Eric Boehlert, a senior fellow at media matters wrote a great article on the Fox News’ insistence to blame every Muslim for every act of Islamic extremism, while claiming, if they even broadcast acts of right wing extremism as isolated incidents..
Can’t help to wonder if Ohio Sen Rob Portman can survive a 2016 primary in the Anti-Obama Party…took balls to stand up for something you believe in when it’s a political death issue for your base…I might disagree with much Sen Portman believes but what he did took character. And it’s refreshing to see that kind of character still exist in Washington.
Very simple question in my opinion, maybe not, but I’ll let you decide.
If America is a nation created on Christian values, what Christian value is represented in telling the least of us that you are on your own?
I understand that the term “least” or “poor” has been renamed “looters” by Ayn Rand or “takers” by Paul Ryan but I seriously want to know how his #budget represents the Christian values he says this nation was founded on?
Apparently House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) didn’t get the memo last November. If the American People wanted ObamaCares repealed you would be the VP. How many speeches did Romney, Ryan and other GOP hopefuls make behind a big sign that said “Repeal and Replace ObamaCare”. I believe repealing the Affordable Care Act was Romney’s day one task.
I mean seriously, assuming that you can still repeal Obama Cares and making that assumption a part of the House Budget is not just a non starter for common ground, it’s a non starter for intelligent debate. I honestly believe Paul Ryan would have an easier time convincing the Catholic Bishops, like he has somehow convinced himself that Ayn Rand objectivism melds with the Gospel of Jesus than convincing Democrats in the House or Senate to repeal ObamaCares.
I fully understand that the Tea Party base considers the repeal of ObamaCares their reason d’être, but how about we find a way to work together. This is what happens when primaries become more important than the general elections. And when democratic voters stay home during a midterm.
Thump your chest, praise your love for liberty, proclaim your faith in Christ and shake hands with the serpent to delay the inevitable; the waning power of the Republican Party. Do not be deceived, the Republican Party’s plan to change the way Electoral College votes go to Presidential candidates has nothing to do with Democracy.
The Republican Party’s plan to go around popular votes, majority rule and the principle of one man, one vote should not shock many Americans. This plan has nothing to do with any sense of reasonable governance, it is a tactic taken out of some of the darkest times in the history of our Republic. Gerrymandered Congressional districts and Political gamesmanship have nothing to do with majority rule, they are tools to prevent it.
If you notice it doesn’t seem that Red State Republicans are too eager to give Red State electoral college votes to Democrats. There is no outcry from Republicans in Mississippi to ensure the Democratic packed 2nd Congressional district goes to the Democrat, nor in Texas to ensure the 12 congressional districts that Democrats won went to Obama. Why is there no outcry from Republicans in these states worried that these Democratic voters aren’t represented in the electoral college.
The House of Representatives does not represent an equal one man, one vote on a popular vote basis and therefore Republicans are attempting to use what little advantage they have. One only has to look at the overall popular vote total in Congressional Races to see what Republicans are up to.
Democrats got 54,301,095 votes while Republicans got 53,822,442. That’s a close election — 48.8%-48.5% –but it’s still a popular vote win for the Democrats. (http://www.masson.us/blog/?p=8978)
If Republicans losing the overall popular vote and keeping a 33 seat majority in the House is representative democracy, then why shouldn’t Republicans also get the White House when they lose by more than 5 million votes.
Could you imagine the reaction of the American people if they saw a President losing by 5 million votes winning the Presidency? It appears to me the Republican Party no longer cares for the ideal of majority rule, or democracy.
The Republican Party is making their last stand to retain power in the changing political climate of America. Instead of appealing to the American people, Republicans will remain dedicated ideologues and try to gain their power over the American people through deceit, since they can no longer trust to respect the power of the people under a majority rule ideal.
If Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi believes assigning Pennsylvania’s Electoral College votes according to our gerrymandered congressional districts would “
more accurately reflect the will of the voters in our state” then the Delaware County Republican must be smoking something Senator. Daylin Leach is trying to legalize. I always thought a popular vote represents then will of the people, but I guess when the people’s will is against you, you have to resort to any tactics that are available.
I know math, reason or logic aren’t the strong suits of our friends on the Right, however I will try to help Mr. Pillegi understand how simple this is. According to George Mason Universities “United States Election Project” Pennsylvania had a 59.4% voter turnout and 5,742,040 Pennsylvanians casted votes for President. President Barack Obama received 52% of that vote to Governor Romney’s 47%. Apparently more Pennsylvanians voted for President Obama and because of that President Obama won Pennsylvania.
Now the problem is thanks to gerrymandered districts and Democratic voter concentration near urban areas Republicans won 13 of 18 congressional districts and Mr. Pillegi thinks that represents the will of the people. Even though Democrats swept the statewide elections of US Senator, Auditor General, Treasurer and for the first time Attorney General. Majority Leader Pileggi thinking would make early 19th Century Massachusetts Governor Gerry quite happy in his reasoning.
Now Senate Majority Leader Pileggi and Governor Corbett can read the political tea leaves in Pennsylvania and they terrify them. Instead of adjusting their views and policies to attract more votes, they are using their power to limit the ability of Democrats to use the fact that more Pennsylvanians are registered Democrats to win Presidential elections.
The actions of the statewide Republican Leadership is not to represent the will of the people, it is to further the power of a political ideology before they lose anymore strength. It is little more then a delaying action. An attempt to keep power in the face of a changing political landscape. The Pennsylvania GOP is trying to sell their soul to the devil. And as Charlie Daniels once said “When you shake hands with the devil you get burned”.
One of the strangest feelings is to know you are about to witness history. It’s one thing to study the history of the United States, but to actually live in the small moments that will be studied is quite a humbling feeling.
When I was in college and sat through American Presidency, US History 1 and 2, American National Government, two sections of the American Historiography and about ten other history classes I never thought I’d be inside one of those little capsules of history. Whether or not you agree with the politics of the one taking the oath of office the atmosphere is amazing. And thankfully I agree with the politics of President Obama, so it makes the ceremony even more important to me.
To know that I am about to witness something that I have only read about is indescribable. I am about to witness President Barack Obama take the same oath of office of as of my favorite American Presidents. The same oath Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Truman, Clinton and every other President of the United States has taken.
In that one, short moment there are no politics, no division and no denying tradition and constitutional duty. Divided Government stops being divided for that split second and history comes alive. And I am so honored and blessed to be able to witness the 57th Presidential Inauguration.
After listening to President Obama address the nation yesterday, I believe he has realized you cannot negotiate with a part of Congress that even the Republican leadership has no control over. Many members of Speaker Boehner and Senate Minority Leader McConnell’s caucus seem to believe that now is the time to question the validity of the public debt of the United States. The debt, which according to the 14th Amendment “shall not be questioned” is now under question by those who claim they must make cuts for the future before they can pay the bills of the past.
Now someone who claims to be fiscally conservative and thinks not paying the bills is sound fiscal policy is difficult to reason with. If the Republicans decide to shut down the Government, because they believe the full, faith and credit of the United States is a bargaining chip and they choose to be derelict to their oath of office, I believe the President should do all that in his power to ensure our derelict Congress pays our bills. Paying the debt of the United States is the job of the House of Representatives and if you are not willing to do your job you shouldn’t take the oath of office.
When the Republicans tried to play this irresponsible hand in the summer of 2011, Forbes Magazine had an article entitled Can Obama Really Use The 14th Amendment To Raise The Debt Limit? Rick Unger wrote:
“Keep in mind that raising the debt ceiling is about allowing for the payment of obligations already authorized by Congress. It’s not about having more money to spend on future government expenditures or programs. Rather, it is permitting the President to borrow enough money to pay the bills created when Congress authorized certain payments, thus requiring the President, by law, to make those payments.”
Paying the debt incurred by previous Congresses has nothing to do with spending cuts. Yes, we need to take a balanced approach to cutting spending in the future. However, the bills we already owe have nothing to do with spending cuts. I can’t say I’m going to cut my spending next month by not paying my American Express bill from last month. You figure fiscal conservatives could figure the basics of how to pay a bill.
Now these same Republicans had no trouble in helping to cause the debt. When Speaker Boehner snuck in an additional 450 million in defense funding in 2011, a majority of that funding that went to defense contractors in his district he saw no problem racking up debt. According to the Huffington Post from 2008-2010, born again fiscal conservative Mitch McConnell added almost one billion in earmark spending before bowing to the pressure of the tea party. However, spending like this is what we are paying for today, not the spending of tomorrow. And neither of these Republicans, nor many of their fellow Conservatives seemed to be concerned when according to Brown University’s cost of war project we spent 3.2 to 4 trillion from 2003-2010 on Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, or when adding 400 billion over ten years to the deficit through Medicare part D.
Mitch McConnell seems to think that the “The president and his allies need to get serious about spending, and the debt-limit debate is the perfect time for it”. The spending debate is a debate that must be had. We need to a balanced, priority based approach for spending in the future. However, getting serious about future spending will do nothing to change the fact that the bills are due. The last time the deficit was zero was 1836 and cutting what we spend tomorrow will not change the fact that we owe from yesterday.
The fiscally responsible thing to do is to raise the debt ceiling and then begin the process of reigning in unnecessary spending. The full faith and credit of the United States is not “leverage” it is a guarantee that we pay the debt we incur. And anyone who has the audacity to believe in American Exceptionalism would recognize there is nothing exceptional with being a dead beat.
I am truly growing tired of hearing conservatives say they agree on certain common sense Gun Reforms and refuse to act. Watching Meet the Press this morning really left me irritated when republican strategist Mike Murphy agreed with Mayor Cory Booker on closing gun show loopholes and requiring background checks. It frustrates me when I see republicans acknowledge that we can agree on certain measures but in what can only be cowardice they refuse to be part of the discussion.
It is just baffles me when Cory Booker brings up statistics like 75% of NRA members agree with some of the more common sense proposals and 100% of their elected officials cower in fear of a lobby. How about we see a Republican bring up a measure in the House that requires some of these common sense regulation that they agree with. Maybe it would be a better use of their legislative time, you know when they have time from trying to repeal ObamaCare, or redefining the 14th Amendment for people but allowing corporations to take advantage of it.
Yes I believe the second amendment protects your right to bear arms. I believe you have the right to protect yourself, hunt, own guns and the such. However, I believe the social contract requires give and take. Free Speech doesn’t mean I can yell fire in a theatre, the right to assembly doesn’t mean I can’t be denied a permit for the assembly, apparently sneak and peek warrants don’t violate the 4th amendment, cruel and unusual punishment still doesn’t prevent the death penalty and freedom of religion didn’t prevent my state from declaring 2012 the year of the bible, not all bibles just the one that I hold true.
No documents of man are written in stone and no founder of this great nation required every generation to live frozen in 1789. And fringe views are not supposed to paralyze the government. Our Constitution is supposed to protect us from fringe politics, through the republican (theory of government, not party) principle that James Madison speaks of in Federalist #10; “majority rule”. I’d bet even half of the Republican member of each house agree with some of these measures. Unfortunately, the Republican Party has surrendered their responsibility of governance to the lobbies that fund them, not that the Democrats are innocent, but in this case the Republican Party are definitely the pawn for special interest.
The 67 Republicans can vote but they can’t hide. On Saturday, the New York Daily News published the names and addresses of the 67 good moral Republicans who voted down the initial bill for Sandy Aid. Included in this group of 67, as Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News exposes is those of the most vile nature; Southern Republicans who ran to the Federal Government for aid when it came to Katrina, but voted to block aid from going to the states affected by Sandy.
A dirty dozen or so came from states that have had their own natural disasters. The people of New York and New Jersey got hit hard enough by Sandy. This week a bunch of Republicans came along and kicked them when they were down.
And to come a little closer to home, only 2 of the 18 members of the Pennsylvania Delegation to the United States House of Representatives. Keith Rothfus and Scott Perry, two Pennsylvania Republicans . Even my own Tea Party Hero Representative Mike Fitzpatrick put his callous nature aside to vote for those in need.
These 67 Republicans voted against helping FEMA make payments through the National Flood Insurance Program on legitimate claims. This wasn’t the so called pork bill, which will be voted on January 15th. The same so-called pork that wasn’t pork when Southern Republicans begged for the funding when Katrina hit their districts.
Now I can understand when the rest of the 51 billion of aid comes to a vote on the 15th that a good deal of Republicans would be against that bill. Many Republican’s would be ideologically opposed to those spending measures. After all where they claim we have a spending problem, I believe we have a priority problem in this country. And those who voted against HR 41 have reinforced my view. These same spending problem Republicans will not vote against Corporate or Pentagon Entitlements. We could have offset the spending with cuts to the I mean come on my Tea-Partiers, I thought Government spending doesn’t create jobs. However, that’s an argument for another day. Today we are trying to ensure that those in need after a disaster have access to help them rebuild. And thankfully their were 162 Republicans in the United States House of Representatives who joined 196 Democrats in voting yes to the initial aid.
The 67 Republicans who on January 4th at 11:22 AM told an entire region of the country “You’re on your own”
Amash, Barr, Benishek ,Bentivolio, Blackburn, Bridenstine, Brooks (AL), Broun (GA), Chabot, Collins (GA), Conaway, Cotton, Daines, DeSantis, DesJarlais, Duffy, Duncan (SC), Duncan (TN), Fincher, Fleming, Flores, Foxx, Franks (AZ), Gohmert, Goodlatte, Gosar, Gowdy, Graves (GA), Graves (MO), Harris, Holding, Hudson, Huelskamp, Hultgren, Jenkins, Jordan, Lamborn, Marchant, Massie, McClintock, Meadows, Mullin, Mulvaney, Neugebauer, Palazzo, Pearce, Perry, Petri, Pompeo, Price (GA), Roe (TN), Rokita, Rothfus, Royce, Ryan (WI), Salmon, Schweikert, Sensenbrenner, Stutzman, Thornberry, Weber (TX), Wenstrup, Williams, Wilson (SC), Woodall,Yoder, Yoho http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll007.xml