That NARAL endorsement of Obama was not all that it appeared.

Since yesterday’s announcement, NARAL groups in Pennsylvania, Missouri, Oregon, Washington, Texas and New York – Clinton’s home state – have issued statements signaling their continued neutrality in the Democratic race and emphasizing that the national group did not speak for them on this matter. These groups represent nearly a quarter of NARAL’s state chapters.

“This decision was not made in consultation with the affiliate network and NARAL Pro-Choice Oregon will not be endorsing a candidate in this race,” said executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Oregon Michele Stranger Hunter in a statement.

Comments Greg Sargent on Talking Points Memo:

Obviously the NARAL endorsement was a huge get for Obama, but you can’t avoid the fact that this was a really mystifying decision for NARAL to make. All it did was alienate huge swaths of its membership and fundraising base, and it’s hard to see how the endorsement did anything to accomplish the group’s stated goal of uniting African Americans and female activists.

Also re endorsements yesterday:

The Edwards endorsement, though, is singular. Elizabeth Edwards is not scheduled to add her voice to the growing Democratic chorus rallying behind Mr. Obama’s campaign.

Publicly, Mrs. Edwards has said that she favors Mrs. Clinton’s health care plan. Privately, she has told several associates she is unsure if Mr. Obama is the party’s best candidate.