Shelly Mandell, head of LA chapter of National Organization for Women endorses McCain-Palin

Imagine Jim Dobson or Rick Warren endorsing Barack Obama. Imagine the headlines and news stories which would derive from such an endorsement.
Now imagine a major Democratic operative, who is heads one of the largest chapters of the National Organization for Women endorsing John McCain and Sarah Palin, primarily due to Sarah Palin’s place on the ticket.
Both would be big news, right?
One would think either scenario would be reported widely. However, when Ms. Shelly Mandell endorsed Sarah Palin in Carson CA, on Saturday October 4, it was not reported widely. Thus far, the stunning news has garnered one story that I can find in the mainstream press (two if you include Greta Van Susteren’s blog post).
The news that has been of interest to mainstream reporters is Palin’s comments about Barack Obama and William Ayers, and her quote of Madelyn Albright. You would think an endorsement from a major feminist leader would get a sentence or two.
You can watch the speech by Ms. Mandell here:

Mandell says she disagrees with Palin on some issues, probably life, but she believes Palin cares about fairness to women and will shake things up in Washington. Mandell is a former supporter of Hillary Clinton.
Why would mainstream media not report this?
UPDATE: Because I did not have the proper spelling of Ms. Mandell’s name, I missed some references, including this one in the LA Times blog. However, the only reporting I can find on this story is the MSNBC post and the local Southern California press. More interest has been given to Sarah Palin’s slight misquote of Madeleine Albright.

28 thoughts on “Shelly Mandell, head of LA chapter of National Organization for Women endorses McCain-Palin”

  1. The Orange County Register, in their article covering the Palin rally in Carson, did make a point of mentioning that she was introduced by Shelly Mandell of the LA chapter of NOW:
    Saturday, October 4, 2008
    Palin says it’s time to ‘take off the gloves’
    The GOP vice presidential candidate takes a few swings at Obama, but also quotes a Democratic line she recently read on a Starbucks cup.
    The Orange County Register
    Comments 963 | Recommend 11
    With a month to go until Election Day, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin told an enthusiastic crowd Saturday afternoon that it was time to “put on the heels and take off the gloves.”
    And while she credited the line to a campaign worker, it and the rest of her 24-minute speech at the Home Depot Center rally was delivered with her trademark panache. The Republican hit the familiar topics of the economy, energy and defense, but offered a few surprises as well.
    The first one came with the woman who introduced Palin, lifelong Democrat and president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization For Women, Shelly Mandell. While NOW has endorsed Democrat Barack Obama as best representing women’s interests in the race, Mandell has taken a different view.
    “This is what a feminist looks like,” Mandell told the crowd. “Like Gov. Sarah Palin.”
    Palin picked up from there, saying, “We’re going to shatter the highest glass ceiling in America.” etc.

  2. Just to correct something from a few posts back, Catholics haven’t used the “Rhythm Method” for a few decades. The rhythm method tries to predict the days a woman is fertile based on the time since her last period. It is very inaccurate. Now most Catholics use some form of “Natural Family Planning”, such as charting her temperature increase before ovulation, or the Billings Method, which uses a combination of several physical signs to pinpoint ovulation. It works a lot better. Contrary to popular belief, the Church follows updates in science closely in order to guide believers as accurately as possible.
    As for it being sinful, I have met a few Catholics who personally believe it is, but the official position of the Church is that refraining from sex is not sinful. The act of sex must be open to new life, but it the couple cannot afford another child, for example, they can make the sacrifice of waiting for sex until another day. Basically, sex is seen as good, but not necessary. Interfering with the life-giving aspect of sex is seen as selfish. Agreeing to forgo sex is a discipline that couples can do to manage their families.
    Another problem that the Church has about contraception is that many methods do not prevent fertilization of the egg, but do keep it from implanting in the uterus. Thus the fertilized egg is rejected, and that life is destroyed.

  3. Sarah Palin is NOT a hypocrite. I am a born again Christian like Palin and I have no issue with birth control. The Bible is the only book and authority. Not some church’s bylaws, rules or personal ideals. Just the Bible in which Christians believe is the Word of God as written through His servants. That being said, birth control according to the Bible is not sinful. It is preventing a birth not destroying an already made one which is what abortion is all about. The 10 Commandments state: “Thou Shalt Not Murder”. So Palin is Pro-life. “Protecting that which already lives”.
    Hillary Clinton is backing Obama because she has stated that she is a loyal member of the Democratic Party and will back whomever is the candidate. She says she wants to show party unity. Whether she agrees with Obama on all the issues doesn’t matter because regardless she and Bill will back him because of their party loyalty.
    I think Mandel’s endorsement is puzzling. Hillary shares more with Obama on the issues then McCain/Palin do. And yet she has decided to back the Republican candidates ticket? Very odd. Yet it’s her choice. I don’t think it’s that newsworthy though because Mandel is only the head of the Los Angeles N.O.W. NOT the National one. Her words really don’t carry that much weight.


  5. Lauren wrote:

    Sarah Palin falls smack dab in the middle of typical pro-lifers.

    Not if you poll the Mennonites, Baptists, and Roman Catholics who I know. But I come from a very conservative, yet somewhat progressive, portion of mostly farmland Indiana.

    ….in regards to Onan, it can be argued that Onan’s sin was in not following God’s instructions, not the specific way he choose not to follow them.

    I was simply giving you the Roman Catholic party line. In disobeying the god, all Onan did was disobey the Israelite law to provide an heir for his brother. The law had a specific punishment, public humiliation. Thus the god must have killed Onan for something further, ergo coitus interruptus.

  6. Battle Ground Voter wrote:

    Lynn David is typical of O trolls. When a notable woman throws her support behind Palin, they try to smear her. Start digging up her past. This is the old politics where the messenger is shot.

    This is really funny. As I remember what happened with Foat and Mandell from the 1980s I simply thought it might bear repeating that Mandell has a record of back-stabbing. Her record as a lawyer bore looking into also. Unfortunately, most people who go to such sites always have bad news to relate. But the money-grubbing Mandell who wasn’t prepared in court and brought somewhat frivolous suits seemed to be a common theme. And I deliberately chose one from prior this election cycle to portray.

    Name one (that is ONE) time Obama has worked with a conservative republican to pass anything of substance. No, something non-controversial like a postage stamp for the great Rosa Parks doesn’t count.

    He worked with Richard Lugar of Indiana, a man who has always had my vote, to create a bill to keep Russian nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists. I guess you don’t really study a man, his character, and his work beyond the hype you want to believe.

    I, too, am a Hillary supporter now supporting McCain/Palin.

    I just happen to have received today a letter from Hillary Clinton, in it she said:

    I haven’t spent the last 35 years in the trenches advocating for children, campaigning for universal health care, helping parents balance work and family, and figting for women’s rights at home and around the world to see another Republican in the White House squander the promise of our country and the hope of our people.
    No way. No how. No McCain. No Palin.
    Barack Obama is my candidate. And he must be our president.
    Barack will renew the promise of America. To rebuild the middle class and sustain the American Dream, to provide the opportunity to work hard and have that work rewarded, to save for college, a home and retirement, to afford the gas and groceries and stil have a little left over each month. We need to do everything possible to help elect Barack as our next president.
    While Barack has been working to elevate the tone of this campaign and appeal to Americans’ hopes and aspiratios, John McCain, Sarah Palin, the Republican Party, and their conservative allies have been doing everything in their power to drag it into the gutter.
    It’s not a matter of disagreeing on the issues or challenging Barack and the Democratic party for our stands on health care, thee war in Iraq or the economy.
    In a sorry replay of past elections, the conservative noise machine is attacking Barackand engaging in a despicable whisper campaign that brrings out the worst of our political process. As someone who understands what he is going through, I know that Barack has what it takes to stand up to thee GOP bullies dragging his name through the mud.
    There is only one path to the peace, prosperity and progress we seek. It can only be achieved by ensuring that Barack Obama walks through thee doors of the Oval Office on January 20,2009….
    Sincerely… Hillary Rodham Clinton

    I guess you’ve never really been a supporter of Ms Clinton if you do not support her now. It seems you are only interested in the cult of personality and not for the issues for which she stands. That’s what is wrong with this country.

    I AM

  8. Lynn, in regards to Onan, it can be argued that Onan’s sin was in not following God’s instructions, not the specific way he choose not to follow them.

  9. Lynn, as someone within the pro-life movement (and a pentecostal) I can shed a bit of light on the contraceptive issue.
    I’ll go from “most” restrictive to least:
    There are the “quiverfull” who believe that any form of birth control is sinful, even NFP, and that we should be open to any children that God chooses to bless us with.
    There are the NFPers who belive that natural family planning is the only acceptable method because it “leaves the possibility open” to life.
    There are Barrier Only people who oppose hormonal birthcontrol but are OK with condoms, diaphrams, ect. as well as tubal ligation and vasectomy.
    These people oppose hormonal birth control because it has the possibility to interfer with implantation of an already created life. This gets a bit muddy because no one knows how often hormonal birthcontrol acts in this manner and “natural” methods such as Lactation Ammenenorah may also act in this manner. This is actually a bit of a contentious issue amongst pro-lifers, but both sides agree that someone CAN be pro-hormonal contraceptive and pro-life, but perhaps not “pro-life enough”.
    Then there are the Pro All BC Pro-Lifers, who are also often pro- comprehensive sex-ed.
    Finally, there are even pro-lifers who will even accept the risk of the morning after pill. Though this is more contentious because it is believed that this pill acts as an abortificient more often than traditional hormonal birthcontrol.
    Sarah Palin falls smack dab in the middle of typical pro-lifers.

  10. Lynn David is typical of O trolls. When a notable woman throws her support behind Palin, they try to smear her. Start digging up her past. This is the old politics where the messenger is shot.
    Try looking at the character of the top of the dem ticket. Name one (that is ONE) time Obama has worked with a conservative republican to pass anything of substance. No, something non-controversial like a postage stamp for the great Rosa Parks doesn’t count.
    Obama is no who he says he is. He lied about his relationship with Ayers (“barely knew him”), and his relationship with Rev. Wright (“this is not the person that I knew”), apparently the Rev. Wright that he knew only said anti-american things in private.
    This time he cannot vote PRESENT on Ayers and have his lap dogs in the media lick his wounds. I was hurt when he labeled the Clintons as racist and pissed on Clinton’s presidency. Who is he to say that, what has he DONE to say such a thing?
    I, too, am a Hillary supporter now supporting McCain/Palin.


  12. You would be surprised how many Clinton supporters are not going to vote for Obama. The NOW leadership would like this story to stay quiet but many HRC supporters are going to switch to McCain.

  13. The rhythm method is eminently acceptable as it has been responsible for the birth of several children in good Catholic families.

  14. Ann–
    Rhythym is only considered sinful if it leads to dancing! 🙂
    Seriously, though, I think it comes down to this. There’s a scripture that says that ‘children are a gift from the Lord’…or something very similar and then another that says that “life is in the seed”. These seem to be behind the controversy.
    Most figure that once the seed reaches the egg, that’s life…which is the basis for attitudes against ‘the morning after pill’; others figure that since life is in the seed, then any efforts taken to stop the seed from reaching the egg are obstructing God’s plan. These would be against all forms of contraception including the use of a condom.
    Even when I was a practicing Catholic, I thought that the rhythym method was a strange way of getting around the whole contraception issue. “Oh, we’re not trying to stop the seed…we’re just making sure that it can’t find a viable egg.”
    I don’t mind when a thinking atheist challenges or critiques religion. Sometimes it takes an outsider to point out our inconsistencies. And, many times, the atheist has religious roots…so it isn’t like they are totally uninformed: they were once on the inside and found it lacking.

  15. I have heard that the Catholic religion believes the rhythm method is a method of contraception – is that considered sinful?

  16. Oh… so Palin isn’t alone in being a hypocrite, it’s endemic among all protestants? That sorta fits in with my Catholic upbringing also. Catholic Answers:

    Few realize that up until 1930, all Protestant denominations agreed with the Catholic Church’s teaching condemning contraception as sinful. At its 1930 Lambeth Conference, the Anglican church, swayed by growing social pressure, announced that contraception would be allowed in some circumstances. Soon the Anglican church completely caved in, allowing contraception across the board. Since then, all other Protestant denominations have followed suit. Today, the Catholic Church alone proclaims the historic Christian position on contraception.

    Whoops, my bad. I didn’t know you all had given up on St Thomas Aquinas and the natural law. And yet I see it mentioned often by several Protestants. I mentioned coitus interruptus as a reference to Onan, who was killed for his sin when the only punishment for not giving your brother an heir was public humiliation. Sorry, I didn’t know protestants quit following the Bible – in that respect.

  17. Thanks Lynn. Obviously your opinion is colored by your Catholic upbringing.
    As a lifelong Southern Baptist, i cannot recall a single time I’ve heard any mainstream protestant preach that contraception was sinful. That may actually be the case — either as a personal belief of many protestants, or as a deeply buried theology that is rarely if ever mentioned from the pulpit — but outside of Catholicism, the idea is completely foreign to me.
    Granted, my thinking is colored by my protestant upbringing, but your charge of hypocrisy could only hold water if Palin claimed to be a Catholic (as is the case with Pelosi, Biden, etc).
    Anyway I always find it humourous when an Atheist tries to lecture someone on religion. Get a real job! 😛

  18. I don’t know, Warren, seems like we’re stretching on this one. Mandell is the leader of a large NOW chapter but it is, after all, only a city chapter. If she was the leader for the entire state, then I could see it being particularly newsworthy.
    Now that Palin has come out on the attack, it’s going to get interesting. I heard her jibe about Tina Fey this morning and the assembled crowd, of course, thought she was so with it. She made a comment about the fact that it seems her candidacy is working against unemployment at Saturday Night Live. Actually, since Tina is no longer a cast member, having moved on to her own show, the jibe falls flat. Tina’s 11 minutes portraying Sarah were 11 minutes that didn’t go to a regular SNL cast member. 🙂

  19. Marty asked…

    Are you a Christian Lynn David? Are you a Catholic?

    Well Marty, I’m a fairly middle of the road atheist, who is a former Roman Catholic. At times I even speak of myself as a Roman Catholic atheist, yeah, an oxymoron. All I know is that from what I have seen of Gov. Palin, she talks a lot about her religion, but she really doesn’t do the walk. The remnant Catholic programming in me is repulsed by her. She speaks of America choosing a “culture of life” and then speaks of her support of contraception/birth control. Even as a member of the “culture of death” as my former pontifical leaders have labeled me, I find Palin’s hypocrisy to be rather blatent.
    A “culture of life” is sometimes defined as support for life from conception on. But in Catholicism a culture of life would support the sexual act between a married man and woman to be sacred and one that must always be open to life-giving. Thus any contraception is out of the question, as is coitus interuptus. I don’t see that to be any different among the larger mainline Protestant groups, but maybe evangelicals and pentacostals are different.
    Were she Catholic, she’d be labelled as a cafeteria-Catholic by others of the religion. I guess Protestants would just call her a lukewarm Christian.

  20. Eh, fair enough. Though it would be hard to find such a person because the Republican winner-take-all primaries preclude the opportunity for such a strong, nationally-organized support network to fall behind anybody other than the eventually nominated candidate. The primary season opened this schism for the Democrats: it’s not all ideological.

  21. Kurtis – It would not be news for Campolo to endorse Obama because TC has been on that side of the world for quite awhile.
    Mandell on the other hand was a Clinton supporter until just recently. I do think if someone of her caliber introduced Obama at a rally, the introduction would get more press than what Obama read on a coffee cup.

  22. Nobody covered Tony Campolo’s work with the left earlier this year.
    (Actually they did; I seem to remember it generating about the same level of buzz, though, which is my point. The fact is many people don’t know who Tony Campolo or Shelly Mandell are; they just don’t register very high on the national awareness scale.)
    (And yes, I’m aware the Tony Campolo / Shelly Mandell pairing isn’t quite equal. It’s just the best I could come up with on short notice. I’m sure there are others, but that’s probably because I don’t believe the media can collectively agree on anything, much less the kind of agreement they’d need to run a conspiracy.)

  23. Lynn David: Palin doesn’t even know what her Christian religion is truly, fundamentally about. Why Christians should be excited about her is beyond me.
    I understand that avoiding contraception is at the heart of Catholic sexual theology, but “what her Christian religion is truly, fundamentally about”? Please. Don’t you think that is a bit of an overstatement? Fundamentally, the Christian religion is not about being born — but born again. Anyway, Sarah Palin is not even a Catholic, so your point (which I’ve seen you make here before) is even further out of line.
    Are you a Christian Lynn David? Are you a Catholic?

  24. This made me laugh. I realize there are probably some people out there who are rather mad at their lawyers but this one from over two years ago…..

    Almost two years after my divorce was final, I was served with papers to reopen the property settlement. My attorney wanted another $8,000 to answer the 234 interrogatory questions (35 are allowed), so I went to court and brought two boxes of records, which Mandell copied and turned over to IRS and the Franchise Tax Board, to no result, except for their calls asking me what was going on. When I appeared for the hearing, two women were there from Board of Equalization, also to no end. Shelly was completely unprepared for the hearing, and 45 minutes late, which angered the judge. I put my ex on the stand, and asked her what she wanted that I had, after she admitted that we had split all of our cash, and owned no property. She said “nothing.” End of case. It cost my ex $10,000, and she was billed another $18,000, which she refused to pay. At the end of the hearing, I requested, and was given, a restraining order against Shelly, my wife, and her girlfriend .. all lesbians. Nasty.

    What do you think? Probably just bitter over Mandell skewering him in his divorce with his wife. Or could (in the words of Rush Limbaugh) a femiNazi like Shelly Mandell have a crush on Sarah? Pay no attention to the entries since Mandell “came out” for Palin on that page, I’m sure they are retribution.
    I’d be careful if I were Gov Palin. Mandell has politically stuck people in the back before. She turned on Ginny Foat and caused her to stand trial for murder back in the early 1980s that occurred in 1965. This at a time when Foat was president of California NOW and was touted as a possible national NOW president and Mandell would have run her campaign. But Foat knowing an indictment still existed in Lousiana (a DA there had said earlier they were not interested in Foat) had tried for one of the lessor vice-presidencies. Supposedly Mandell got mad over that, floated political rumors around NOW about Foat and the murder, and then turned Foat in. Foat was found innocent and I think she is now back in Palm Springs, CA, and might be on the city council. See:

  25. So Palin actually nailed a Clinton democrat – looked Mandell up on NEWSMEAT – hey, they got me there too! Question one, I contributed more to Obama than Mandell to Clinton, does that make me as a private citizen more newsworthy if I should change my endorsements? Mandell said she spoke not with the authority of NOW but as a private citizen when she introduced Palin.
    Another question, why should Palin want her? Is the politics of getting Mandell to endorse her, more important to Palin than the idea that Mandell makes her money from the pain of breaking marriages [see: ]? This reminds me of when Palin said she was all for contraception while at the same time saying America should be accepting a culture of life. Palin doesn’t even know what her Christian religion is truly, fundamentally about. Why Christians should be excited about her is beyond me.

  26. Excellent post. Like I said on my own blog, NOW is no longer about promoting women’s issues, its about promoting the liberal agenda.

  27. California NOW released a statement reaffirming support for Obama/Biden and repudiating Shelly Mandell’s support for Palin.

Comments are closed.