OK. We've got 965 retweet all-star votes for #JoelEmbiid. I need 35 more for an even thou. Come on guys! #NBAVote… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
I met Lisa 38 years ago. It took only seconds to recognize that she had uncommon grace, obvious elegance, a generous and, of course, beautiful smile, and an abundance of talent. She anchored the news for decades, documenting life in the tri-state area for a generation of viewers. But I think her true legacy will be the countless stories she has told about people who found the courage and the grit to overcome challenges that in many cases threatened their well-being. You see, Lisa Thomas Laury knows about such challenges, challenges that threatened not only her well-being, but her life. You can define the word "brave" in many ways. I define it this way: Lisa Thomas Laury. Perhaps that is why she's been able to express a certain kind of compassion and empathy in her reporting that one rarely sees. Maybe never. Lisa made us feel good about people who triumphed over their misfortunes. But she also made us feel good about ourselves. I'm not sure how she did that, but she did. As I honor her career today at Action News, and more importantly, as I honor her, I'm remembering that she was able to attain a high level of success without ever showing anger or impatience with anyone with whom she worked. I don't know how she did that either. But she did. So Lisa, on to the next thing. May it be as gratifying as your first venture, if not for millions of viewers, at least for you and your wonderful family. Those millions of viewers will make do with the memory of an elegant lady with a keen mind and a quick laugh. You made us better, and we love you for that.
Vote! Trust @6abc with the news. But trust Joel Embiid with #TheProcess. RT to get @joelembiid into the 2017 All-St… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
Vote! Trust @6abc with the news. But trust Joel Embiid with #TheProcess. RT to get @JoelEmbiid into the 2017 All-St… twitter.com/i/web/status/8…
Forgive me, but I'm having trouble understanding the strategy of the Senate Republican leadership. Long before President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court yesterday, Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell insisted that any nominee put forward by the President would not get a hearing before the Judiciary Committee. No hearing, no vote in the Senate, and not even a courtesy meeting in McConnell's office. No Kentucky hospitality.
If you haven't been paying attention, the whole idea is that McConnell and most Republicans don't want Barack Obama filling the seat left vacant by the death of conservative and strict constitutionalist, Antonin Scalia with a Democratic or liberal jurist. McConnell and other Republicans such as Pennsylvania's Pat Toomey want the seat to be filled by the next president's nominee.
Here's where my understanding gets a tad clouded. It has become reasonably apparent that the next president will be either Hillary Clinton, who is evil incarnate to most Republicans in Washington, or Donald Trump.
First Clinton. Merrick Garland is a 63 year old moderate judge. Hillary Clinton might well appoint a 45 year old liberal judge who makes Garland seem like a Scalia disciple by comparison.
Then there's Trump. Does the Republican establishment, which is spending every waking hour trying to figure out a way to stop this man from becoming president because they think the idea of a Trump presidency is "outrageous/unthinkable/scary," really want to hand him the chance to make a Supreme Court nomination as one of his first official acts? If someone understands that contradiction, please tell me.
There is a group of 7 Republicans who say they're willing to give Judge Garland a hearing. Is that because they conclude that a 63 year old moderate might be the best of what for them is an unfortunate situation? Or maybe they have come to the conclusion that a two-term president is actually supposed to serve for eight years. Nah, probably not. That's not nearly political enough, and in Washington these days, if it's not about winning a political skirmish, nobody really cares.
Of course, President Obama understands the politics of the situation as well as anybody. He knows full well that Judge Garland might be more "acceptable" to McConnell than a nominee from President Clinton, or President Trump. Maybe Senator McConnell will get around to showing Garland a little Kentucky hospitality after all. Or maybe not.