Source: http://feeds.abcnews.com/click.phdo?i=1c2abe8ce968c78f1225111ad88d774d
recent political polls michigan politics illinois senator philippine politics
Source: http://feeds.abcnews.com/click.phdo?i=1c2abe8ce968c78f1225111ad88d774d
recent political polls michigan politics illinois senator philippine politics
Source: http://feeds.abcnews.com/click.phdo?i=91093ff3460887019f116d377bc91bd6
how to get involved in politics download data politic senate appropriations political forums
bbc politics news politic crack processor srilanka political news funny political news
senate majority leader total politics political news political unrest
politics forum top news today political contributions by corporations michigan senate
Source: http://feeds.abcnews.com/click.phdo?i=6da148591c932b1ea904ead6bceb17f6
north carolina senators and representatives senate votes political platform politics news
You remember this twist; they're revisiting the "Mediscare" strategy that worked for them in 2010, telling seniors that the cuts to Medicare Advantage in the Affordable Care Act were the real Medicare cuts. That Democrats are more responsible for cutting Medicare than the 235 Republicans who voted this April to gut it. Yesterday, Speaker John Boehner started the attack in earnest, with this claim:
"The only people in Washington, DC who have voted to cut Medicare have been the Democrats" said Boehner, "when they voted to cut $500 billion in Medicare during Obamacare."
His spokesman doubled down on that statement, sending this to Greg Sargent:
"The Democrats? health care law siphoned more than $500 billion away from Medicare into an unsustainable new entitlement?that?s a Medicare cut. Now, they are insisting on the status quo, which means Medicare?s bankruptcy and steep benefit cuts. In contrast, the House-passed budget, the 'Path to Prosperity, makes sensible reforms to preserve and protect Medicare for the future."
Sargent:
This moves the argument one step further, and takes the GOP attacks on Dems from the left to its ultimate conclusion. Not only did Dems vote to cut Medicare when they passed the health care law, but they are also proposing still more cuts to Medicare, in the sense that doing nothing will mean more benefits cuts later. After all, we know Dems are willing to cut Medicare because they've done it before.By contrast, the Ryan plan?which we are told is necessary to reduce spending?is "reform." And that reform is designed to prevent Dems from getting away with more cuts.
Republicans are conveniently ignoring the fact that the Ryan budget preserves the Medicare Advantage cuts from the ACA, "virtually the only part of 'Obamacare'?the term that Republicans use derisively to describe the health care law enacted last year?that the Wisconsin Republican preserved when he drafted his budget." And ignoring the analysis of the CBO that says seniors would have to pay a substantial portion of their own healthcare costs, i.e. would experience a benefit cut, under the Ryan plan. And ignores the Ryan's own words, that seniors should have to pay for their own healthcare.
But ignoring reality has worked for Republicans for a long time, so why shouldn't it continue to? Particularly, as Sargent warns, if Democrats end up caving into Republican hostage-taking on the debt ceiling and deficit. "History shows, of course, that they've made this argument successfully before. Of course, if Dems agree to deep Medicare cuts in the Biden-led deficit negotiations, then we'll all call a truce. Right?"
Yeah, right. If a bargain is made, then of course the Republicans won't use Medicare cuts against Democrats. We all know how much you can trust a Republican promise. Like that whole "we'll only filibuster judicial nominees in 'extraordinary circumstances'" thing.
political articles political news video which political party am i senate foreign relations committee
Source: http://feeds.cbsnews.com/~r/CBSNewsMain/~3/PdWdICvMo7A/main20067248.shtml
politics forum top news today political contributions by corporations michigan senate
pa senators political articles florida senators and representatives oregon senators
the daily politics politics polls michigan senators maryland senators and congressmen
Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=1d596b7573c37c39b07908a2b0b35312
top political news game politics political blogs political polling
The Senate has approved an extension of the Patriot Act for four more years by a vote of 72-23 (22 Democrats and one Republican 18 Democrats, one Independent and four Republicans opposed). The House has approved the extension 250-153 (122 Democrats and 31 Republicans opposed).
At the Danger Room, Spencer Ackerman writes Top Democrat Channels Cheney, Blasts Patriot Act Foes as Osama Pals:
It used to be that Sen. Harry Reid had a problem with smearing surveillance skeptics as terrorist allies. But now that some Republicans oppose the Patriot Act, Reid is calling the objectors Osama?s BFFs. Dick Cheney would be proud.All the libertarian senator Rand Paul wanted was to add amendments to the government?s cherished surveillance law that would protect Americans? privacy. For this, Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, charged that Paul?s efforts would ?increase the risk of a retaliatory terrorist strike against the homeland and hamper our ability to deal a truly fatal blow to al-Qaida.?
It?s not just that Reid is demagoguing Rand Paul. It?s that Reid?s objections betray the depths of his hypocrisy on both surveillance and its politics, as revealed by the sophisticated consistency-generating algorithm known as Google.
Remember back when a Republican was in the White House and demanded broad surveillance authority? Here?s Reid back then. ?Whether out of convenience, incompetence, or outright disdain for the rule of law, the administration chose to ignore Congress and ignore the Constitution,? Reid said about Bush?s warrantless surveillance program. When Bush insisted Congress entrench that surveillance with legislation in 2008, Reid turned around and demanded Bush ?stop fear-mongering and start being honest with the American people about national security.? Any claim about the detrimental impact about a lapse in widespread surveillance were ?scare tactics? to Reid that ?irresponsibly distort reality.? (Then Reid rolled over for Bush.)
That?s nowhere near the end of Reid?s hypocrisy here. When the Senate debated renewing the Patriot Act in 2006, Reid, a supporter of the bill?s surveillance procedures, himself slowed up the bill?s passage to allow amendments to it ? the better to allow ?sensible checks on the arbitrary exercise of executive power.? Sounding a whole lot like Rand Paul, the 2006-vintage Reid registered his ?objection to the procedural maneuver under which Senators have been blocked from offering any amendments to this bill? and reminded his colleagues, ?the hallmark of the Senate is free speech and open debate.?
Reid could hardly be more of an opportunist here. ...
Joanneleon has a diary on the subject, Remember When We Used to Fight Against PATRIOT Act Extensions?
? ? ? ? ?
At Daily Kos on this date in 2004:
The Field Poll, which has the distinction of never being wrong, confirms that California is solid (D) territory.
? ? ? ? ?
See High Impact Diaries here. See Top Comments here.
recent political news senators from ohio massachusetts senator business news today