The unfailing reverence on the American right for Ronald Reagan is understandable. He was the only exemplar of modern conservatism to win the White House, and unlike liberal icons such as Roosevelt or Johnson or Obama, he presided over an economic boom and became beloved by voters not normally drawn to his party. No wonder that Reagan, long before his death in 2004, attained mythical status in the conservative movement and the Republican Party. But that myth has become a burden for the modern GOP. It has bound Reagan’s followers on the right to policies and positions that were
Comments: She sounds like she actually posts here on Lucianne.com using numerous pseudonymns. Why am I not surprised by this? Rubin was totally and embarrassingly head-over-heels over Mitt Romney. Praised him to the skies, and dumped on anyone opposing him. Loathed Palin. Seemed entirely dismissive (if not actually antagonistic) towards the grassroots/tea-party. Her GOP-E ilk always hated Reagan. She needs to be reminded that Ronald Reagan was not a Myth. He actually accomplished Historic Achievements. He also said what he meant and meant what he said.
The GOP has to finally own up to the fact that it is now a democrat entity. The rest of the country has to find a new political party that behaves like a responsible adult. And Rubin has to realize that she, too, is actually a democrat, she never transformed.
Omigosh, what is it with the suicidal tendencies of the Republican Party? Can you imagine the Dems ever talking about the need to dial it back on the deification of FDR, JFK, heck, for that matter Mikhail Gorbachev? A more self-loathing party than the Republicans (as governed by its elites) cannot be imagined.
Thanks OP. I have long felt Lcom had serial posters and Rubin would probably be the type to be one. I guess she has forgotten that Mitt lost, Dole lost, McCain lost but Reagan won twice. She wants the conservatives to stop trying to follow their beliefs and just rubber stamp the liberal Repubs.
Jennifer is a denizen of DC and, as such, she hates the conservatives across the country. Sometimes I wonder if she has ever ventured outside her Washington-Maryland-Northern Virginia confines. She probably has visited the Grand Canyon and believes that gives her credibility to expound on various GOP topics vs conservatives´ views.
I will say her tv makeup has improved over the last year or two.
Forget Sir Ronaldus Magnus, our leader who carried 49 States in 1984 and secured for the GOP the greatest Electoral College victory in the history of The Republic?...Wonder how much The Washington Post pays this young political ignoramus?
Jennifer and her cohorts here are like liberal Episcopalians. They have won and now control the denomination/party but found that those whom they have conquered are not obliged to continue the association. Now what you do with what you won is up to you entirely. Have fun with that because it doesn´t seem to be working out very well for you.
I revere Ronald Reagan. I have sometimes thought, however, that any subsequent candidate is in the position of a second wife who can never measure up to her husband´s memory of his sainted first wife.
This longing for another Reagan has been a stumbling block for a great many Republicans and as we read constantly on this site, they will settle for no less and will stay home before they accept less. Even worse, they will attack and denigrate any proposed successor thereby helping the Democrats while claiming they are standing up for principle. I don´t think there is any cure for what ails them.
LOL! I´m not Rubin, but what she says resonates. She isn´t saying to hate or dislike Reagan; rather, she is saying it is time to ´move on´ from Reagan. Just like we think highly of George Washington, but that doesn´t mean we have to 100% take his policies as our policies 200+ years later. We are now 30+ years past Reagan´s first election; the GOP needs to address the issues of today rather than the issues of 1980.
The comments here are telling. When posters presume that one person must post under several aliases, they pretend that only one person thinks the GOP needs to think in a different way. No, there are plenty of GOP voters who would agree with a different approach. Many helped elect this new generation that she mentions. Trying them now on charges of "GOP purity" is self-defeating.
#5, Rubin is a Californian with undergrad and law school at Berkeley and a 20 year stint as a labor lawyer in Hollyweird and only recently moved to the DC area...what GOP campaigns, local or state organizations, or local/state/federal administrations has she actually been involved with? How did she become designated a conservative columnist? Rubin, her spin and the WaPo are bogus...
I agree; Rubin uses four pages to argue a point that a skilled writer could manage in two, but I´m not willing to throw her overboard just for that.
Today’s Republican Party, however, faces legions of voters and candidates who came of age politically after Reagan’s eight years in office. An entire generation recalls him vaguely as a genial, optimistic president who stood up for America in the Cold War.
The Republican Party can remain a Ronald Reagan historical society, or it can try to endure as a force in national politics. But it can’t do both. The choice matters greatly, for there is no guarantee that the GOP will retain its ability to win national elections or that conservatism has a future as a national governing philosophy.
She could´ve stopped there.
The GOP is constipated, big time. People in that condition are no fun to be around, and they can´t get anything done because they´re all plugged up and self-absorbed.
Conservative voters are pretty much on the outside looking in now; the democrats are off-the-hook crazy and the GOP isn´t very far behind. Rubin´s list of new ´pubbie "leaders" doesn´t exactly inspire -- McDonnell, Walker, Christie, Rubio Paul, Jindal, Martinez -- and it makes me wonder if the lofo phenom and a truly crappy roster of GOPers might be producing a perfect storm that could lay waste the Republican Party (on the national scene, at least) for a couple decades. That would probably be fatal for our Country, at least, as we know it.
Jennifer Rubin, spokesperson for the establishment Flat Earth republicans. Enjoy the free shrimp and merlot, sleep in on Sunday and pretend that 2010 didn´t happen. And whatever you do, pay no attention to the tea party villagers with their pitchforks and their torches, they just don´t understand the brilliance of the enlightened republican royalists.
I agree with Rubin about the purity issue. There is only one Reagan and as a party we should be able to argue about policy, not simply imitate Reagan´s. So long as we focus on framing issues within the context of limited government under the enumerated powers, I´m good.
She was a democrat when the Reagan revolution happened and missed the whole thing. Now shes switched to republican. Obviously the transformation was incomplete which helps explain a lot. A more perfect rino could not be ´made´.
It is easy to name the posters that could be Rubin. We already have another RR but the Moderates that run the GOP hate her and continually try to destroy her. The Moderates would rather keep losing the WH than to let a Conservative win.
I heard Mark Levin´s comments on her piece and he tore her a new one and I stopped reading this woman´s writings a long time ago because she always appeared to be brain dead whenever I read her column. Now this just proves she is totally clueless.
I have to agree that John McCain makes an ugly poster child for the GOP. But isn´t that the point? It´s not Reagan who is out of place. The biggest threat to the GOP comes from RINOs like McCain, who are stupidly pushing the legalization of millions of undocumented Democrats. How dumb do you have to be to miss that?
Rubin´s basic point is sound - the terrain has changed a great deal since the 1970´s and ´80´s. We have a different electorate which is larger, browner and weaned on video games, sloppy education, sexual license and the notion of government as the all-purpose Sugar Daddy.
Does a traditional conservative message resonate with such a people? No. But do Rubin´s mushy, imprecise prescriptions offer a workable alternative? I don´t think so.
A country in the grip of political correctness, myopia and determined ignorance of the social and economic consequences of its current course will not be turned around by politicians, however solid or well intentioned.
Sorry to be the skunk at the picnic, but I don´t see any way out. I´ll be the first to rejoice if I am eventually proven wrong.
Reply 32 - Posted by:
god of irony, 4/27/2013 10:57:56 AM (No. 9299351)
The basic laws of how a society works has NOT changed. Humans are best served with a government, social and economical system that is the least intrusive as possible. The best government can hope to do is to slow things up a little. Reagan understood and so does all REAL conservatives.
Ronald Reagan wanted to win and knew that far right would not do it. (Remember, he had been on the other side for many years and had also been president of a union.) This is hard for many here to swallow, but it was his rationale when he made that "big tent" remark.
He was also a pragmatist, willing to compromise to at least get most of what he wanted.
I don´t believe he would be "electable" by today´s Republicans. The conservatives of today could not go along with his pragmatism.
Reagen would be hated by many posters here, for compromising with democrats. Reagens tax plan was suppose to be like the reductions in england, reductions of 10/10/10 for the first three years, his was 5/10/10. Bill Buckley asked him why he compromised with the democrats and he replied the "art of the possible". Could you imagine the snark and insults thrown at him with today´s conservatives. He raised taxes in 83, could you imagine our posters if he did that now, also thhe also didn´t cut social spending as much as he could have, he knew there was no political will for that. We now have very rigid demands that Reagen himself couldn´t live up to.
Although some parts of the article have fuzzy logic, the idea we need to make the conservative position relevant to today´s society makes sense, the rise of the one issue voter is really killing us, many poster here would never have voted for Reagen if they disagreed with him on any issue. The part of not connecting emotionally is a big problem for us, Reagen was a master at that. I think all she is trying to say is we need to be better at choosing our battles.
Republicans need to come into the 21st century and learn where they are in time. The GOP ought to be about empowering the individual (the BIll of Rights) and empowering the middle class.
Instead, right now, they are about hating - hating gays, hating immigrants, hating women, hating liberals, hating moderates, essentially hating anyone ANYONE who does not agree with them. They are so distant from Christ´s Love it is embarassing.
Aside from restoring integrity, prosperity and strength to the USA following the disastrous malaise of Carter´s tenure and his Iran debacle, and all-the-while setting the captives of Communism free around the planet, who can possible attempt to marginalize the value & vision of President Reagan´s leadership when they can read his own words which are now published and available to all who cherish Life, Liberty and Justice for all?! Both his radio broadcasts before becoming President which he composed himself and are now available in published written form, and his journals which he wrote IN HIS OWN WORDS best relate RR´s authentic wisdom and where it came from.
Pres. Reagan´s example of leadership by example will probably never be surpassed as he remains one of American history´s greatest men to have ever occupied the WH, ...but voters must never give up that daunting quest! Why settle for the opposite?! America deserves the very best of our leaders and Pres. Reagan´s integrity, policy accomplishments & good cheer represent the best example of leadership which America has produced and has to offer the future.
Note: Despite the constant taunting by the lefty/lib/dem media, Pres. Reagan knew & displayed exactly how to handle the always negative press critters!
The issue is not Ronald Reagan versus 2013. The issue is conservative ideas and philosophy. If they are right, they don´t change. Lower taxes, smaller government, individual liberty. That those happened to be Reagan´s ideas don´t make them any less relevant today.
#44 and others, if RR was around today he would get the nomination. Let´s not forget he was dismissed as a light weight in his runs for and service as governor of CA and president. Go back and read #40...RR was of very high intellect and wrote extensively for years, and when you couple that with a love of country, core principles, and a unique magnetism whether you dealt with him one on one or in a large audience or via the TV, you have a winner. GOP winners since Ike have all been from big states, and two were governors with executive experience in large states. He also was a politician who assembled a crack team of no-nonsense players for his campaigns and for governing (including a cadre of Bushies and folks we now call RINOs). I´m looking at a Scott Walker or more polished Rick Perry for 2016.
The GOP has never been a conservative party. NEVER! It´s energizing theme was preserving the Union, a noble cause it consummated in much blood. Post Civil War, its theme shifted to secular progressivism which encouraged the expansion of industrial capitalism; creating great wealth and resulted in the R´s being labeled the party of big business which has little, if anything, in common w/principled conservatism. So is it any wonder the GOP nominated but two conservatives in the last 100 years? Rubin, an R lefty, speaks for the Est. gang that presented the voters w/the likes of Hover, Landon, Wilkie, Dewey, the Bushes, Romney etc; her core argument being that conservatism is a loser and to win the GOP need more of the same old. Really? Sadly a number of posters believe that garbage. Despite all the happy talk, the R´s have been in decline since FDR; the D´s effective control of Congress being testament to that reality. Conservatives understand full well the electoral dynamic in play; the sad sack GOP does not.
It´s one thing to argue over policies and change them if they need changing.
But I will never abandon my principles for the sake of political expediency. And make no mistake about it, the argument within the GOP right now is all about principles. Jennifer Rubin and her ilk are apparently happy to be cast as "slightly more parsimonious liberals." If the GOP goes that way, I will happily vote Libertarian.
There is nothing magical about the GOP, and if it abandons me and my principles, I will look elsewhere.
Well #43, I for one (#31) am not Jennifer Rubin. I wouldn´t even know what a morning make-up routine is all about. But if you have some idea of how to sell conservative ideas to an increasingly ignorant and slovenly electorate, by all means have at it. I´ll contribute to your PAC or vote for you.
When I saw the article´s headline, my head nearly exploded. I admit to being a rabid fan of RR. After I actually read the article, though, I found myself agreeing with some of her points, but not all. My favorite line was "Policy without a politician is a dissertation." Hello, Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney!!
I´m so upset with all the problems #31 related, that I´m inclined to retire my 2009 Tea Party posters, hang up my marching shoes, focus on my family, my neighbors and God´s Holy Word. Then comes the Ted Cruz candidacy, which the Texas GOP establishment (that´s you Rick Perry and all the Bushes) tried to kill in its cradle. Dewhurst had all the money and organization, but we had THE candidate and grass-roots passion. The rest of America is discovering Ted Cruz and you can thank non-establishment conservative Texans for that! You´re welcome.
So my prescription is tell the RNC to go to heck, work like crazy in the primaries for conservatives and don´t let the federal mess in Washington steal your joy. Someday we will have our national candidate, rather than a dissertation, and conservativism will be restored.
No one should set aside the issues they find most important to support a party. If there is no one on the ballot who represents my concerns than why vote? As someone who has voted Republican for over three decades, I´m finding it harder to want to even bother.
#43 I doubt you read the article, you are the type that would have turned against Reagen if he did one thing you didn´t agree with. The governors she used as examples have put conservative principals into action, but they have done it without hostility towards groups they disagree with. The article points out we have failed to explain how conservatism can make life better for the masses. One of the many brilliant attributes of Reagen was he had the ability to show how conservative principals could make peoples lies better. while Reagen was staunchly pro life, he was not hostile towards any group of people, like some conservatives are. I will remind everybody Reagen was the proponent of the big tent.
I suppose we should also get over George Washington, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Thomas Paine, Patrick Henry...oh, and while we´re getting over heroic Americans, why not include across the pond: Margaret Thatcher and Winston Churchill.
What is it with pundits? Courage is a thing to be emulated and admired. Does Jennifer think Conservatives need a cloned Reagan? The purity meme is getting old. What a foolish woman. We need a SPINE.
FTA: "The old guard has become convinced that Reagan’s solutions to the problems of his time were the essence of conservatism — not simply conservative ideas appropriate for that era."
Rubin thinks we need to "move on" from what she considers ideas appropriate for a past era. That is a familiar argument. It is an argument made with regard to the U.S. Constitution and even the Holy Bible. To some, that "outdated worldview" and those old paths have served their time and purpose and this postmodern era requires a new kind of thinking for a new updated worldview.
Rubin says, "A successful political party must not just acknowledge new realities but adjust to them, even embrace them." She wants to "step away from the Reagan hymnal" and redefine conservatism. That redefinition by the "New Right" means doing away with conservatism´s foundational principles.
But that old Book, the inspired word of God, and its precepts embraced by our Founding Documents have been the foundation of the most free and prosperous country the world has known. We have been able to adjust and overcome all obstacles ("new realities") so long as we remained true to those basic precepts and principles.
That old Book says in Jeremiah 6:16 -
Thus says the Lord:
“Stand in the ways and see, And ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls. But they said, ‘We will not walk in it.’
This country is ´going to hell in a handbasket´ and the new thinkers want to not only throw away the restorative "hymnal" that inspires a return to the old paths, but to embrace the "new realities" along the road to perdition where the blind are leading the blind, and the POTUS is asking the blessings of God on an organization known for embracing that new normal of abortion on demand - a woman´s right to have her baby murdered (and to make certain it dies even if the first attempt isn´t successful). What we need is enough leaders with the ability to see and to educate others to see before we are destroyed. May God help us to return to the old paths that lead to Him.
#51...I think you misconstrue the big tent...Reagan built a tent on a foundation of conservative principles and welcomed all to who chose to enter it, knowing they would be standing on that foundation. I´ll never forget a meeting he had with Jesse Jackson during the ´80 campaign, one Reagan insisted on but Jesse tried mightily to avoid because Jimmah Carter had him by the short hairs for misusing federal grant money...Reagan was lightly briefed because the meeting was literally scheduled at the last minute...Jesse tried to set him up by announcing to the traveling press the KKK in some small town had endorsed RR that morning...Reagan preempted him, announced his REJECTION of the endorsement and made it clear that those whose support he welcomed must accept his principles....
#48 and #51, it was a joke playing on the observations made by earlier posters that Jennifer Rubin was posting here under various disguises, and based on the notion that anyone who agreed in any part with what Rubin said would automatically be branded a RINO. Perhaps I should have been more clear. As it happens, I DID read the article, and I agreed with many of the points that Rubin made. And I heartily agreed with both your posts.
As for a solution to the problem? I have no idea of how to sell conservative ideas to electorate that increasingly wants a nanny state. I wish I did.
The big tent works a lot better when somebody not from the RockfellerBushRomney wing of the liberal republican wing holds the clip board and hires the entertainment. As for those Roverites who shrug their shoulders and admit they cannot sell conservative ideals-- we agree, you suck at it because you don´t believe in it. Stand aside. As to the gnashing of teeth over the eleventh commandment-- all but one of the republican nomination seekers agreed to stay positive, but faced with the inability to get over 26% the guy with the money and nothing to sell went negative earliest, most often and didn´t look back. And Jennifer Rubin and the people here who parrot her vibe certainly weren´t troubled by the eleventh commandment then. Commandments only apply to the believers, the faithful, the bitter clingers. Enjoy the artichoke dip.
#45, I am well aware of every fact you mentioned about one of our finest Presidents, Ronald Reagan. I did not say he could not WIN an election today. I am of the opinion that his core principles, crack intellect and outstanding speaking ability would serve him just as well today. Mark Levin was there and he saw first hand how the Rockefeller Republicans despised him. I read #40 and agree wholeheartedly with every word.
Some things I remember about Reagan, You could believe what he said. He meant what he said and said what he meant. You could trust him. He was truthful to Americans. He was anti-corruption. Now we have the exact opposite squatting in the White House. Obama lies all the time, you can´t believe a word he says and he is corrupt. I don´t understand why the Republicans don´t embrace being the anti-corruption party? They never talk about corruption, how money is misspent around Washington. The DemocRATS are thoroughly corrupt. Obamacare is corrupt. Unless the Repubs start to care about corruption, the TEA Party will overtake them and I will gladly support the TEA Party people over the corrupt establishment Repubs.
RUSH: Let´s go to the audio sound bites. The gross domestic product number is out. And, by the way, I don´t know what this is. There´s a new way of measuring the GDP. The Obama administration is measuring it in an entirely different way, which is showing growth. The standard measure of gross domestic product is showing flat. But this new measure, which the media is applauding and loving, is showing a growth rate of 1.7%, and it´s being hailed. The stock market earlier today was having a pretty good day.
RUSH: In one hour, we´re gonna have Utah Senator Mike Lee on the program to explain in detail and in an understandable way what he´s trying to do. As you know, Mike Lee is leading the effort to defund Obamacare in the United States Senate. The entire Republican establishment has aligned against him. Consultants, establishment bigwigs, party bigwigs, even some donors have aligned against him because they are convinced that attempting to defund Obamacare at the next negotiation, the end of September, on a continuing resolution will lead to a government shutdown,
RUSH: Here´s Brad in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. It´s great to have you on the EIB Network. Hi. CALLER: Mega dittos, Mr. Limbaugh. A pleasure to speak to you. I told your call screener there that I am an attorney. I teach law. I´m a former public official and a Republican, and I advise my clients and my students, "You can´t take legal advice from the people across the table. They´re going to give advice, obviously, that is in favor of their position." RUSH: Exactly. CALLER: That sounds so obvious, why even say that, right?
IRS-Gate: From stonewalling Congress to Federal Election Commission collusion to harassment of already-tax-exempt conservative groups, the IRS scandal metastasizes. Someone high-up was clearly giving orders. ´Phony scandals," to use President Obama´s term, should not generate near-daily news coverage from a media that would like nothing better than to see its dream president let off the hook. Yet everywhere you look comes another bolt of lightning keeping this Frankenstein monster "alive!": • In addition to conservative organizations being ultra-scrutinized in applying for tax-exempt status, existing conservative groups like Morton Blackwell´s Leadership Institute, around since 1979, and the
So why did the French Revolution — initially premised on the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity — come to be defined by the guillotine, regicide, rivers of blood and the Reign of Terror? To reveal a common historic error, the revolution didn´t start pristine and somehow get hijacked by the likes of Maximilien de Robespierre. He and his notorious Committee of Public Safety ruled through terror and systematically beheaded thousands at the guillotine. The violence was there from the very start, in the bloodcurdling words of the revolution´s propagandists — journalists, pamphleteers and writers, some of whom
The good news is that the Commerce Department´s second-quarter GDP report shows that the U.S. is richer and the economy larger than previously believed. The bad news is that this has nothing to do with anything that has happened lately, and certainly not in the last nine months. The current not-so-great economic recovery trudges on. *** Wednesday´s second quarter report is especially interesting because it includes economic revisions based on new assumptions that re-measure the size of the U.S. economy going back to 1929. The Bureau of Economic Analysis does this every five years or so,
Graft: The relationship between the Clintons and the wife of embattled Anthony Weiner grows curiouser and curiouser. Forget sexting; this may be the real scandal. And one senator sees a possible criminal element to it. Republican Chuck Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is demanding documents from the State Department shedding more light on the private consulting work that Huma Abedin, aka Mrs. Weiner, performed while working for the government, where she had access to top secret information. Abedin served as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton´s deputy chief of staff, where she earned $135,000 a year.
If we learned anything about Barack Obama in his first term it is that when he starts repeating the same idea over and over, what´s on his mind is something else. The first term´s over-and-over subject was "the wealthiest 1%." Past some point, people wondered why he kept beating these half-dead horses. After the election, we knew. It was to propagandize the targeted voting base that would provide his 4% popular-vote margin of victory—very young voters and minorities. They believed. He won. The second-term over-and-over, elevated in his summer speech tour, is the shafting of the middle class. But
President Obama promised to mend the failings in the American health-care system, and yet for cancer treatment, ObamaCare is taking a rotten feature of the old system and making it worse. The Affordable Care Act expands a program called 340B, which siphons money from drug makers and insurers to subsidize certain hospitals. The program has been expanded as a way to offset some of the cuts that the law imposes on hospitals. One significant side effect: 340B is increasing the cost of cancer care—and harming its quality. When the program began in 1992, its aim was to support
Most Americans would agree that academic freedom is a sacred right of the academy and crucial to the American experiment in democracy. But what is it really? That´s the question raised by the Associated Press´s July 16 release of emails between Mitch Daniels, when he was the governor of Indiana, and his staff concerning Howard Zinn´s "A People´s History of the United States." The emails were written in 2010 and Mr. Daniels, whose second term as governor ended this January, is now president of Purdue University in Indiana. Published in 1980, Zinn´s "A People´s History"
Fiscal Policy: President Obama has proposed a "grand bargain" with Republicans: They get a tax cut for corporations, he gets more money to spend on worthless government stimulus. That´s no bargain — that´s surrender. In the latest attempt by Democrats to disguise GOP capitulation as centrist "compromise," Obama said he´ll sign off on a cut in the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28% — with an even lower rate of 25% for manufacturers — if Republicans will agree to spend more on Obama´s "investments" and OK a tax hike on U.S. companies doing business overseas.
In Chattanooga on Tuesday, the latest stop on his economic inequality tour, President Obama made himself an offer he couldn´t refuse. If Congressional Republicans agree to a corporate tax increase, he said, then he´ll agree to spend more money on his favorite public-works projects. If Republicans bargain hard, will he also offer an expansion of ObamaCare as a sweetener? We know this sounds like an exaggeration, but that´s the essence of what the President proposed as what he called a new "grand bargain." Mr. Obama will agree to reform the corporate tax code—a GOP priority and one
Mark Levin, who hosts one of America´s top radio talk shows and is considered by supporters to be the people´s pundit on the Constitution, is rallying his 8.5 million-strong audience to demand an historic convention of state governments to halt the "oppressive power" of the federal government. The author of two New York Times bestsellers on the threats to the Constitution, Levin hopes his latest, "The Liberty Amendments," out mid-August, will spark the state lawmakers to tap a rarely used Constitutional provision to institute measures that would brake President Obama´s use of executive orders, bar thousand-page laws and
FORNEY, Texas - George Zimmerman, the former Florida neighborhood watch leader cleared of all charges in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, was pulled over for speeding in North Texas on Sunday, CBS DFW reports. According to the station, Zimmerman was armed when officers pulled him over on Highway 80 in Forney, east of Dallas. (Snip) The officer reportedly did not recognize Zimmerman, who was driving a Honda pickup. Zimmerman told the officer he was armed and was then told to put the weapon in his glove compartment, according to the station.
Arizona Sen. John McCain was the Republican Party´s 2008 presidential nominee and he still wants the keys to the Oval Office. But he is beginning to sound more like a fan of likely 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. "She´s a rock star," he said in a newly released interview. "She has, maybe not glamour, but certainly the aura of someone widely regarded throughout the world," he added in a reference to her work as secretary of State. McCain, reportedly trying to win back his reputation as a GOP maverick, was asked by the New Republic
The former commander of special operations in Northern Africa told a closed-door briefing today that he was largely detached from events the night of the Benghazi attack as he was traveling at the time. The testimony of Col. George H. Bristol, USMC, Former Commander, Joint Special Operations Task Force-Trans Sahara, Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command Africa, had been eagerly anticipated by members of Congress. Originally, lawmakers had been told by the Defense Department that he had retired — the actual date is Aug. 1, an “administrative error” according to the Pentagon — and that they didn’t have
President Obama has been rolling up his sleeves campaigning across the country delivering a surreal stump speech message supposedly aimed at the middle class: big government works, Obamacare is manna from heaven, the wave of recent scandals are “phony” figments of the imagination, and all economic problems are the fault of the Republicans. Conveniently, he leaves out the bankruptcy of Detroit, a city run by his own party for more than half a century. His message is so stale and unconvincing, that even The New York Times and Washington Post have noticed. Both papers, usually loyal to Obama, remarked that
Gotta figure her lead would be even bigger without Joe Miller in the field here. Her nomination for the taking? Alaska should be a top tier pick up opportunity for Senate Republicans next year…but their top choice of a candidate is Sarah Palin. 36% of GOP primary voters in the state say they’d like Palin to be their standard bearer against Mark Begich to 26% for Mead Treadwell, 15% for Dan Sullivan, and 12% for Joe Miller.
Embattled Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner and an attorney in the Federal Election Commission’s general counsel’s office appear to have twice colluded to influence the record before the FEC’s vote in the case of a conservative non-profit organization, according to e-mails unearthed by the House Ways and Means Committee and obtained exclusively by National Review Online. The correspondence suggests the discrimination of conservative groups extended beyond the IRS and into the FEC, where an attorney from the agency’s enforcement division in at least one case sought and received tax information about the status of a conservative group,
Sen. John McCain — a Democrat? There was confusion Wednesday after the Arizona Republican mistakenly strolled into President Obama’s meeting with Senate Democrats at the Capitol. The room full of Democrats — who happened to be meeting in the same room where the Senate GOP usually holds their weekly policy luncheons — erupted in applause and laughter as the former Republican presidential candidate made his entrance. As McCain, 76, walked out of the Dem-filled space, reporters pressed him as to why he stepped foot in the room.
In an interview on National Public Radio (NPR), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said her new agenda for women will give mothers access to day care so they can “earn without carrying the burden of child care.” During the interview, aired on Weekend Edition Sunday, Pelosi spoke about her newly announced agenda, which is on her website, and is titled, “When Women Succeed, America Succeeds: An Economic Agenda for Women and Families,” a plan that includes universal pre-school and access to day care for working women, and an increase in the minimum wage.
Karl Rove and more than one hundred Republican donors sent a letter to Republican members of Congress on Tuesday, urging them to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would include, among other provisions, granting "legal status" to illegal aliens who meet certain criteria. Anticipating that lawmakers will face resistance to the bill when they go home for the August recess, the letter marks the escalation of a campaign in which Republican leaders and donors are pressuring House Republicans to act on an immigration reform bill.
No matter how much you may hope for it, it seems unlikely that you´ll be using the phrase "Senator Sarah Palin" with any great regularity in 2015. A new poll indicates that the former Alaska governor is about as popular in the state as Barack Obama — which is to say, not very popular at all. But even more surprising, while the former vice presidential candidate has made Alaska a central part of her public image, the state´s residents split on the question of whether Palin is all that Alaskan. Conducted by Public Policy Polling,
In her first speech since taking over the Environmental Protection Agency, Gina McCarthy came out swinging Tuesday and promised to ramp up the aggressive climate change agenda laid out by President Obama.(snip)“Can we stop talking about environmental regulations killing jobs? Please, at least for today,” she said during remarks at Harvard Law School. “We need to cut carbon pollution to grow jobs. We need to cut carbon pollution to strengthen the economy. Let’s talk about it positively. Let’s approach this as an opportunity of a lifetime. There are too many lifetimes at stake.”