So, the "Mexico City" policy has been reversed. This is not, in anyway, surprising, but unfortunate, IMHO, nonetheless.
Still, contra Patrick Appel (subbing for Sully), I think Amy Sullivan made an important and valuable point. Methinks it is not coincidence that the President chose to do this quietly and the day AFTER the Roe anniversary. Doing it yesterday would indeed have demoralized those pro-life Americans on a tough day for them anyhow. In other words, he DID NOT rub it in anyone's face. On policy, it makes no difference, but the symbolism is much more reassuring.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On to different matters, please identify the difference in the following two stories on Obama's "I won" remark. First, Politico; now, the Wall Street Journal. One tells us what the comment was in regard to (ideas that were thoroughly debated this election) and also notes that aides say it was NOT as partisan as it looks. Normally, I'd think the WSJ was lacking this info, but not this time. Nope, Politico gets the award for most incomplete journalism of the day. Congratulations!
To be fair, Politico also notes, importantly, that the President was indeed receptive to several ideas put forth by Cantor and the House GOP. So, it wasn't a meeting derailed w/ partisanship.
At any rate, memo to the House and (not as bad) Senate GOP: You did lose! Sorry. Now, that doesn't mean the President should never try to bring you guys in. Besides, that's not his style. But, umm, this won't be the bill you'd write. Nor should it be.
This is separate from the Congressional leadership, buy only to a point. I think they SHOULD be a bit more bipartisan, but there are reasons you guys (GOP) are the minority. My point is this: Push when needed; do NOT push your luck.
No comments:
Post a Comment