Why I'll stop wearing my NARAL shirt

Ever since the March for Women's Lives a few years back, I've had a bunch of pro-choice schwag to wear around town. After NARAL's decision to endorse Lieberman, I'm not so sure I want to. Matt Stoller has a good analysis of the deep strategic implications of this misstep:

In allowing Senator Lieberman to not filibuster Alito and still backing him for his reelection campaign against a reliably progressive candidate, the leaders of NARAL and Planned Parenthood have decided to throw away their political capital. Jane Hamsher is correct to point out what a horrifically bad decision this is. I can only add that the move to endorse Lieberman comes from a very top-down DC mindset, where a conservative status quo is preferable to admitting error or engaging in institutional change.

... at the end of the day, every Senator will know that the guns on the progressive side are not loaded and they can vote against women's rights and pay no price. That's the message that NARAL and Planned Parenthood just sent. And the Republicans, if they are disciplined and on message, and if no third party force asserts itself, will win easily.

This isn't a problem isolated to the Choice movement, either. All over the progressive advocacy world, I see the decisions coming out of DC favoring, as Stoller says, access over power. Maybe it's just that these organizations are staffed by those tools from your poli-sci classes, the ones who cared more about prestigious internships and name-dropping than actually getting anything done.

This, I guess, is why I'm so enthused about grassroots activism. It's damn hard to be ensorceled by all the power of establishment Washington if you're hundreds of miles away and feeling frustrated. There may be no inherent virtue in fighting to get heard, but I think the strength of will it requires is a sort of indirect guarantee of less muddled motives.