Please note that at the end of the Washington Post article, the Obama people say they could "compromise" by limiting it to abortion.
What chutzpah! On both the administration's side and the side of anti choice fanatics.
The original purpose was to throw a huge monkey wrench into the ability of clinics that perform abortions to function at all. By broadening the reach of the rule into birth control it they have now turned their initial aim into the compromise.
All that anti choice groups wopuld have to do is send anti choice nurses, doctors, even clerical staff into, say, Planned Parenthood Clinics, get a job and then refuse to perform them.. It could quickly cripple a clinic either in terms of an abilty to proivde actual services, ie , abortions to women or financially cripple it.
and studied film history (taught a few courses as well) I can attest to how important presentation is to conveying a message.
Framing and camera angles subliminally convey status and importance.
Low angles make you look up to people...literally and figuratively. High angles make you look down on people, literally and figuratively.
The left side of the screen has more psychic weight than the right side of the screen. Hannity was always on the left side and he took up at least 60-65% with colmes squeezed into the rest.
And of course in interview or the older style crossfire shows the right wing host often talked over the Democratic guest....and often let the right winger interrupt the Democrat. Even the liberal hosts tended to do that in order to project "fairness"
the state. In both Clinton campaigns theee were coordinated campaigns focussed on the atate.
Indeed NY was ordered to provide money and manpower for other states to elect Barack Obama. There were tons of phone banks for that and very few for the local races.
We had some really important races here for the State Senate. There were winnable races in Queens, Long Isalnd and upstate that we could have won with more money, 500K to 1 million and there were 3 other races we could have had.
And those races were starved of volunteers as well as money. Sure we have won the State Senate but it hangs by a thread. There were 3 Dems elected who hold the balance of power. Any day they can walk out (and they threaten) and the Republicans regain the chamber.
With a few hundred more volunteers and some money (it was very clear that the Obama campaign would end up with more money that they could spend, 13 million), lots of other states besides mine would have benefitted.
There are lots of good bills that won't get passed.
I said so at the time. It was clear from the Texas primary on in which there were other races on the ballot....that his coattails were limited. In the districts Hillary won the down ticker races did better. Those voters also cared about the party as well as her.
Obama's coattails were limited for 2 reasons. the kind of people he attracted and the fact that his campaigns focussed on him and not down ticket races.
This is the problem when you make an election about just a person, not a party.
is the ONLY reason to appoint Gregg. No Democrat..then no appointnment to Commerce for GRegg. There should be no vacancy then at all. It only accomplishes putting in a man who will undemrine your agenda in exchange now for absolutely nothing.
You think it's magmanimity. Wonderbar!!! You know the phrase...give an inch, take a mile?
Republicans think he's a fool...and it t emboldens them to even more outrageous demands.
At this point the only power Republicans have is the power Obama is giving them. They don't have any other. Of course they will start to parlay this perhaps into actual power....
Hazlitt, early 18th century liberal esayist on how conservatives and liberal behave....all these words hold true today.
"They never give an inch of ground that they can keep; they keep all that they can get; they make no concessions that can redound to their own discredit; they assume all that makes for them; if they pause it is to gain time; if they offer terms it is to break them: they keep no faith with enemies:
While they give no quarter, you stand upon mere ceremony. While they are cutting your throat, or putting the gag in your mouth, you talk of nothing but liberality, freedom of inquiry, and douce humanité. Their object is to destroy you, your object is to spare them---to treat them according to your own fancied dignity"
They may not win an election tomorrow but they will undermine the ability of this adminstration to do a good enough job to get reelected in the future as they try to destroy the Democratic. agenda.
if Lynch doesn't appoint a Democrat or we don't get to 60 votes in the Senate.
All this does is to now cast into doubt any other time there is a vacancy and the governor doesn't appoint a republican...The RNC would howl, the NRSC would howl, the media would get on its high horse and shout you're not being bi partisan. But of course only if it's a Democrat.
It wouldn't be the same howl if a Democratic senator left office and was to be replaced by a Republican governor...then the rules would go back. Of course it would go back to it's okay to appoint a Republican to take a Democratic seat.
Why is Gregg so needed at Commerce that once again Obama is signalling that he can be rolled?
What do you need someone who doesn't believe in your agenda?