Reply #42: So I guess to "defend the principle"

[lapfog_1]

you would ignore the wishes and specific request of both Planned Parenthood and NARAL?

Because women's issues require firm support and NARAL wouldn't have a clue how to do that, would they?

Keeping a majority in the assembly isn't a good enough reason? You'd rather have other Democrats in districts that are more republican than Democrat lose their bid for re-election because a republican candidate would use the "no" vote against them on bills entitled "Protection of Live Births" and the like. And the outcome of the "no" vote would likely lead to a republican majority and those bills final passage when reintroduced in the next session.

Do you want results or the ability to stand up and say "I VOTED NO". Especially when you know that the rules are clear, a "present" vote and a "no" vote are the same.

Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Obama did the right thing for the right reason. He has a 100 percent rating from both NARAL and PP. And he has testimony from leaders of both organization that THEY planned the strategy and asked the members to vote "present".