Just how craven is the National Organization of Women? In case you've been wondering all these years, now we know. They, or at the very least their leadership, are reprehensible and wholly without principles. Less than a day after Jerry Brown and/or an aide was accidently taped calling Meg Whitman a "whore, " NOW rushed to release an obsequious statement in support of Brown and to tout his "record on women's rights." Except for being dependably pro-choice, he has exactly NO record on women's rights. It seems NOW has gone all Sharia on us. The more disregard a man shows them, the more they line up to profess their affection for him.

The facts are in. The women of the left who loved Bill Clinton so, so much thought nothing of his long record of abusing ....guess who....women! They regularly impugn fine men, because they are conservative, or because they are pro-life, but will defend to the death serial abusers from monsters like Che Guevera and Yasser Arafat to John Edwards and Eliot Spitzer. CNN even gave Spitzer his own show, which no self-respecting woman is likely to watch. In short, if the cad is a man of the left, leftist women and the organizations they form will overlook just about anything and flock to his defense, no matter how serious the transgression.

It is becoming clear that activist Democratic women have no standards beyond political ideology. Do politicians speak profanely when they think no one is listening? Most likely all of them do. But words mean things. Men who actually do respect women don't use words like "whore." It is the slur of a man who disrespects women. Whether or not it was Brown or his aide who used the term in reference to Whitman is irrelevant. What matters is that the man was comfortable using it in the other's presence.