From one of America’s most important voices of protest, an urgent polemic about the strangling of meaningful dissent—the lifeblood of our democracy—at the hands of a government and media increasingly beholden to the wealthy few. Dissent is democracy. Democracy is in trouble. Never before, Lewis Lapham argues, had voices of protest been so locked out of the mainstream conversation, so marginalized and muted by a government that recklessly disregards civil liberties, and by an ever more concentrated and profit-driven media in which the safe and the selling sweep all uncomfortable truths from view. In the midst of the “war on terror”—which made the hunt for communists in the 1950s look, in its clarity of aim and purpose, like the Normandy landings on D-Day—we faced a crisis of democracy as serious as any in our history. The Bush administration made no secret of its contempt for a cowed and largely silenced electorate, and without bothering to conceal its purpose the government coordinates, “not the defense of the American citizenry against a foreign enemy, but the protection of the American oligarchy from the American democracy.” Gag Rule is a rousing and necessary call to action in defense of one of our most important liberties, the right to raise our voices in dissent and have those voices heard.

In the 1830s slavery was so deeply entrenched that it could not even be discussed in Congress, which had enacted a "gag rule" to ensure that anti-slavery petitions would be summarily rejected. This stirring book chronicles the parliamentary battle to bring "the peculiar institution" into the national debate, a battle that some historians have called "the Pearl Harbor of the slavery controversy." The campaign to make slavery officially and respectably debatable was waged by John Quincy Adams who spent nine years defying gags, accusations of treason, and assassination threats. In the end he made his case through a combination of cunning and sheer endurance. Telling this story with a brilliant command of detail, Arguing About Slavery endows history with majestic sweep, heroism, and moral weight. "Dramatic, immediate, intensely readable, fascinating and often moving."--New York Times Book Review

This book supports three important messages: the global gag rule has failed to achieve its goal of reducing abortions; there is no definitive relationship between restrictive national abortion laws and abortion rates; and the 2017 expansion of the global gag rule will adversely affect a dashboard of health indicators.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

Crises often leave people in vulnerable situations in which a moment in time can function as a turning point of a catastrophic situation for the better or worse. From another perspective, the concept of crisis signifies losing control of everyday privileges, such as that of a pandemic. Therefore, the interaction of rhetoric and sociolinguistics in times of crisis is inevitable. It is crucial to internalize how rhetoric, an effective skill from ancient times to make meaning of sociological breakthrough events, changed the course of events as well as the fate of humanity. Within the same context, research should focus on diverse disciplines to explore, investigate, and analyze the concept of “crisis” from global, sociolinguistic, and rhetorical perspectives. Rhetoric and Sociolinguistics in Times of Global Crisis explores and situates the concept of global crisis within rhetoric and sociolinguistics as well as other disciplines such as education, technology, society, language, and politics. The chapters included bridge the gap to initiate a discussion on understanding how rhetoric and sociolinguistics can create critical awareness for individuals, societies, and learning environments during times of crisis. While highlighting concepts such as rhetorical evolution, political rhetoric, digital writing, and communications, this book is a valuable reference tool for language teachers, writing experts, communications specialists, politicians and government officials, academicians, researchers, and students working and studying in fields that include rhetoric, education, linguistics, culture, media, political science, and communications.

Examining the congressional debates on antislavery petitions before the Civil War. Passed by the House of Representatives at the start of the 1836 session, the gag rule rejected all petitions against slavery, effectively forbidding Congress from addressing the antislavery issue until it was rescinded in late 1844. In the Senate, a similar rule lasted until 1850. Strongly supported by all southern and some northern Democratic congressmen, the gag rule became a proxy defense of slavery’s morality and economic value in the face of growing pro-abolition sentiment. In John Quincy Adams and the Gag Rule, 1835–1850, Peter Charles Hoffer transports readers to Washington, DC, in the period before the Civil War to contextualize the heated debates surrounding the rule. At first, Hoffer explains, only a few members of Congress objected to the rule. These antislavery representatives argued strongly for the reception and reading of incoming abolitionist petitions. When they encountered an almost uniformly hostile audience, however, John Quincy Adams took a different tack. He saw the effort to gag the petitioners as a violation of their constitutional rights. Adams’s campaign to lift the gag rule, joined each year by more and more northern members of Congress, revealed how the slavery issue promoted a virulent sectionalism and ultimately played a part in southern secession and the Civil War. A lively narrative intended for history classrooms and anyone interested in abolitionism, slavery, Congress, and the coming of the Civil War, John Quincy Adams and the Gag Rule, 1835–1850, vividly portrays the importance of the political machinations and debates that colored the age.

Drawing on Adams' diary, letters, and writings, chronicles the diplomat and president's numerous achievements and failures, revealing his unwavering moral convictions, brilliance, unyielding spirit, and political courage.

In this unique and essential collection, Molly Ivins, Maureen Dowd, Maria Hinojosa, and a host of other frontline thinkers, journalists, and activists employ wit, outrage, and cold, hard facts to expose the "W Effect,"a comprehensive incursion into women's rights. In recent years, women around the globe have come under attack-both literally, in the case of war and punitive repression, and more subtly, in the case of eroded rights and economic power. Yet this dangerous trend has not, to date, been comprehensively documented and deconstructed-in part because women are finding it harder to gain access to the mainstream media. Both a harsh reality check and a hopeful starting point for new action, The W Effect brings together the premier feminist voices to provide cutting-edge reports; fresh, empowering analyses; and engaging, provocative ideas for the future-including a resource guide for information and activism. At this pivotal time, The W Effect is a necessary book for feminists of all ages and genders, for all progressive activists, for students, and for anyone interested in current politics and the future of women's rights and women's lives in America and around the world. With reports on: affirmative action, the Patriot Act, welfare "reform," sexual freedom, reproductive rights, the impact of the religious right, education funding and Title IX, public health policy, globalization, international HIV/AIDS policy, the International Court and the U.N., and more. Journalist and broadcaster Laura Flanders was the founder of the Women's Desk at FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting), where, for 10 years, she hosted the syndicated radio program CounterSpin. Flanders currently hosts "Working Assets Radio" and is a contributor to The Nation, The Progressive, Ms. and In These Times. She is the author of Real Majority, Media Minority, The Cost of Sidelining Women in Reporting and Bushwomen: Tales of a Cynical Species (April 2003).

An important challenge to what currently masquerades as conventional wisdom regarding the teaching of writing. There seems to be widespread agreement that—when it comes to the writing skills of college students—we are in the midst of a crisis. In Why They Can't Write, John Warner, who taught writing at the college level for two decades, argues that the problem isn't caused by a lack of rigor, or smartphones, or some generational character defect. Instead, he asserts, we're teaching writing wrong. Warner blames this on decades of educational reform rooted in standardization, assessments, and accountability. We have done no more, Warner argues, than conditioned students to perform "writing-related simulations," which pass temporary muster but do little to help students develop their writing abilities. This style of teaching has made students passive and disengaged. Worse yet, it hasn't prepared them for writing in the college classroom. Rather than making choices and thinking critically, as writers must, undergraduates simply follow the rules—such as the five-paragraph essay—designed to help them pass these high-stakes assessments. In Why They Can't Write, Warner has crafted both a diagnosis for what ails us and a blueprint for fixing a broken system. Combining current knowledge of what works in teaching and learning with the most enduring philosophies of classical education, this book challenges readers to develop the skills, attitudes, knowledge, and habits of mind of strong writers.

How U.S. senators were chosen prior to the Seventeenth Amendment—and the consequences of Constitutional reform From 1789 to 1913, U.S. senators were not directly elected by the people—instead the Constitution mandated that they be chosen by state legislators. This radically changed in 1913, when the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, giving the public a direct vote. Electing the Senate investigates the electoral connections among constituents, state legislators, political parties, and U.S. senators during the age of indirect elections. Wendy Schiller and Charles Stewart find that even though parties controlled the partisan affiliation of the winning candidate for Senate, they had much less control over the universe of candidates who competed for votes in Senate elections and the parties did not always succeed in resolving internal conflict among their rank and file. Party politics, money, and personal ambition dominated the election process, in a system originally designed to insulate the Senate from public pressure. Electing the Senate uses an original data set of all the roll call votes cast by state legislators for U.S. senators from 1871 to 1913 and all state legislators who served during this time. Newspaper and biographical accounts uncover vivid stories of the political maneuvering, corruption, and partisanship—played out by elite political actors, from elected officials, to party machine bosses, to wealthy business owners—that dominated the indirect Senate elections process. Electing the Senate raises important questions about the effectiveness of Constitutional reforms, such as the Seventeenth Amendment, that promised to produce a more responsive and accountable government.