You know, nothing says they have to endorse an anti-abortion Democrat, but clearly they don't understand that good politics -- turning the Senate Democratic is far more beneficial for their issue (women rights) than anything the Republicans can muster.
Until NARAL (and the rest of the single-issue groups) understand that building a movement is more beneficial to their causes than singular devotion to their pet causes, I can't take them seriously.
Divided those groups are being picked off, one by one. Trial lawyers, you're next up. United, the Republicans stand.
The groups I take seriously? MoveOn, Democracy for America, National Political Hip Hop Conference, the bloggers -- groups that are working to build an effective progressive movement, not a single issue. Because when Democrats regain power, choice, the environment, worker's rights -- the whole gamut -- will be protected.
Aside from the obvious issues here on leadership (Chafee votes to put people like Frist and Lott into leadership positions), there is a more substantive problem in terms of actual votes cast in the Senate such that a pro-life Democrat advances choice much more effectively than does a pro-choice Republican. Let's compare Chafee (pro-choice Republican) to Harry Reid of Nevada (pro-life Democrat). When Bush nominates anti-choice judges to the Federal bench, one of these people votes for those nominees in ever single case, while the other opposes them consistently. When it actually comes time to vote, Reid promotes choice much better than does Chafee, so these kinds of attitudes (we'll endorse a Republican because they support our cause) actually work to the detriment of the issue at hand because it is the pro-life Democrats at the end of the day who stand strong for choice.