At 08:15 AM 12/17/98 -0800, Jim Devine wrote, inter alia: >today. As noted, he's been more than willing to comply. The exception, I >feel, is that he does have a core constituency that he can't abandon >completely. Thus he has made fewer compromises on abortion rights and a few >other issues (I wouldn't include the environment in that list). > The question is whether he did not want to abandon that constituency or did not have an opportunity to do so (i.e. he was not pushed hard enough by corporate interests). It seems that "women and gay rights" are part of the corporate agenda (e.g. the GM Saturn division is appointing a woman to its CEO position and many corporations have adopted the domestic partneship policies) - although I wonder for what reason. One possibility is to thwart the formation of class-based politics, buth that is another issue. But again, the point is whether our fearless leader did not abandon their pro-choice constituency because he was not committed to do so or because he did not have an opportunity. Judging from the fact that he was willing to start a major international incidcent solely to avert impeachment (I do not belive there is a single word of truth in Pentagon bullshit about alleged Iraqi threat) - _anything_ goes if this President's position is endangered. Regards, Wojtek
