. Guerrina

    Seems like NOW is just trying to pick a fight and are now directly responsible for putting the ad they claim is offensive and their organization in the spotlight. Also NOW is making a huge assumption about the Roe vs Wade issue. This time I find NOW coming across as troublemakers, making mountains out of nothing.

    January 29, 2010 02:39 pm at 2:39 pm |
  6. Felonious Monk

    Is it a "pro-life" message or is it a believe as I believe message?

    Is she afraid of others with differing points of view?

    January 29, 2010 02:40 pm at 2:40 pm |
  7. Ken

    Would a pro-abortion message be allowed?

    January 29, 2010 02:40 pm at 2:40 pm |
  8. Eric - Blue Hen

    Doesn't "the right to choose" include choosing life as an option?

    January 29, 2010 02:43 pm at 2:43 pm |
  9. J-Bird

    It is sad.
    We're trying to get America on track with it's values and then you have this.

    January 29, 2010 02:45 pm at 2:45 pm |
  10. Bruce Millar

    Why do so many continue to treat Palin's comments as newsworthy?

    She has proven time after time that she has no real grasp of national issues.

    January 29, 2010 02:46 pm at 2:46 pm |
  11. Brian

    None of us (including NOW) have even seen the ad. If the message of the ad is simply an appeal to women to not have an abortion, using the Tebow family as an inspirational example, i don't see anything wrong with that. If the ad were to call for abortion to be outlawed (which i have a feeling it will not) then i could understand people objecting to it.

    January 29, 2010 02:47 pm at 2:47 pm |
  12. wmscot

    Palin "missing a point" what a novel thought. I am assuming there are a lot of women that have a differant view abbout this. She apparently is not taking that into account if she wants to run again.

    January 29, 2010 02:47 pm at 2:47 pm |
  13. speedster

    I'm a pro-life liberal, and if the ad is what it is described as in the story, I really see no problem with it.

    January 29, 2010 02:48 pm at 2:48 pm |
  14. Bethanne

    What are advocacy commercials exactly? Aren't all commercials 'advocating' something? Be it a certain food product, clothing line, thirst quencher, or tv show you just can't miss, etc. If Focus on the Family and the Tebow's had the money to purchase and produce a commercial spot to run during the Super Bowl then they have the right to do so. Just as much right as the National Organization for Women has the right to buy an 'advocacy commercial'...but what exactly would NOW be advocating? Sour grapes it sounds like.

    January 29, 2010 02:49 pm at 2:49 pm |
  15. GI Joe

    Palin takes shots at everything - nothing new

    January 29, 2010 02:49 pm at 2:49 pm |
  16. An American First


    Is this for real? What industry norm? You do it or you don't do it. Don't justify it by saying others are airing these types of commercials as well.

    January 29, 2010 02:49 pm at 2:49 pm |
  17. notfooledbydistractions

    So I guess Palin and her ilk won't have any problems if the gay dating site also runs their ads during the super bowl, right?

    January 29, 2010 02:52 pm at 2:52 pm |
  18. Braxton

    How would Palin feel if a Pro-Choice commercial was aired during the Super Bowl instead?

    January 29, 2010 02:52 pm at 2:52 pm |
  19. Dave

    The ad is just plain misleading.

    It takes a one-in-a-million example of Tim Tebow to demonstrate that abortion is somehow universally bad. That's lame.

    Couldn't someone make an ad with about 100,000 people who are drug addicts, murderers, and rapists and say the same thing to make the opposite point?

    January 29, 2010 02:52 pm at 2:52 pm |
  20. Dr. Roy K. Boutwell

    Freedom of Speech !!! You can't "cherry pick" and choose according to a fixed agenda. If Rowe v. Wade is a just, popular law, it will stand on its own merits. If the Focus on the Family ad brings it down, well so be it, and personally I hope is does.

    January 29, 2010 02:52 pm at 2:52 pm |
  21. harry

    So now we have CBS, Rush, Glenn and Sarah leading us to a better future. If these are what we are going to call our drivers of our American bus, I think I'll just get out and walk. The stink in the bus could get toxic!

    January 29, 2010 02:53 pm at 2:53 pm |
  22. Susan

    Such an ad is NOT appropriate for the Super Bowl - no ifs, ands, or buts about it! And, not to worry, EVERYthing upsets Silly Sarah in one way or another - go figure.....??

    January 29, 2010 02:54 pm at 2:54 pm |
  23. EJ in metro Houston

    I think regardless if you are religious, practice Christianity or not it would really be nice if more of these Focus of the Family folks, including Sarah Palin herself would really practice what the religion teaches which includes NOT passing judgment and being more tolerant of other's differences. If they would do that, especially the so-called religious right Republicans I think there would be a far better view of them and they could get their point across even better. I recall a certain verse that says "let your light so shine before men so that they may SEE your good works". Really can't say I see that with a lot of them.

    January 29, 2010 02:55 pm at 2:55 pm |
  24. Shanna

    I have no problem with the pro life message of the Tebow ad. I do have a problem with the fact that it implies that women should not heed a doctors advice while pregnant. In a situation like Tebow's mom describes, it s always good to havea second opinion, but to suggest that if a pregnancy puts a woman's life in danger she should just 'pray it out' is ridiculous

    January 29, 2010 02:56 pm at 2:56 pm |
  25. Susan Jacobs

    Only Sarah Palin would say that taking a woman's rights to choose is empowering her with a straight face. She plays as is pays.

    January 29, 2010 02:57 pm at 2:57 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13