Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, January 15, 2019

WASHINGTON — The botched rollout of the health care law has called forth some good news: Republicans are so confident they can ride anti-Obamacare sentiment to electoral victory that they’re growing ever-more impatient with the Tea Party’s fanaticism. Immigration reform may be the result.

The GOP is looking like a person emerging from a long binge and asking, “Why did I do that?” The moment of realization came when last fall’s government shutdown cratered the party’s polling numbers. Staring into the abyss can be instructive. For the first time since 2010, the middle of the House Republican caucus — roughly 100 of its 233 members — began worrying less about primaries from right-wing foes and more about losing their majority status altogether.

Obamacare’s troubles reinforced the flight from the brink. House Speaker John Boehner is telling his rank-and-file that they can win the 2014 elections simply by avoiding the stupid mistakes their more-ferocious colleagues keep urging them to make. In this view, the health insurance issue will take care of everything, provided Republicans end their Tea Party fling.

In fact, it’s an illusion for the GOP to think that bashing Obamacare is an elixir, especially if Democrats embrace and defend the law. Now that its benefits are fully kicking in, Republicans should be asked persistently, “Who do you want to throw off health insurance?”

Also: Do you want to go back to denying people coverage for pre-existing conditions? And: What about those 3 million young adults now on their parents’ health plans? “Repeal Obamacare” is not as popular as it seems in GOP bastions.

Nonetheless, some illusions are useful. Boehner is using them aggressively. The immigration principles he announced at his caucus’ retreat last week in Cambridge, MD, are a breakthrough because they are potentially more elastic than they sound. This is why many immigration reform advocates were elated, and why President Obama, sensing what was coming, offered not a hint of partisanship on the issue in his State of the Union address.

The principles have been loosely described as favoring the legalization of undocumented immigrants without a path to citizenship. But what the statement actually opposes is a “special path to citizenship” for the roughly 11 million who are here illegally. Everything hangs on the implications of that word “special.”

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 0

116 responses to “Is The GOP Giving Up Tea?”

  1. JD Mulvey says:

    You’re naive, EJ. The right has been so intransigent on every single thing that all it takes is some faux reasonableness and you’re ready to claim that the tea party’s grip on the GOP is over.

    If some Republicans want to become “moderates,” they’ll need to actually take moderate positions and fight for them. Extending unemployment benefits would be a good place to start. They could pass that bill this week if they wanted to.

    You say immigration reform is the issue. So after another six or nine months (if we’re lucky) of far right posturing, they MAY finally demonstrate this moderation you say they’re embracing.

    I’m not holding my breath.

    • Dominick Vila says:

      Republicans know that after years of insulting and marginalizing Hispanics and Latinos, a Hail Mary pass is not going to do the trick. They shot themselves in the foot with their relentless attacks against Latinos (who constitute 18% of the U.S. population, not counting illegals), and African Americans (who constitute 12% of the U.S. population). The only thing they will accomplish by embracing immigration reform in the 11th hour, is angering their base, which they can’t afford to do.

      • elw says:

        Heck, I am not a person of color and their comments and treatment of those Communities and others turned me away from the GOP well over a decade ago. I have always registered as a Democrat but use to vote for the person; now I look for the (R) and automatically reject that person.

        • James Bowen says:

          I don’t think the GOP has treated communities of color any worse than they have treated the population at large, though there are exceptions. If there is one demographic that the GOP has foolishly mistreated, it is women.

          • elw says:

            No doubt that they consider women to be a class of people onto itself; but when it comes to nasty comments and the policies they choose to push they basically see the world as divided into two classes, 1. rich, White men and 2. everyone else. What is clear they love those in the number one class and everyone else is fair game depending on their mood.

          • James Bowen says:

            It is difficult to lump the GOP into generalizations. Their leaders are beholden to the interests of wealthy donors and I think tend to divide people the way you described them minus the part about their being white. The base of the GOP is a hodge podge that includes vocal people whose views are outside the American cultural norm (i.e. those anti-women types), but is traditionally middle class. The interests of the middle class are in conflict with those of the wealthy donors. This is part of the reason for the rifts we are seeing in the GOP, though I’m not sure the base at large is smart enough to see what is really going on, though they sense something is wrong. Hence they sometimes turn to nutjobs as a knee-jerk reaction.

            It is worth noting that the leaders of the Democratic Party are also beholden to those same wealthy interests, though it is less obvious.

          • elw says:

            It is true that the Democrats are beholden to wealthy donors. I do not agree on why it is the less obvious, the difference is that the donors they have donate because of they like the Democratic platform do not what to change its Social agenda. You can say what you want about the Republican base being middle class, but that does not change the fact that GOP policies do not help the middle class or support in any way minorities and vulnerable populations. The GOP has been losing membership pretty steadily for the last decade and that has a lot to do with their policies and actions not who their donors are. It is one of the reasons they have trouble wining National elections.

          • James Bowen says:

            I agree with everything you say here. The GOP has long had a middle class base, and the fact that the policies they have been pursuing for the last 30+ years that harm the middle class are nothing less than political suicide.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Are you aware of the controversy generated by a Super Bowl Coca Cola commercial that highlighted the richness of our diversity?

          • James Bowen says:

            I have heard people talking about it today.

      • James Bowen says:

        I don’t think the GOP has treated Hispanics that badly. The GOP’s base is traditionally middle class, a group that unfortunately does not include most Hispanics. Hispanics tend to be economically more hard-pressed than the rest of the population, which is why they lean firmly Democratic. Ironically, the best thing the GOP could do to draw more Hispanics is to restrict immigration. That would put upward pressure on wages and allow more people, including Hispanics, to enter the middle class.

        • neeceoooo says:

          No the base of the GOP is the top 1% income level. I am middle class and a lot of my friends are, the GOP does not even touch us or want to touch us.

          • James Bowen says:

            The top 1% is not a voter base–it is a donor base. It is traditionally the middle class where the GOP gets its votes. You are correct about your latter statement, though. In pursuing policies that harm the people that vote for them, the are committing suicide.

          • plc97477 says:

            The only touch the gotp does is to touch us up to pay for the tax breaks they have given the top 1%.

        • Raymond Paiz says:

          Once again James, you and most forget that the illegals come here because there are jobs. The employers are our enemies and the criminals. Everyone calls the illegals criminals, but forget about the employer who is breaking the law. The illegals come here to improve their lives for their family while the employers break the law to make more money. Who is the evil one? If you want to punish the illegals, start with the employers and put them in jail and take away their businesses. They gave away the jobs for Americans to illegals. I do not blame the illegals however as they only want a better life.

          • James Bowen says:

            I agree with most of what you say here. The employers must be punished severely. However, that does not excuse illegal aliens from their actions. Nobody forced them to come here, they made the decision on their own. Keep in mind that they have also committed document felonies if they hold a payroll job (which some 7 or so million of them do). Their desire for a better life is certainly understandable, but the fact is that our country has a limit to the number of people that can adequately be provided for. We simply can’t allow everyone who wants to come here for a better life to do so, lest we wreck this nation and country economically, ecologically, and socially.

          • jmprint says:

            YOU do not know whether or not they were forced out of their country, sometimes they see it safer here illegally they would rather face consequences here then per persecuted in their on own country to no fault of theirs. People like you want to be the judge and jury to all that bring you discomfort.

          • James Bowen says:

            They still made the conscious decision to break the law and come here. Whatever their reasons, they are responsible for their actions. We cannot bring all of the persecuted and/or disadvantaged people in the world here, not without wrecking our own nation.

          • jmprint says:

            Are you competing the Lord’s job? This nation is ours the people create by God, your job should just be to be faithful to him. You like communism, MOVE and take your organization with you.

          • James Bowen says:

            Physical laws are God’s laws, and those laws say we have limits to the number of people we can provide for. Bringing in too many people will wreck our nation, no matter how much wishful thinking to the contrary.

        • Raymond Paiz says:

          You need to research your history. Everyone talks about how the Blacks and Japanese were treated unfairly and forget that we the Mexicans have gone through the same prejudice. We could not go into a restaurant where Whites were eating or drink from their faucets or go to their bathrooms. Mexicans were considered worse than dogs. So do not tell me the GOP and others did not treat the Hispanics as badly. Both parties did.

          • James Bowen says:

            Perhaps both parties did, but that prejudice is therefore not unique to the GOP.

            I must admit I am unaware of what you are talking about though. While it is not surprising that Mexicans in the U.S. have been victims of prejudice, I am unaware of any legally-sanctioned discrimination against them, such as happened to American Indians, blacks, and Japanese. Enlighten me.

          • Raymond Paiz says:

            I guess being Mexican, I have felt and seen the prejudice of Whites and society. My parents suffered a lot. They might not have been “legal” in terms of a law passed, but the barriers and actions against the Mexican have been tremendous. Just recently, Arizona passed a law which allowe the law to stop any Mexican and require to prove their citizenship. While the Whites say that is OK because when they are stopped they have to show their drivers license. The difference is that Mexicans were being stopped because they were Mexican, not because they were breaking the law. One of my friends who is a doctor was in Arizona doing a presentation at a conference. He was there two nights. He was stopped three times each night on his way to the hotel and he had to prove he was legal. He was not breaking any laws but he was considered “suspicious” because he had a brown skin. Would you get angry if you were stopped and had to show your license for no reason? I am sure you would have yelled at the law. Yet, the GOP and Conservatise said they saw nothing wrong about it. That is a legal example of the prejudice that exists. Then the GOP says they do not understand why Mexicans do not like them.

          • James Bowen says:

            I’m sorry to hear about the prejudices you and your family have had to deal with.

            However, that Arizona law you speak of does not allow police to stop any Mexican and require them to prove their citizenship. It requires that during any contact police have with anyone in the state (traffic stops, etc.), their immigration status be checked. If it is being used for the purposes you say, it is being abused.

          • Raymond Paiz says:

            That is the funny part James. We all know that laws are made and broken daily. That is not the intent of the law, but that is how it was being implemented. Of course the police would deny it. The same thing in Arizona where I have family. I myself was stopped several times for no apparent reason. I was told I was driving a “reported stolen car”. I had a brand new car. Then I was told that it looked like I was driving a little intoxicated because I was weaving. I do not drink. Finally I was given a ticket because I was told that actually I was going 5 miles above the speed limit. When I said I would take it to court, they laughed and said it was two against one as they were two officers. I know how the system works. The judge would have taken their side. You would not experience this type of prejudice so that you might not be aware of the subtle way officers “use” the law to carry out their prejudice. It was bad in Texas. I can tell you that CAlifornia has not been as bad but it does exist.

          • James Bowen says:

            I’m sorry to hear that. I too have witnessed similar corruption among law enforcement and in the legal system. They’d better be careful in Arizona though–if they keep behaving that way they are jeopardizing that law. The Supreme Court upheld that portion of the law, but indicated that kind of abuse could prompt further reviews of it.

      • 4sanity4all says:

        What you said is true, but Republicans don’t all believe it. Many of them think that they will win the Latino vote by saying a few phrases in Spanish on the campaign trail. And remember, in Florida many Cubans vote Republican. They tend to be wealthy business owners, and voting Republican is a long tradition with them. Some Republicans look at Florida, and make the mistake of thinking that Latinos are interchangeable, and if they can win there, they can win anywhere. Another thing is, the Latinos that can vote are already citizens, and immigration is not as pressing an issue with them as wage issues and job availability are. In Chicago, we have many populations from Europe and Asia who were recently able to come here, but are not yet citizens, and they are watching this immigration debate with great self interest. Immigration is a very tough issue to get legislators to consider, because non citizens cannot vote, so right there is a big reason that it is a tough sell.

    • James Bowen says:

      There is nothing moderate about have virtually unlimited immigration when there are many signs, such as our unemployment levels, wage stagnation, strains on natural resources, national debt, etc. that the U.S. already has more people than it can provide for. To paint people who want to remove all limits on immigration as moderates and people who want to enforce the laws on the books as extremists is about as disingenuous as it gets.

    • daniel bostdorf says:

      JD….check out post at top…….Bowen is a propagandist….see explanation…

  2. Dominick Vila says:

    Neither traditional Republicans nor the Tea Party faction have given up on anything. On the contrary, they remain determined to achieve their goals. The difference is in tactics rather than substance. With the possible exception of a few neanderthals that cannot help themselves and continue to make fools of themselves, I expect a friendlier GOP, willing to seek compromise and embracing populist causes they have thus far rejected or ignored.
    Politicians don’t change overnight because someone or something convinced them they were wrong all along. Republican politicians will take a more conciliatory stand on issues of national importance to increase the number of seats in the House and, if possible, take control of the Senate. They know that intransigence and obstructionism backfired, and they are prepared to take a different approach to achieve the same goals.

    • 4sanity4all says:

      And by “take a different approach”, do you mean that they will say anything, and then after they get elected, backpedal on all of their promises to cooperate, and go back to being stubborn and unyielding? I would like to see them take a different approach, but I would also like to see them realize that most of the country wants liberal laws, not restrictive laws based on religion and phony ‘family values’. Most Americans realize that we are a country of many viewpoints, and our laws should allow everyone freedom to make their own decisions. My personal values should not dictate your personal values. I would never own a gun for example, but I have no objection to a mentally normal person being able to own a gun for protection and a rifle for hunting. And I don’t want any Republican to dictate what my doctor can provide for me or any women. In my heart, I think most Americans are middle of the road in their heart, too, but the far right has convinced their base that we liberals want to raise their taxes and give away everything they worked for, as well as seize their guns and force them to give all the lazy sluts free birth control pills. They have repeated these foolish untrue ideas so many times, that their fearful base believes it, repeats it, and votes with regard to it. And sadly, that is how we got to this place.

  3. waggaze says:

    The party that could care less about the middle classs and its welfare but it does support and spoon feed the corporations and Military Industrial Complex to keep their coffers healthy. They would prefer the unemployed middle class to starve than to cut DOD funding. Let’s hope the Republicans are marched out of DC on a rail with Boehner and Lyin’ Ryan leading the way.

    • docb says:

      No EJ, the new tea party term is using LAWLESS in place of UPPITY! The same racist little white males and their stepford wife types…just using different rhetoric for the same policy failures!!

      • jmprint says:

        In Texas you have assholes running for Government on the issue of securing borders and not letting the immigrants that are here not get educated, but I only want to warn them, it would behoove them to educate them, their daughter or granddaughter might fall in love with one of them. I don’t think they want the baby daddies to be under educated.

        • James Bowen says:

          They should not be educated in our country, they should return to their own country. There should be absolutely nothing available to them here: no jobs, no schooling, no police protection, no welfare, no housing, etc. The only public benefit they should be allowed to access is emergency medical care, if need be, followed by deportation.

          • Albert Barriga says:

            @James Bowen, are you a Native American, you racist son of a bitch?

          • James Bowen says:

            Yes I am. Do you have any counter-argument to make? Factually incorrect insults do not count.

          • Albert Barriga says:

            What tribe? The “Fuckawee”?

          • James Bowen says:

            Ask me a serious question without insults or sneers, and you might get an answer from me. Until then, I don’t consider you worthy of an answer.

          • Albert Barriga says:

            Your answer to Jimmy Agler is really stupid!! How were “YOUR” people supposed to know what the blue-eyed white devils would do? And by the way, sneers and insults are how your remarks should be dealt with being as they’re so ignorant.

          • James Bowen says:

            When it became apparent that American Indians were begin crowded out by white colonists, it was apparent what would happen if events continued on that course, which they did. If my remarks are so ignorant, why don’t you have a real reply to them?

          • Avril111 says:

            my Aunty Amelia got a new blue Land Rover LR4
            only from working part time off a home computer… helpful hints B­i­g­4­1­.­ℂ­o­m

          • daniel bostdorf says:

            Jame Bowen is an associate of an antiim-migration movement…please see my post above….Bowen is a propagandist….see explanation…

          • jmprint says:

            oooh! You live in a bubble, and when it explodes i wonder where you will land. Humans are human, regardless of where they are born or the color of the skin the bible teaches that, and that’s what makes American soooo beautiful.

          • James Bowen says:

            I agree with your latter statement, but how do I live in a bubble. Yes, humans are the same everywhere, but there are limits to how many humans our country can handle. We can’t let everybody who wants to come here do so. We don’t have the resources.

          • 788eddie says:

            We don’t have the resources?

            We would if we put the tax rates for the wealthy back up to where they used to be (and to where they should, in all fairness, be).

          • James Bowen says:

            I’m not just talking about taxes. I am talking about physical commodities such as water and green spaces. Those are the ultimate source of our material well being and physical health and any addition to our population decreases the amount available to each American, not to mention future generations of Americans.

          • jmprint says:

            If you have faith in God, he provides. If we stopped ALL help from the immigrants in this nation the greedy would still cry about not having enough. There is no end to GREED. So soften your heart and understand that if for some reason a person leaves his country it is to better themselves and their family, and trust me they don’t come over here to suck on your dollar, they come over here to be self sufficient. There are evil doers everywhere, I am not speaking of those.

          • James Bowen says:

            No, there is no end to greed, but greed must be fought and punished where necessary. While I can sympathize with people who come here for a better life, the fact is that we have limits to how many people our country and its resource base can provide for, not to mention our public infrastructure. If we are to preserve any sort of quality of life and decent economic opportunity, we must do two things: firmly deny the 1% the cheap labor they so crave, and greatly reduce the number of immigrants coming into the U.S. Keeping fertility below replacement level is also necessary.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            I thought you said a few weeks ago that you were not born in the USA. Maybe I am confusing you with someone else. Bear in mind that the overwhelming majority of Hispanic or Latino children that get an education in the USA were either born in this country, sometimes to illegal immigrants, or came to this country when they were children. Why should we deny an education to children born in this country, because of their ethnicity and what their parents did? Since when are children punished for crimes committed by their elders?

          • James Bowen says:

            You must be confusing me with someone else. I was born in South Dakota. If they were born in this country, Hispanic children are citizens and obviously entitled to an education just as any other natural born citizens are. Ethnicity has nothing to do with it–the same applies to Asians, Europeans, Africans, and Australians. However, if they were brought here by illegal parents, they themselves are illegal and should therefore not be eligible for any public benefit whatsoever. Remember, being an illegal immigrant is not a crime, and deportation is not a punishment. Returning these parents and children to their country of origin is an administrative action that rectifies their legal status. If their parents committed crimes such as illegal entry or SSN fraud/theft, I don’t think those children should be charged with the crimes of their parents. Since they are not authorized to be in the country though, by all means they should be ineligible for public education.

          • daniel bostdorf says:

            Bowen is not to betrusted and I explain above….Bowen is a propagandist….see explanation…

          • Raymond Paiz says:

            James, you are so naive. You blame the illegals for everything and guess what? The employers are the truly guilty ones. If they did not hire the illegals to make a better profit and keep Americans captive to low wages, the illegals would not come. Most of the people on Welfare are White (78%). So how aret hey breaking our economy. They help the employer keep wages down. The GOP has eliminated unions, who try to get a good wage for Americans, and will not get rid of the illegals because their donors want the low wages paid to the illegals. That is why nothing has ever been done about them under any president. Obama has sent more illegals home than any other president and you blame him for the problem. Blame the rich idiot.

          • James Bowen says:

            Again, I agree with most of what you say here. I am well aware that the wealthy employers and their bankrollers are the primary culprits here, and that the key to stopping illegal immigration is in the workplace, not at the border (I think that a border fence is a ridiculous waste of money). However, that does not change the fact that there are limits to how many people this country can provide for. I Immigration is the cause of U.S. population growth, and it must be reduced. Since illegal aliens have no right to be here in the first place, expelling them is the logical place to start. They came on their own accord and are responsible for their own actions.

          • Raymond Paiz says:

            I agree with you, however, we are back to why nothing is done about the illegals. You are saying forget the employer and let us punish the illegals. They came because they are looking for a better life, the same as most immigrants since Columbus. Let us begin with putting the criminal employers in jail and then deal with the illegals. I am sure that if there are no jobs, most will go back home. Just like the Conservatives want to secure the border first, I say let us put the employers in jail. Let us make them pay for their crime.

          • James Bowen says:

            I totally agree with everything you say here, with one exception. I am not saying forget about the employer. Workplace enforcement and employer sanctions are, like you say, the way to stop illegal immigration. If I left you with that impression, I have apparently miscommunicated.

        • daniel bostdorf says:

          jmprint—watch out…caught this guy at other article…please see my post above….Bowen is a propagandist….see explanation…

        • daniel bostdorf says:

          Sotomayor: Labeling Illegal Immigrants Criminals Is Insulting

          read here:

          http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/02/04/sotomayor-labeling-illegal-immigrants-criminals-is-insulting/

      • James Bowen says:

        They should not get any kind of legal status whatsoever. That is not racism, that is simple recognition of the fact that our country has limits to how many people it can provide for.

        • Jimmy Agler says:

          Hmmmm,,,,,it is a somewhat sound argument there James. I am willing to bet the Comanche, Souix and other felt the same way about immigrants with last names like Bowen and Agler

          • James Bowen says:

            They probably did. What happened to the American Indians is a stark historical example of what can happen when people in a certain country fail to control the inflow of foreigners into their country.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Does that mean you oppose the entry of European, Asian, Australian, Canadian and other white immigrants, or is your concern limited to Hispanics/Latinos?

          • James Bowen says:

            More like the former, except I do not oppose immigration or the entry of immigrants. I just think it needs to be greatly reduced.

          • Dominick Vila says:

            Sounds like an over population solution with a few loopholes…

          • James Bowen says:

            Overpopulation is the primary concern w.r.t. immigration policy. Unfortunately this aspect of it is discussed very rarely in the media.

          • daniel bostdorf says:

            Dominick….please see my post above….Bowen is a propagandist….see explanation…

      • daniel bostdorf says:

        Sotomayor: Labeling Illegal Immigrants Criminals Is Insulting

        read here:

        http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/02/04/sotomayor-labeling-illegal-immigrants-criminals-is-insulting/

    • daniel bostdorf says:

      note…please see my post above….Bowen is a propagandist….see explanation…

      • waggaze says:

        I believe you are correct. So was Joseph Goebbels and he eventual lost everything in the end. History repeating itself again?

    • joe schmo says:

      Being a Conservative, I certainly hope they are too. In this case, the consensus is unanimous. I think the ‘Tea,’ Constitutionalists, Capitalists etc…. are going to pull the GOP out of Washington by the ears…… We are sick to death of the Boehners, McCains, McConnells, Ryans, and RINO’s thank you very much.

      ….and about ‘the party that could care less about the middle class’ while harboring the Corporations (which we are not all that happy with either because of all the outsourcing) and ‘Military Industrial Complex (here we have a bone to pick I am anti-war not anti-military. Weakness does not garner respect….Sorry, you want to get annihilated, keep it up…..

      • waggaze says:

        How much military funding is enought? I cannot believe nor defend the doubling of the budget for DOD as it is today. This is what I oppose including starting a war just to satisfy the Military Industrial Complex while making more enemies of sects, people and countries needlessly. Iraq is a fine example of a needless war the created a safe haven for terrorists including destroying the social fabric of a state of people who were of not threat to this country. Who are we to dictate the government component of a country? Saddam kept order which in turn brought the flow of oil for export which now is zero for the US and brought us to our financial knees. No one could defend the actions taken against a sovereign state that posed no threat especially those cited by GW and cronies. WMDs? Where?

        • joe schmo says:

          I SAID I WAS ANTI-WAR. Especially senseless starting with Viet Nam. I am not against the military because if you are weak you can easily be demolished. If you think the world is a safe place and if you think we are safe against the world, then you are sadly mistaken….. No many of the social programs are ruining us…..

          • waggaze says:

            I did not mention anything about the world being safe but did note we have made it not safe through senseless wars including Vietnam. Our quest for resources from other countries and missionaries trying to change other societies assisted in making our world a dangerous place. We are not innocents in this world. My posit was how much is enough funding for DOD? Congress has seen fit to take so much money from other programs such as science and education to allocate to DOD for what? Funding the DOD at pre-GW levels did not make our DOD weak but more efficient. DOD’s level of funding goes against what the Republicans espouse about fiscal responsibility thus hypocritical at best. We cannot afford funding the DOD at its current levels just so the Military Industrial Complex can live and thrive. You did a good job of avoiding my question so I will take it you are satisfied with the current DOD levels of funding instead of being fiscally responsible and supportive of the MIC.

          • joe schmo says:

            I understood your post quite well, thank you. Well, what would you have the DOD do? You are misguided. I read somewhere, not sure where the article is, that the DOD funds many science and math research projects and they are now unable to do as much because of the budgets cuts.

            Invests in Innovation

            Invests $12.2 billion in long-term scientific and technological innovation to ensure that the Nation has access to the best defense systems available in the world.

            http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/factsheet_department_defense

            AND:

            Scienceandtechnology.

            The Department believes that accelerating trendsin both technology development and a dynamicthreat environment dictate that we must maintainour edge by protecting our investments in development of future capabilities. As such, science and technology programs are largely protected within this budget.

            If you care to read more about the military and the budget cuts you are welcome to look at this .pdf

            http://www.defense.gov/news/Defense_Budget_Priorities.pdf

            If you look at the .pdf, you will see just how many cuts have been made. As you well know, military personnel do not get that much money. As far as technology, most of our technological advancements have come from military research. Apparently, the .pdf has the notion of explaining in conclusion that the FY13 budget will reduce the military considerably by 2020. So this should make you very happy. However, I feel this is not set in stone and is very dependent on who the president is at the time. I should hope that the military stays right on track in protecting our interests. It is very dangerous thinking to place so much trust in the Global Community.

            As far as Global interests, I think this administration is especially naive. Putin has made a mockery out of us as well as China (ours is one of the only countries that does not enforce import tariffs) and the Middle East (we could be totally energy independent). Even after all the Environmental research has done on the pipeline which has been deemed safe, your side still balks. You think only of your own agenda rather than the good of all Americans which is hypocritical because you seem to be so insistent on the good of all mankind. It takes a balance on both ends for this country to work or are you forgetting that.

            I agree we need to stay out of other countries faces. But, there is a huge BUT here. With no protection what so ever how do you think this country will stay? Unless it is forced – Coexist? Won’t happen in my lifetime….think again

          • waggaze says:

            Some scientists do not want their research and developments being used for killing people thus this is where you are mislead. Most of us refuse to work on DOD funded projects as they ultimately end up being used for destruction. Just as the UAV was invented for monitoring forest fires tje DOD could not wait to attach missles to our craft. NASA has had a profound affect on society through research and development. DOD should and must be reduced back to pre-911 levels. There Is no debate there unless one is a war hawk or in most cases today a Chicken hawk. Those who have not faught another corporation’s war are the first to start them to leave their legacy.

          • joe schmo says:

            You’re also a fool if you think global incentives are always well meaning.

            By the way when the UAV was invented to be used by the forest service it turned out to be a complete flop of a project and not because it didn’t work.

            The U.S. Forest Service spent $100,000 in 2007 to buy two Sky Seer drone
            aircraft that they have not figured out how to use. The story was
            reported at Environment & Energy and was featured at a web site about forest planning.
            Apparently the agency purchased the drones seven years ago initially to
            be used for law enforcement, but FAA regulations and other problems
            have presented obstacles to the very expensive unmanned aerial vehicles
            (UAV) taking to the skies.

            http://fireaviation.com/tag/uav/

            Incompetance in my opinion. Why was there no training? Typical for the 21st century. No incentives or follow through.

            You mention NASA. I think Obama is more interested in social issues. Also, NASA came out with the notion that there was no global warming until it was threatened to be defunded by the Obama Administration for not admitting that there was….and what about that space program. I feel it is one of the most important aspects of human existence. It, like most progress, has been outsourced to Russia and China. The new powerhouses. Face it, we’re slowly loosing it. Of course, the military is going to jump on it before some other nation sails past us. It’s all about competition and protection.

            Russia has a clue, they are becoming what we used to be. Talk about role reversals, we are becoming weak, picking up their old traits and will continue to do so if things do not change. I’m sure you have no clue what it is like to live in a Communist country?

            I am assuming that you are involved in the Scientific community? Who says science is always right. I believe in progress. I am a futurist. I believe in innovation. Without competition you have none of these.

            …and the debate between the war hawk and chicken hawk….well if we keep going on the path we are headed we will surely end up the chicken hawk because another lunatic from who knows where will feel it is his power to destroy us. With no defense our goose is as good as cooked.

            The masters of innovative technology happen to be those who inherit power and respect. Those who do not will be controlled.

            I’m curious then, what would you describe as your rendition of a perfect world?

  4. ORAXX says:

    Today’s Republican party has become an organization dedicated to preserving the wealth and power of a tiny handful of individuals, by any means at their disposal.

  5. disqus_ivSI3ByGmh says:

    Those 100 or so Moderate Republicans may still have to worry. Right now, they have what can be considered “safe” seats as long as they are the candidate. However, the typical “Tea Party”-backed primary opponents will always use something like “He may as well be a Democrat” at their principal means of attack. Especially if these same “safe” Republicans actually condone to work with Democrats in order to bring out needed legislation over the next six months. Of course, in some of these districts, the Tea Party is going to run against everything the Republicans in those districts actually need to make a living! So it will be amusing to see if they vote against their own self-interests in the name of party purity, or if they stay home out of protest. We all know that even though Registered Democrats will vote for a Republican Candidate if they feel their guy is not viable, there is little anecdotal evidence of Republican voters reciprocating, and supporting a Democrat when their guy is a whack-job somewhere to the right of Cato!

  6. kingartie1 says:

    The Grotesque Oligarch Party is just casting about for ways to look like they’re cooperating without actually taking the risk of cooperating. There has been and will be no fundamental change of heart, no reboot of their business plan, no recast of philosophy. The GOP RNC are more like a bunch of rodents looking to get out of the one-exit maze of their own making without alienating those who hand out the rewards of cheese. They need some of the Latino vote and are triangulating how they can win it while keeping all of the white red state base and more than half of the independents, without which they cannot steal the Senate and/or keep the House. Trying to not disaffect a vital block of voters is not nearly the same as appearing to seem that you are doing everything sensible and principled with a change of heart to reach out to new ones.
    This new calibrated immigration “reform” and the 5-year-late half-baked Republican’t alternative proposal for health care insurance reform are not policy strategies so much as they are control-freak-crafted to give them an out so that if and when they get both houses they can stifle and retract any laws that are not to their ideological liking, no matter who it hurts, even if it ruins lives and puts a hit on the economy, even if those ruined lives happen to be those of some of their most loyal Fox-addicted red-state conspiracy-obsessed underemployed dupe voters.
    If the oligarch autocrat Koch Brothers and their ilk don’t want it, then no one will get it, and sleaze and sleight of hand and a tidal wave of dark dollars and doublespeak are all acceptable tactics as they attempt to buy or force our decisions with brainwash propaganda and guest appearances on Hannity et al.

  7. howa4x says:

    EJ
    I think the one gorilla in the room continues to be the Koch bros who initially funded the tealiban. They are true believers whose father helped start the John Birch society, a radical right wing organization of the 50-60’s. The tea party are the stalwarts still protecting the job creators myth and until there is another loyal group found that is stupid enough to vote against the interests of their own children, they will still get backing from 1%ers. Also the Tea party and allies still control a large swath of the primary electorate and will constantly continue the war of women’s right to reproductive choices vocally. Uncle Huck is a good example of this and he appeals to a large part of the base who thought his comments on libido were appropriate. Also the Tealiban think they are in a war for the soul of what they think is America is(white, Christian) and will not give that up without a fight to the death even if it means the destruction of the GOP. Any republican running will have to constantly fend off the ultra right to get to the general. This is the graveyard of moderate republicans and will be for a long time. Control of the Senate will still prove elusive until there is a center that will also fight. Expect the tea party to say enough disparaging things about Latinos to make any legislative victory seem hollow and cynical.

    • James Bowen says:

      The push for more immigration and legalization of illegal aliens is one of the highest priorities of these wealthy interests you mention. This push is wrapped in progressive-sounding rhetoric, but that rhetoric is nothing but a disguise for the naked greed you denounce here.

    • daniel bostdorf says:

      please see my post above….Bowen is a propagandist….see explanation…

  8. elw says:

    The GOP faces a up hill battle, even if they do suddenly side-step their most radical members. First of all there is no side-stepping anyone who is radical in their beliefs because for most of them the world is black and white and they simply do not do gray. If they cannot get what they want, there is a good chance they will break off from the party and form a new one that will attract a significant number of the GOPs followers making it even more difficult for them to win a National election. They jumped in a snake pit when they embraced the Tea Party and it will take them decades to crawl out of it, it the can.

  9. James Bowen says:

    The opposition to legalization of illegal aliens and expanded legal immigration is not something that is confined to the hard core right wing of the GOP. It is much, much broader than that. The push for this so-called immigration reform is coming from wealthy interests–the same wealthy interests who have steamrolled the middle and working classes in this nation for the last 45 years. The immigration battle is really a battle between the wealthy and the common folk. The wealthy using soaring rhetoric about being humane, giving people opportunity, being a nation of immigrants, etc. when their real motivation is greed.

    As citizens, we must do whatever it takes to stop amnesty and immigration increases.

  10. Jimmy Agler says:

    There is only one thing that makes an elected official do anything. Fear of losing their seat. The GOP is moving away from the TP because the country is too.

  11. daniel bostdorf says:

    I would also like to point out that there is an organization that is pushing discriminatory anti-immigration in the guise of population control in California. It wants to spread lies and distortions nationwide about what legalizing illegal immigrants would do to the USA and its workers…… The group is called Californians for Population Stabilization . It is being investigated for some questionable positions.

    And the poster below, “James Bowen, is a personal friend of the organizer of this fascistic propaganda campaign…

    An article was posted at huffpost (that I referenced below) that falsely suggested legalizing illegal immigrants is somehow wrong for this country. The author who wrote this article is Joe Guzzardi, the National Media Director for Californians for Population Stabilization

    News story here about Californians for Population Stabilization:

    California org. focused on curbing population growth under scrutiny for anti-immigrant stance by Adrian Carrasquillo 12:29 am on 03/23/2013

    http://nbclatino.com/2013/03/23/california-org-focused-on-curbing-population-growth-under-scrutiny-for-anti-immigrant-stance/

    From the article:

    “The nonprofit Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) is under scrutiny for comments made by a member of the organization who said the DREAM Act is dangerous because children of “illegal aliens” may be communists or drug smugglers and because of ads against proposed parts of immigration reform like legalization or a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, a dicey area to wade into for a nonprofit…Marilyn Deyoung, chairman of the board for CAPS, was interviewed by Cuentame, a Latino social media advocacy organization, which posted the video on Youtube……“A baby can join a gang and then commit a crime, a baby can drop out of school and become a criminal, a baby grows up,” she said about immigrants. “The DREAM act is dangerous, children of illegal aliens who were brought here under this stupid birthright citizenship visa. They’re not getting into the depth of whether they’re communist or whether they’re drug smugglers or had felonies or had been in prison or anything. They know how to game our benefits — they’re on food stamps, they go to the hospital, get free education, free medical care.”..

    I caution many here that there is a concerted effort to push propaganda and lies about the dangers of legalizing illegal immigrants…this demonization of illegal immigrants is UnAmerican and should be seen for what it is…propaganda….and in my opinion….the worst form of discrimination against these immigrants…

    Here is Bowens exchange with me when he was caught in his popaganda:

    James Bowen daniel bostdorf

    • 2 days ago

    U.S. population growth is unsustainable, and illegal immigration (and illegal immigrant fertility) is a significant contributor to that growth. I don’t see what is so questionable about what Joe Guzzardi said here. These are valid concerns (at least about them being drug smugglers). Rep. Steve King of Iowa expressed similar concerns last summer, and was unfairly crucified in the media for doing so. He stood his ground.

    my response:
    daniel bostdorf James Bowen

    • 2 days ago

    You need to check out who Guzzardi is. And you are obviously in need of fact checking your beliefs about immigration….and…get back on topic…so getting back to Decker again…”But a quick examination of leadership’s one-page “Standards for Immigration Reform” memo, a draft copy of which Politico has published online, suggests plenty of reasons to doubt that Republicans are really ready to move on a comprehensive immigration reform plan. In fact, such a move may be even less likely than it was a year ago…..But as long as the GOP is still trumpeting a “border ” security first, citizenship never” strategy, it’s a fair bet that Republicans are more interested in appearing as though they want to take action than they are in actually doing something.” This is the point of the article—what the GOP is willing or not willing to do….not anti- immigration reform…

    Reply
    James Bowen daniel bostdorf

    • 2 days ago

    I am proud to say that I personally know Joe Guzzardi and I often read his columns. They are usually “right on the money”.

    my response
    daniel bostdorf James Bowen

    • 2 days ago

    Then you have just produced the “mea culpa” of being a propagandist for the Californians for Population Stabilization that Guzzardi produces in my opinion racist and discriminatory lies about immigrants.

    http://nbclatino.com/2013/03/2

    REPORT:”“This is what these pro-nativism, anti-immigrant groups do,” he says. “They push an agenda predicated on lies, hate and misinformation and when confronted – they backtrack. Say it wasn’t them – like kids, except their words harm people — the real lives of immigrants and Latinos.””

    James Bowne is not to be trusted.

  12. kfreed says:

    “Is The GOP Giving Up Tea?”

    No. All that’s left of the GOP is the Tea. They’re just hoping we’ll stop noticing if they continue to pretend otherwise:

    “MEMO: Health Insurance, Banking, Oil Industries Met With Koch, Chamber, Glenn Beck To Plot 2010 Election”
    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/

  13. Barbara Morgan says:

    I am going to make people mad but I don’t agree with the President and his path to citizenship for illegals. I do not agree because many of the more 12 million illegals in this Country have been here since before the first amnesty Reagan gave them and did nothing then to become legal and the same thing will happen with this group of illegals. They will not be willing payout the money that they will have to pay just like many didn’t want to do in the 80’s and we will still have millions of illegals in this Country no matter what kind of reform the government comes up with and that is not fair to the people that are trying to come to this legally nor is it fair to the American workers who have been replaced by these illegals in the working place especially construction and like businesses. It is not the fault of the Country that there are many children and young adults that were brought here by their parents that they are caught in the middle of this mess but the fault of the parents that did this to their children. I can go along with a path for citizenship for the young adults and children who had to enter the Country illegally because their parents brought them here but not the adults that willing broke our immigration laws and are demanding to be made legal here when no such thing would ever happen for you or me if we entered their home countries the same way they did ours.

    • daniel bostdorf says:

      Barbara: I generally like your statements posted at other websites….BUT…Here are the facts, not propaganda, and five reasons why we need immigration reform….it BENEFITS America:

      1. Immigrants Start Companies and Create Jobs
      President Obama said it himself on Tuesday, “In recent years, one in
      four high-tech startups in America were founded by immigrants. One in four new small business owners were immigrants.” According to the Kauffman Foundation these immigrant-founded companies produced $52 billion in sales and employed 450,000 workers in 2005.

      2. Immigrants Are Innovators
      The Kauffman Foundation also points out that in 2006 foreigners residing in the U.S. were named as inventors or co-inventors of one-quarter of all patent applications filed from the
      U.S.

      3. Immigrants Work for the American Dream
      A 2011 Brookings Institution analysis of immigrant skills and employment in the U.S. found that low-skilled immigrants in the country had a higher level of employment and a lower rate of household poverty than native low-skilled populations, despite the fact that employed immigrants earned $5,000 less than employed
      natives.

      PLEASE NOTE THIS: Immigrants have taken the risk to leave home and are focused on finding work and building a better life for their families. A study by demographers at the University of Southern California estimates that by 2030, nearly 70 percent of Latinos who came to the U.S. during the 1990s are expected to own a home.

      4. The Demand for Immigrants Will Rise
      We may not realize it yet in the U.S. but the competition is on to
      attract young, talented immigrant workers. As the “developed world”
      grows older we will need younger, mobile workers to spur economic growth
      and help pay for the benefits of the post-war baby boom generation.

      A recent article in Bloomberg Businessweek by Charles Kenney reminds us that some countries, including the U.K., Australia, and Canada, have already taken measures to ease the visa process for foreign students and innovators. Kenney argues that “given the first-mover advantage (countries that open their doors to migrants from a particular country subsequently attract more migrants from that country), reform is an urgent priority.”

      5. Immigrants Can Help Boost Sagging Fertility Rates and Spur Economic Growth

      As populations get older, they are less productive and more costly to take care of. A young workforce is key to maintaining productivity and economist growth. An aging population and sagging fertility used to be a problem faced only by Europe and Japan but since the financial crisis U.S. fertility has dropped below the replacement rate of around 2.1 children born per woman.

      Immigrants can help raise fertility rates not just by having more
      children but also lowering the cost of child care. A Hebrew University (Jerusalem) study found that an important reason for historically large families in the U.S. was cheap child care, much of it provided by undocumented workers.

      Kenney, of the Bloomberg Businessweek, points out that “If low-skilled migration stops, the fertility rate could remain permanently depressed, in which case the long-term “crisis”
      in entitlement programs, from Medicare to Social Security, that rely on a good ratio of workers to retirees will become an urgent problem.” more here: http://fusion.net/abc_univision/story/economic-reasons-immigration-reform-now-16112

      I respectfully appreciate your opinion. It was thoughtful. However, the premise upon which you base your opinion is has been proven false. Completely false.

      You are listening to too much right wing propaganda about this issue.

      This statement by you one is most egregious examples of a false premise leading to a false conclusion: ….. “They will not be willing payout the money that they will have to pay just like many didn’t want to do in the 80’s and we will still have millions of illegals in this Country no matter what kind of reform the government comes up with and that is not fair to the people that are trying to come to this legally nor is it fair to the American workers who have been replaced by these illegals in the working place especially construction and like businesses.”

      As Joe Biden states: marlarky.”

      If you read my post below, I clearly outline where this propaganda, not facts, comes from where you and right wing media have gotten it from and keep perpetuating the lies and distortions……there is an organization that is pushing discriminatory anti-immigration in the guise of population control in California. It wants to spread lies and distortions nationwide about what legalizing illegal immigrants would do to the USA and its workers…… The group is called Californians for Population Stabilization . It is and has been being
      investigated for some questionable positions as well as overt racism.

      There effort to push propaganda about the dangers of legalizing illegal immigrants…this demonization of illegal immigrants is UnAmerican and should be seen for what it is…propaganda….and in my opinion….the worst form of discrimination against these immigrants…it is racism pure and simple.

      From the investigation reported here:
      Titled: California org. focused on curbing population growth under scrutiny for anti-immigrant stance by Adrian Carrasquillo 12:29 am on 03/23/2013

      http://nbclatino.com/2013/03/2

      Quote:
      “The nonprofit Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) is
      under scrutiny for comments made by a member of the organization who said the DREAM Act is dangerous because children of “illegal aliens” may be communists or drug smugglers and because of ads against proposed parts of immigration reform like legalization or a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, a dicey area to wade into for a nonprofit…Marilyn Deyoung, chairman of the board for CAPS, was interviewed by Cuentame, a Latino social media advocacy organization, which posted the video on Youtube:
      ……..“A baby can join a gang and then commit a crime, a baby can drop out of school and become a criminal, a baby grows up,” she said about immigrants. “The DREAM act is dangerous, children of illegal aliens who were brought here under this stupid birthright citizenship visa. They’re not getting into the depth of whether they’re communist or whether they’re drug smugglers or had felonies or had been in prison or anything. They know how to game our
      benefits — they’re on food stamps, they go to the hospital, get free
      education, free medical care.”..

      FROM THE INVESTIGATION:
      “This is what these pro-nativism, anti-immigrant groups do,” he
      says. “They push an agenda predicated on lies, hate and misinformation and when confronted – they backtrack. Say it wasn’t them – like kids, except their words harm people — the real lives of immigrants and Latinos.”

      Ms. Morgan, I don’t know if you work for this Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS)….I only hope that you take the time to research the facts about immigration.

  14. Michael Leonard Rowley says:

    Is the Democratic party giving up the ACLU because of the NSA?

    • daniel bostdorf says:

      Some advice to readers at National Memo:
      Read the profiles of a poster by clicking on their name. In this case here:
      http://disqus.com/michaelleonardrowley/

      Then determine if the poster really has the best of intentions.

      A social media troll as someone who seeks to lure or bait people into negative, disruptive rhetoric for their own edification or to commandeer an otherwise free-flowing discussion among colleagues.

      They don’t recognize anyone that may be interested in discussing something that bores them and opt to criticize or yell “boring” instead of engaging in the discussion. Or they post inane off topic bumper sticker single sentences.

      or in this case :
      “Is the Democratic party giving up the ACLU because of the NSA?

      They choose to belittle those who seek the information and discourse as well as those who try to provide it. They simply have no interest in anything that is not self-serving.

      Trolls will defend their focus on expressing contrary opinions as an honorable attempt to rid the online community of fake-experts, get to the truth of a matter or enlighten their followers; however, their intent has nothing to do with community building or public enlightenment.

      So how should you deal with trolls?


      Ignore them.

      Trolls exist for the spotlight.”

  15. daniel bostdorf says:

    Back to the article EJ wrote:

    “The botched rollout of the health care law has called forth some good news: Republicans are so confident they can ride anti-Obamacare sentiment to electoral victory that they’re growing ever-more impatient with the Tea Party’s fanaticism. Immigration reform may be the result.

    The GOP is looking like a person emerging from a long binge and asking, “Why did I do that?” The moment of realization came when last fall’s government shutdown cratered the party’s polling numbers. Staring into the abyss can be instructive. For the first time since 2010, the middle of the House Republican caucus — roughly 100 of its 233 members — began worrying less about primaries from right-wing foes and more about losing their majority status altogether.”

    Yes—The GOP is starting to give up the TEA-party…

  16. To all the Obama haters and Fox News parrots and Ditto Heads. The fact is and I know how much you hate facts; nearly ALL PEDOPHILES ARE REPUBLICAN
    Nearly ALL Pedophiles are Republicans Click Here

    Convicted Republican Pedophiles Click Here
    More Republican Child Molesters Click Here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.