I'm tired of hearing about a battle for the Republican Party between mainstream business interests and the Tea Party. The battle is over and the Tea Party has won, at least in Congress.
So, when an arsonist doesn't burn down the House [sic] do you praise him for self-restraint or just go about your business because, you know, you're not supposed to burn things down?
Doesn't it concern some among the Democratic leadership that the healthcare law may create lots of trouble for the party if all of its aspects have not had time to work out the kinks well before the 2016 election?
What's been put forth is a surprise. The reasons to explain the GOP's apparent about face are varied. It's a naked grab for Hispanic votes or, at the least, to take some of the edge off the ferocious hostility of Hispanic voters toward the GOP.
They may sow the seeds of reform, but do not (in themselves) offer sufficient guidelines for reform.
What century are you living in? Your "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" is a solution in search of a problem. Despite your attempts to confuse people with the bill's misleading title, federal funds cannot be used for abortion under the Affordable Care Act.
What the GOP doesn't seem to have grasped is that just saying sensitive things (or refraining from saying stupidly insensitive things) isn't enough to win voters. It's the policies, not just the way you talk about them.
To break the issue of abortion rights down to a battle over "messaging," or ensuring that Republican members of the House give some necessary red meat to their base, ultimately has a much more dire impact on the body politic.
An alternative for Obama and the Democrats would be to more readily admit the problems with the ACA and more generously engage Republicans in efforts to improve the law. Democrats really have everything to gain from depoliticizing health care, admitting the law is not perfect, and calling on leaders regardless of party to offer ideas that strengthen the law.
The media has been far, far too negative about Obama. Yes, he has problems he must deal with, but the fix is in, and the comeback will soon begin, and the House GOP wallows at 9 percent popularity while the GOP civil war has only begun.
They say they want to pass bi-partisan reform, yet refuse to bring the only bill with both Republican and Democrat co-sponsors to a vote.
The cuts come as Congress could not get their act together to continue the funding levels to SNAP that were passed in 2009, at the height of the recession in the Recovery Act. As we've seen the recession isn't over and families are still struggling.
Even when it comes to non-partisan issues such as preventing domestic violence and helping Americans whose lives have been devastated by a natural disaster, House Republicans have repeatedly voted 'NO.'
How is this even a debate? How is it that men and women who served in uniform get smeared as lazy and unmotivated to work, as soon as they need help feeding their families by using food stamps?
Coal industry lobbyists and House Republicans have chosen to spend the anniversary of Superstorm Sandy trying to block climate action and help the polluters who release the largest amount of global warming pollution in our nation.
The possibility of losing control of the House is beginning to stare GOP strategists in the face. Do they really want to risk incensing a big block of Hispanic and other immigrant voters by blocking immigration reform, and energizing them to go out to vote in large numbers to punish Republicans?