suggesting at once the limits of the decision and the prospects of future challenges. This may turn out to be cold comfort, but it is worth considering nevertheless.

The other thing that is worth thinking about as we go along is that the reason there is a federal law banning PBAs is because Congress voted for it, and that these people were elected.  It is long past time for those concerned to develop a far better electoral strategy and capacity at all levels.

I have long argued that "message" is not enough in a constitutional democracy where power is distributed based on elections, not on PR. As important as good communications is, it does not overcome a well organized opposition bent on using the tools of electoral politics to gain power and make policy.

by Frederick Clarkson on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 04:57:03 PM EST

In July 2000 Alito voted to strike down New Jersey's ban on mid-term abortions. "The New Jersey statute," he wrote, "lacks an exception for the preservation of the health of the mother." In his confirmation hearings he said he would "respectful of precedent."

Yesterday he disregarded not only his own opinion, but he disregarded the president laid down but the Supreme Court in 2000, and joined the other four Catholics on the court to support the Vatican's dictates. This was a theological not legal decision.


by PlacitasRoy on Sun Apr 22, 2007 at 12:58:58 AM EST